Quote (shimmer @ Aug. 18 2011,05:21)Can YOU make perfect sense of the following?Hi Shimmer,It seems you are making an attempt to say that since Peter said some of Paul's letters are hard to understand, and therefore some people twist up his meaning, that I am doing the same in Phil 3.   Is that about it?  I tell you what:  Go back to Biblos, an…[Read more]

Hi Kerwin,I was reading a post t8 made a minute ago, and found this from him:“The directors then face criminal charges because they take in investors who are under the impression that all is good and this is a good company to invest in.”See?  He did it too.  The words “THEN face criminal charges” let's us know that t8 really meant to say “…[Read more]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 18 2011,08:17)Mike………Paladin was right brother. He is a great asset here for us all. IMOpeace and love……………………………genePaladin has been wrong on every single issue I've challenged him about.  And he DISAGREES with YOU 50% of the time.  Gene, on THOSE things he disagrees with you about, he IS r…[Read more]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 18 2011,08:13)Mike my question to you is why would you even see it any different then that, is it because of a “PREDISPOSED” Position you have and therefore tend to force the text to Meet those positions?No, that would be YOU, Gene.    Read Matthew 22:42-45.  Why was Jesus trying to teach the Pharisees that the Me…[Read more]

Hi Kerwin,I almost forgot:  What do you make of all those scholars who translated “I AM” as “I HAVE BEEN” in John 14:9?  And do you suppose that if the Trinity was out of the picture, those same scholars would have also translated it as “I HAVE BEEN” in 8:58 – like the NWT does? I know they would have.  Here's another example for you:Last week I…[Read more]

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ Aug. 18 2011,08:40)MIke………Jesus and Joshua are the exact same Name , so are we to believe the same thing for Joshua the Son of Nun ?.Gene,Do you even know what this discussion is about? I suggest you read back a few posts and find out. peace,mike

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Aug. 18 2011,02:41)Mike wrote:Quote Why is it that only the Father is lacking a PERSONAL name that is NOT common to both of them?Because the Father did not enter into human history and act. He had no personal involvement but did all things through His representative equal.KJJack, you have spoken correctly that God often…[Read more]

Quote (Kangaroo Jack Jr. @ Aug. 18 2011,02:33)We have been over this a zillion times too. Christ's predacessors were mere shadows and Christ is the SUBSTANCE (or reality).Show me the difference Jack:Was Christ anointed by his God, just like his predecessors?Was Christ sent by his God, just like his predecessors?Was Christ a servant of his God,…[Read more]

Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2011,00:57)Quote (mikeboll @ 64)Are you implying that Paul really DID get his gospel from men, but because those men were speaking the words of God, he could say that he got it NOT from any man?You are correct.Hi Kerwin,WHICH men did Paul receive his gospel from?I did not receive my gospel from any man, but from Pat.Kerwin,…[Read more]

Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2011,01:05)Mike,Quote Who is the mediator between men and God, Kerwin?  Is it not the man who at one time laid down his life for us?We agree on that point!Quote For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men: Christ Jesus – the man who gave himself as a ransom for all.In the above rendering, all I've done is…[Read more]

Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 18 2011,00:40)Your understanding is not explicit according to the Strong’s which defines root (rhiza) as:Quote 1.a root 2.that which like a root springs from a root, a sprout, shoot 3.metaph. offspring, progenySo the first and therefore most popular definition is “root”, just like it is always translated, huh?  Also, se…[Read more]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 17 2011,19:36)Jehovah Most High is the Father and the Son.  There is Jehovah Most High Father, Jehovah as the only begotten Son, Jehovah Most High Father and Son unity.  Depends on context. So, no “Jehovah Most High Son”?  Why not?  And if Jesus is the SON OF Jehovah, the Most High God, then how can he BE Jehovah Most Hig…[Read more]

Hi Gene,Barnes does see things your way, not only in Is 11:1, but also in verse 10, along with Rev 5:5 and 22:16.But Clarke says:Christ was the root of David as to his Divine nature; he was a branch out of the stem of Jesse as to his human nature.And Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary says:Root of David-(Isa 11:1, 10). Not merely “a sucker…[Read more]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 17 2011,03:57)Mike,It is quite clear that Jehovah is not the maker of these 'gods.'Why? Because people worshipped these gods in ways that were detestable to Jehovah?Satan and a third of the angels have rebelled against Jehovah, right? Does that mean Jehovah didn't MAKE Satan and those angels? Does it mean that He is not…[Read more]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 17 2011,12:39)They have many names…Jehovah is common to both of them.Okay. But Jesus has a PERSONAL name that is NOT common to both of them. Why doesn't the Father?Just like the common name “church”. But Smyrna has its own PERSONAL name and so does Ephesus, right? Why is it that only the Father is lacking a PERSONAL…[Read more]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 17 2011,12:20)Mike,This evidence that the pronoun is referring to the name is not just about it being singular, but singular AND neuter.That's it?    That's all you have to say to the scholarly evidence – including your buddy Gill?Kathi, that post was the most fun I've ever had writing a post on HN!  This is my pa…[Read more]

Quote (Lightenup @ Aug. 17 2011,12:17)Mike,Jehovah was always the Father with the Son, whether within or alongside.KathiThen why did the Son have to be GIVEN the name “Jehovah”? Wouldn't he have already had that name from eternity if he always WAS Jehovah from eternity? Another chink in the armor, Kathi?

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Aug. 17 2011,10:50)im not Ed j,because you make no sense and you are playin wordgames.NOW you know how I feel having a discussion with YOU, D.  I cannot follow your logics, your reasonings, how you can insist that a scripture that says “white” really says “black”, etc.It always turns out to be a big headache for me.But,…[Read more]

Quote (kerwin @ Aug. 17 2011,16:46)Mike,Quote Does the scripture say “Root of David's faith”?  Or “Root of David”?I see that as a useless question as I can with equal validity ask you ‘Does scripture sat “Root of David’s flesh or Root of David?” as the answer to either is inferred and not explicit.What kind of answer is that?    Actually…[Read more]