“Terrarica,

Find one place where it literally states Jesus was created first by God.”

Hi Kerwin,

It is JW doctrine based on misinterpretation of a Rev 3:14 and Col 1:17 .
Pierre will not let go of this false belief no matter who explains it to him.
Rev 3:14 and Col 1:17 are about Christ’s preeminence, not a creation o…

[Read more]

Lesson B includes the following:

For this part of the analysis, we need to remember that there are exceptions where the article (‘the’) may be used at random as seen in part A. above.  So we are trying to find how John intends the lack of an article with a noun (like god, man, cave, etc.).  Such nouns must be “count nouns.”  That means, usi…[Read more]

“’Form’ may be used to translate morphe, but it also must be understood that it is restricted to the outward appearance of something, not to its essence.”

Kerwin: “That is incorrect as neither a servant or God has an outward form.”

……………………

As even many trinitarian Bible scholars admit:

“Morphe is instanced from Homer onwards…[Read more]

According to the title of this discussion, this should have received prominent attention.

Here are some important NT Greek words found in that phrase:

being (huparchon) in the form (morphe) of god (theou – anarthrous gen…[Read more]

EdJ: “Hi Tigger,

“Huh?

“Can you please re-work the structure of the words here so I can understand what you mean ???”

………[Read more]

</dir>EdJ: “Hi Tigger,

“Huh?

“Can you please re-work the structure of the words here so I can understand what you mean ???”…[Read more]

EdJ: “Hi Tigger,

“Then post them here in bite size pieces so that all here can take the time to respond to them, OK?”

………………………….

Hi, Ed. I am nearing 80 years old, not…[Read more]

EdJ: “Hi Tigger,

“Then post them here in bite size pieces so that all here can take the time to respond to them, OK?”

………………………….

Hi, Ed. I am nearing 80 years old, not…[Read more]

</dir>EdJ: “Hi Tigger,

“Then post them here in bite size pieces so that all here can take the time to respond to them, OK?”

………………………….

Hi, Ed. I am nearing 80 years…[Read more]

“There was a member here named “jammin”, and he use to post words written by others.
And when we looked into those words and were questioning him about them
he would reply… …’why are you asking me I didn’t write it?’

“That is why I don’t bother to read ‘cut and paste’ jobs – copied from outside sources. (sorry UMB5 and Tigger)
However, I wi…

[Read more]

There was a member here named “jammin”, and he use to post words written by others.
And when we looked into those words and were questioning him about them
he would reply… …’why are you asking me I didn’t write it?’

That is why I don’t bother to read ‘cut and paste’ jobs – copied from outside sources. (sorry UMB5 and Tigger)
However, I wi…

[Read more]

If you had the time and energy to listen (or read) all…[Read more]

If you had the time and energy to listen (or read) all…[Read more]

…………………………………..

There is no doubt that the first Christians were Jews who attended and…[Read more]

So you won’t comment on my correction of your mistaken post above?

Psychos (‘cold’) is not a count noun.  We cannot properly say in this verse, ‘it was a cold’ or ‘it was the cold.’  Nor can you make it plural (‘it was colds‘).  So it is not a proper example for John 1:1c.

“Tigger,

‘As explained before, a nominative noun modified by a genitive (an “of” noun) are included in “prepositional” constructions and are, therefore, improper examples.’

“So according to you a proposition or a genitive noun causes difficulties.

“The thing is that archiereus translated high priest is not a genitive noun. The gen…[Read more]

I have been waiting for you to (1) find your elementary error in your last post., and (2) reveal your error here.

Will you do that?

…………………..

What’s with all the venom concerning JWs and Michael?  Whether Jesus is Michael or not is not of greatest importance except to some Trinitarians.  But they certainly are not the only (nor the first) to make the claim.

Quotes From Scholars Concerning Jesus as Michael the Archangel

From early Christian writings until n…[Read more]

…………………..

What’s with all the venom concerning JWs and Michael?  Whether Jesus is Michael or not is not of greatest importance except to some Trinitarians.  But they certainly are not the only (nor the first) to make the claim.

Quotes From Scholars Concerning Jesus as Michael the Archangel

From early Christian writings until n…[Read more]

…………………..

What’s with all the venom concerning JWs and Michael?  Whether Jesus is Michael or not is not of greatest importance except to some Trinitarians.  But they certainly are not the only (nor the first) to make the claim.

Quotes From Scholars Concerning Jesus as Michael the Archangel

From early Christian writings until n…[Read more]

“Tigger,

“It sounds like you are discarding those variations that disagree with your conclusion. Some Trinitarians believe God is God’s proper name and that is one your discard.”

………………..

I discard examples that Trinitarian scholars also discard. For example:

Personal names such as “Jesus,” “Abraham,” “Mary,” etc. should not be…[Read more]

“Tigger,

“It sounds like you are discarding those variations that disagree with your conclusion. Some Trinitarians believe God is God’s proper name and that is one your discard.”

………………..

I discard examples that Trinitarian scholars also discard. For example:

<b>Personal names</b> such as “Jesus,” “Abraham,” “Mary,” etc. should…[Read more]

“Tigger,

“There is no preposition in the sentence that applies to the high priest clause.

“Even English translations do not use a preposition.”

……………………………..

As explained before, a nominative noun modified by a genitive (an “of” noun) are included in “prepositional” constructions and are, therefore,…[Read more]

There is no preposition in the sentence that applies to the high priest clause.

Even English translations do not use a preposition.

……………………………..

As explained before, a nominative noun modified by a genitive (an “of” noun) are included in “prepositional” constructions and are, therefore, improper examples.

18:13…[Read more]

Kerwin wrote:

“Tigger,

“In John 18:13 the words ēn archiereus correspond to ēn theos in John 1:1 which reveals that those Trinitarians that claim God describes the qualities of the word have a case.

“There is also an instance where the word ēn preceding a nominative is translated ‘was a’.”

………………………

John 18:13 does not co…[Read more]

Kerwin wrote:

“Tigger,

“In John 18:13 the words ēn archiereus correspond to ēn theos in John 1:1 which reveals that those Trinitarians that claim God describes the qualities of the word have a case.

“There is also an instance where the word ēn preceding a nominative is translated ‘was a’.”

………………………

John 18:13 does not co…[Read more]

“Tigger,

“The Koine Greek definite is not the equivalent of our definite as in order to be a nominative there must be a definite preceding it. I looked at some other examples and saw no exceptions. Even with name the Greek language speakers would say rough equivalent of <i>the Tigger</i> when addressing you in the nominative. Fro…[Read more]

“Tigger,

“I dropped the not.

“So far I have found nowhere where a nominative noun is not preceded by the definite article.

“Sorry about that.”

……………………….

But that’s what I’m referring to.  You have not read Lesson B which gives a number of examples of the nominative noun anthropos without the article being…[Read more]

I’m glad you are (sort of) examining John’s usage, but you obviously are not carefully reading what I have written!

PLEASE read my first post on this page which ends with: “Apparently you still have not read the first two lessons or you wouldn’t be making such errors.”  Nor have you clicked on the link in that post.

If you don’t even re…[Read more]

‘A god’ at John 1:1c is more sensible than ‘God.’ More important for this discussion is the fact that John’s own grammar and usage prove it! I’m sorry that you won’t even give it a chance, but t…[Read more]

“Hi Tigger,

“You mean the definition of the Hebrew word “EL-o-heem”;
“EL-o-heem” does indeed define as all three of those,
but also as #4…

4) God

Great, now we’re getting somewhere.

Now which of the “four” (4) definitions do you think
JEHOVAH was referring to when he said the following…

“ye are even my witnesses.
Is there ‘a…[Read more]

“Hi Tigger,

“You mean the definition of the Hebrew word “EL-o-heem”;
“EL-o-heem” does indeed define as all three of those,
but also as #4…

4) God

Great, now we’re getting somewhere.

Now which of the “four” (4) definitions do you think
JEHOVAH was referring to when he said the following…

“ye are even my witnesses.
Is there ‘a…[Read more]

I believe Lesson B tells you that “a god” and “gods” are used in scripture for God’s angels, earthly kings, and judges. There is also a very long list of sources there where I found Trinitarian scholars confirming that fact.

….

Kerwin wrote:

“I looked through a few verses of John 1 and the nominative form of a noun is always procee…[Read more]

I believe Lesson B tells you that “a god” and “gods” are used in scripture for God’s angels, earthly kings, and judges. There is also a very long list of sources there where I found Trinitarian scholars confirming that fact.

….

Kerwin wrote:

“I looked through a few verses of John 1 and the nominative form of a noun is always procee…[Read more]

“Tigger,

theos is the same word as the theou and theon so any noun whose form ends with “s” may requite the definite article.”

……………………

Kerwin,

John 1:1c uses the nominative form ‘theos.’  That is one important reason why we need to see John uses this same case throughout his writings. Another important reason is that the nomina…[Read more]

“Tigger,

<i>theos </i>is the same word as the <i>theou </i>and <i>theon </i>so any noun whose form ends with “s” may requite the definite article.”

……………………

Kerwin,

John 1:1c uses the nominative form ‘theos.’  That is one important reason why we need to see how he uses this same case throughout his writings. Another import…[Read more]

“Tigger…….GOD AND HIS WORDS ARE ONE AND THE SAMETHING, Jesus said the word he was telling us was not “HIS” words, buth the words of him who sent him,so how do you conclude JESUS IS THE WORD HIMSELF? Jesus said the FATHER WAS “IN” HIM SHOWING HIM EVERYTHING TO SAY AND DO, DO YOU BELIEVE JESUS WAS THE GOD THAT WAS “IN” HIM? NO…[Read more]

We find the truth of John 1:1c by examining all parallel constructions in John‘s writings and grammar (as explained in Lesson A).

We find the truth of John 1:1c by examining John‘s writings and grammar (as explained in Lesson A).

We find the truth of John 1:1c by examining John‘s writings and grammar.

“tigger and Umb5,

“John 1:6 uses theou without the ho to mean God.”

…………………………

I have already pointed out that the other forms (theou, theon, etc.) are inconsistent with their article usage and, therefore, like”prepositional” constructions, are improper examples.  We are interested only in the examples of…[Read more]

“tigger and Umb5,

“John 1:6 uses theou without the ho to mean God.”

…………………………

I have already pointed out that the other forms (theou, theon, etc.) are inconsistent with their article usage and, therefore, like”prepositional” constructions, are improper examples.  We are interested only in the examples which…[Read more]

“Umb5 and tigger2,

“It is the modern custom to call God by the name God but I am not sure if that custom existed in the first century. In John 1:1 and in other passages of the NT the word ho should have been translated to a English definite instead of dropped so it is more like “The Word is with the God and the Word is God …” or “T…[Read more]

“Umb5 and tigger2,

“It is the modern custom to call God by the name God but I am not sure if that custom existed in the first century. In John 1:1 and in other passages of the NT the word ho should have been translated to a English definite instead of dropped so it is more like “The Word is with the God and the Word is God …” or “T…[Read more]

“So in all the gospels when they meant “God” (alone without “a”) they always used “ho theos”, and all bible translations render it without the “a”,  except at John 1:1 where it does not have “ho” in front of “theos” but yet it is still translated without the “a”.. ? Which is why it is probably a mis-translation.

“I just wan…[Read more]

I really appreciate your reply to what I have written.  I haven’t had any honest responses to it until UMB5 wrote the above post.  Here’s the thing with John 10:33:

In Lesson A I show that we are interested in the form of the word for “god”/”God” which is used for subjects (and predicate nouns) as it is found in John 1:1c.  This would be…[Read more]