- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Kathi, sorry im wrong. Any mention of 'day star' is only in the American translation its not in any other translations.
So there cant be a connection because the words begot or begotten or star or anything similar was never there in the first place.
Why do they add things?
Hi WJ,
You said:
Quote Of course we believe that anything is possibe for God that is why we believe that God came in the likeness of sinful flesh and was found in fashion as a man. John 1:1-14 – Phil 2:6-8 So God can be a man on earth while simultaneously being God in heaven, but He can't figure out how to make a son for Himself, huh? Lame.
You said:
Quote Your concept violates the principle of “every kind bearing after its own kind”. And as you bring up to me as often as it serves your purpose, God cannot be limited to the constraints of mankind. But how is Spirit begetting spirit violation of this principle?
You said:
Quote If the Father brought birth to “a god” then he would be 100% God like the Father. But wait Fathers do not give birth. So who is the Mother? God is a spirit entity right? So naturally Jesus was begotten as a DIFFERENT spirit entity. Fathers don't beget themselves Keith. They beget sons who are like them, but not them. And how can you even pretend to limit the One who caused everything to exist to not being able to do it without “a mother”? Was a “mother” needed for God to cause mankind to exist? Why would one be needed for GOD to cause His Son to exist? Lame.
mike
Quote (Lightenup @ July 08 2010,15:16) Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 07 2010,10:22) LU………..Nick is not wrong , Like us Jesus had a Physical Berth and a Heavenly Berth, One took place when He was Born through the women Mary , the other was at the Jordan when he recieved the Holy Spirit and was then sent into the world to preach the Gospel of the kingdom of God. People try to make a big deal out of his earthly birth as a preexisting morphed being, which is simply a lie. God had before said through Isiah, what His appearance would be like. Isa 53:1……> Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the LORD revealed? 2> For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of dry ground;he has not form nor comeliness and when we shall see him there is no beauty that we should desire him. 3> He is despised and rejected of men; a (MAN) of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him: he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
God the Father Had to create His Genetic Code to match the description he gave of Him. But as Mike brought out that was not a problem for GOD to do , so why does everyone think it is such a big deal for God to do that. Adam and Eves creation was far greater then adding DNA to Mary and having her give birth to a Man Child. Jesus was (NOT) a preexistent Being , he was 100% Pure prophesied foreordained Human being in (EVERY) Way and was not a Son of GOD not more the ADAM was, UNTIL he was baptized at the JORDAN River, Nick is absolutely right on this. IMO
peace and Love to you and yours………………………gene
Hi Gene,
I know that you believe this but you have never seemed to own up to the fact that the Son was actively involved in creation and Nick or you have never owed up to the fact that the Son is the root of David as well as the offspring of David.Remember I have shown you that the verbs regarding creation and the Son's involvement were written in the active voice and not passive voice in the Greek?
Also, Jesus is never mentioned as being born again at the Jordan.
Thanks for adding your thoughts though.
Yeah! What she said!
Kar,
Do you imagine that God did not know that man would corrupt his word?
Man, even Man, puts 'ERROR DETECTION' processes in places where he sends out or collects data: Databases, Recorded material, Electronic Broadcasts, CD, DVD,, Computer data, everything…If man does that – Can you imagine that we have done something that God himself didn't know to do?
No, Scriptures is self replicated, Whenever man thinks he has corrupted Scriptures it amends itself if you know how to deploy the “ERRor CORRection mechanism”
No, we are not WISER than God. If man learnt to do it then it is because God has already done it and allowed our minds to do it also – for, yes, we are 'gods' made in his image.
Quote (942767 @ July 09 2010,09:02) Hi Mike: “A spirit womb”? Really? I can't believe to what extreme people have to go in order to maintain their doctrine.
Love in Christ,
Marty This from the man who ignores all the scriptures that say Jesus was “in God's presence” before the creation of the world and thinks Jesus was a foreordained “thought” God had before he was flesh. Let's say that Jesus came back and told us all that he was with God as a spirit creature before he ever came as flesh.
Then would you bring up your silly points about how God couldn't have possibly brought forth a son without a “womb” or a “mother”?Come on guys, EVERYTHING is possible for God. Maybe he wiggled His nose like on Bewitched or nodded His head like on I Dream of Jeanie. Does it really matter? Scripture says He begat a Son and the Son says he was with the Father before the creation of the world. What more do you guys need?
mike
Quote (Kangaroo Jack @ July 09 2010,10:21) Quote (942767 @ July 09 2010,09:02) Hi Mike: “A spirit womb”? Really? I can't believe to what extreme people have to go in order to maintain their doctrine.
Love in Christ,
Marty
Hey Marty,We agree on this one man!
the Roo
You would agree. You think God has to have a “womb” or “woman” to cause a being to exist.
mike
Hi All,
Even if I strongly disagreed with the pre-existence of the one we know as Jesus Christ, I wouldn't be so lame as to support my belief with insinuations that God couldn't have caused him to exist without a womb or mother or whatever.
Please, take yourselves outside of the debate for a minute and think about what you claim. “God couldn't have…..“
Find a different argument to prove your case. One that doesn't require you to limit what God can and can't do.
mike
Quote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2010,12:11) Hi All, Even if I strongly disagreed with the pre-existence of the one we know as Jesus Christ, I wouldn't be so lame as to support my belief with insinuations that God couldn't have caused him to exist without a womb or mother or whatever.
Please, take yourselves outside of the debate for a minute and think about what you claim. “God couldn't have…..“
Find a different argument to prove your case. One that doesn't require you to limit what God can and can't do.
mike
So you don't agree that the Word was in the beginning with God and was God as in John 1:1?And what about the Word (Who was in the beginning) being made flesh? Is that passage of Scripture also wrong?
And what about Jesus' prayer in John 17? The part where He said Joh 17:5 And now Father, glorify Me with Yourself with the glory which I had with You before the world was.
And what about Rev 19:13 where the Word of God (obviously Jesus) appears on the white horse?
Quote (Oxy @ July 11 2010,17:24) Or did I misunderstand you Mike?
Hi Oxy,You misunderstood. I'm on your side on this one. We only differ in our understanding of whether the Word was GOD or “a god”.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (mikeboll64 @ July 11 2010,19:29) Quote (Oxy @ July 11 2010,17:24) Or did I misunderstand you Mike?
Hi Oxy,You misunderstood. I'm on your side on this one. We only differ in our understanding of whether the Word was GOD or “a god”.
peace and love,
mike
My apologies then Mike. Glad to have you onside. I was talking to a Jewish friend of mine the other day and he informed me (using more Hebrew words than I can shake a stick at) that “was a god” is mentioned only in one of the writtings whereas “was God” is written in all the other versions, and was his personal conviction as well… for what it's worth.Mike, Oxy,
Perhaps a definition of “God” and “a god” from both of you would serve to illustrates each others views.
[Moderator]
Quote My apologies then Mike. Glad to have you onside. I was talking to a Jewish friend of mine the other day and he informed me (using more Hebrew words than I can shake a stick at) that “was a god” is mentioned only in one of the writtings whereas “was God” is written in all the other versions, and was his personal conviction as well… for what it's worth.
Hi Oxy,To bad your friend spoke Hebrew instead of Koine Greek, or we may have been able to get some real understanding from him.
Why do you think John used the definite article “the” in front of both “words”, but one one of the “gods”? Here is some info you might find helpful:
The Koine Greek language had a definite article (“the”), but it did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”). So when a predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be indefinite, depending on the context.
The Journal of Biblical Literature says that expressions “with an anarthrous [no article]predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning.” As the Journal notes, this indicates that the lo′gos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: “The qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun [the‧os′] cannot be regarded as definite.”
So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was “divine,” “godlike,” “a god,” but not Almighty God. This harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here called “the Word” in his role as God’s Spokesman, was an obedient subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.
There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in other languages consistently insert the article “a” when translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says: “They supposed it had been a spirit.” In the Koine Greek, there is no “a” before “spirit.” But almost all translations in other languages add an “a” in order to make the rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that the Word was with God, he could not be God but was “a god,” or “divine.”
Joseph Henry Thayer, a theologian and scholar who worked on the American Standard Version, stated simply: “The Logos was divine, not the divine Being himself.” And Jesuit John L. McKenzie wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . ‘the word was a divine being.’”
But consider just two examples found at John 8:44. There Jesus says of the Devil: “That one was a manslayer” and “he is a liar.” Just as at John 1:1, the predicate nouns (“manslayer” and “liar”) precede the verbs (“was” and “is”) in the Greek. There is no indefinite article in front of either noun because there was no indefinite article in Koine Greek. But most translations insert the word “a” because Greek grammar and the context require it.—See also Mark 11:32; John 4:19; 6:70; 9:17; 10:1; 12:6.
And here are some other translation that don't use “the Word was God”.
1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.
1864: “and a god was the word.” The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson.
1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.
1935: “and the Word was divine.” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.
1946: “and of a divine kind was the Word.” Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.
1950: “and the Word was a god.” New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
1958: “and the Word was a God.” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek.
1975: “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.
1978: “and godlike kind was the Logos.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.
Let me know what you think.
peace and love,
mikeMike……..Lets suppose it was you being discussed in John !:1 , So it could read, in the beginning the word the word was with Mike and the word was Mike. Would you buy that? Or would you say your word was someone else?. We have Scripture that say and GOD Said (spoke words) let there be light etc, and it was so. We do no have a scripture that say Jesus said let there be light and it was so do we? Not some unknown preexistent being other than GOD himself? Mike the LORD God almighty and His word are one and the same thing. In Isaiah God plainly said He (ALONE) and BY (HIMSELF) created everything in existence. Why do you choose to ignore those scriptures and try to created another God , Even simple logic would tell you that if John wanted to mean Jesus he would have simply written Jesus there . It would have been written Like this.
In the beginning was Jesus and Jesus was with GOD. and Jesus was GOD. Is that what is written there if not then why try to make it say that?. Jesus himself said that God the FATHER was the (ONLY) True GOD. Why can't you simply understand that brother. Why force the text to say what trinitarians and Preexistences believe?
peace and love to you and yours……………gene
This is a semi quote a pm'd to someone:
Quote
I couldn't figure John 1:1. It just doesn't read right. It's like the conundrum:
Time Flies Like an Arrow
Fruit Flies Like a BananaYou have to read it in the right frame of mind and with the right inflection to figure it.
Anyway, it came to me one night that WORD is exactly that! God's WORD, God's spoken thought, that which God IS and that emanates from Him, is His Word and that Word is “En-Spirited”, personified, Made Flesh, as Jesus Christ.
And here is something not previously exposed in the conundrum: 'In the BEGINNING'! What does that mean – Everyone assumes it means ETERNAL – but hold up, there are MANY things “In the BEGINNING”:
“Satan was a deceiver FROM THE BEGINNING” but clearly it was not ETERNAL because He was 'Perfect before Sin was found in him”
“In the BEGINNING, God created the Heaven and the Earth”; But clearly, heaven and Earth are not Eternal.So at some point Jesus (to be) became the WORD of God, the one who was the Chief Architect of the creation of God, the one who DID, to the WORD, that carried out God's Spoken, and, therefore, yes, “HE WAS IN THE BEGINNING WITH GOD”, “In the Beginning…” at the start of God's creation!
And, yes, He, Jesus (to be), “the Word” – and “THE WORD”, was 'DIVINE' [Possessing the nature of a deity, possessing an undie-able and all powerful nature]. Note that it had to be said that 'the Word' was 'Divine'. And that He was WITH GOD – Someone WITH Someone else ISN'T That Second Someone (Weird, isn't it obvious? Even, the salutations 2 John 1 is ABSOLUTELY clear about the difference between GOD and Jesus yet trini's look at a quote from the Hebrew saying “Your Throne, O GOD, is forever…” clearly sentencially this does not mean the targetted individual is “THE GOD”, let alone “a God” but “a god” – “a venerable [non-deitified] person of high rank and authority” (note the capitalisation is down to the translator – not the original scriptor)
Do we say that God is divine (Correctly please in here if I'm wrong, do we say it or just imply it because we say 'God'. Premises: Do we say FEAR Jesus?No, But We Say Fear God? Yes: Therefore Jesus isn't God…One for TT, ha ha!)
So, when all is said and done, the conundrum is resolved:
“In the beginning was the Word”
“And the Word was with God”
“And the Word was Divine” !(God-Divine / Worship-Obeisance)!
“He was in the beginning with God”He emptied himself of his divine spirit nature and became flesh and blood and became subject to human law (where it didn't conflict with God's law) for the purpose of carrying out God's WORD, to teach mankind God's Word, to Live God's word and thereby revealing God through the Light of God's Word.
And having achieved all things according to God's word, even unto death, he was again made Divine and took his place next to the Almighty, having been RAISED TO A GREATER POSITION THAN THAT WHICH HE LEFT… If he was God, how can that be. (Trini's claim that the Trinity Gods are Heirachically linked and that the father Comes first and then Jesus and then the hoy Spirit – but yet they are CO-EQUAL!!! When did you hear anyone say, or where have you read “The FATHER of God”?Even Mary, they call “The MOTHER of God.”
p.s. KEEP REMEMBERING that 'God' is a title – not a NAME…)
God Bless You.
Quote (Gene Balthrop @ July 12 2010,12:05) Mike……..Lets suppose it was you being discussed in John !:1 , So it could read, in the beginning the word the word was with Mike and the word was Mike. Would you buy that? Or would you say your word was someone else?. We have Scripture that say and GOD Said (spoke words) let there be light etc, and it was so. We do no have a scripture that say Jesus said let there be light and it was so do we? Not some unknown preexistent being other than GOD himself? Mike the LORD God almighty and His word are one and the same thing. In Isaiah God plainly said He (ALONE) and BY (HIMSELF) created everything in existence. Why do you choose to ignore those scriptures and try to created another God , Even simple logic would tell you that if John wanted to mean Jesus he would have simply written Jesus there . It would have been written Like this. In the beginning was Jesus and Jesus was with GOD. and Jesus was GOD. Is that what is written there if not then why try to make it say that?. Jesus himself said that God the FATHER was the (ONLY) True GOD. Why can't you simply understand that brother. Why force the text to say what trinitarians and Preexistences believe?
peace and love to you and yours……………gene
Hi Gene,1. A person's words are not who they are.
2. Why does it say singular “word”, not plural “words”?
3. How does someone's spoken word become flesh?
4. How can something that IS God be WITH God?
5. It says the word was with THE God, and was “a” god, not THE God.
6. We know all things came FROM God THROUGH his Son,(1 Cor 8:6) AND we also know all things came THROUGH the Word (John 1:3).
7. Rev shows the person who is the Lord of lords and King of kings is also the Word of God.
8. Bill Gates can rightly say that he alone built Microsoft. And that fact doesn't isn't negated by the knowledge that many “servants” (employees in his case) did the hands on work for him. Even though it was a group effort, Bill ALONE is the source of Microsoft.That's enough for now.
peace and love,
mikeQuote (Nick Hassan @ July 12 2010,12:44) Hi JA,
Jesus was a man, not an emptied God.
We can follow him.
That's not scriptural Nick.Phil 2
mike
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
