I am asking you.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Did Jesus say he was God???
- Thread starter Muffled
- Start date
Shermana
Heretic
As you can see, since you refuse to even try to find 3 other examples where it would possibly even apply, it was made up just for that one verse. That's why no one takes it seriously. It's a mockery of language studies and utter proof of the lengths Trinitarians will go to, even making up their own grammar rules which get proven wrong yet they cling to them even if in 20 other cases they are disproven.
So you mean it doesn't apply elsewhere, and that's why it's not taken seriously?
I remember discussing this with you before.
Do you want me to quote what you said?
javajo
Well-Known Member
kai___theos____en_____ho___ logos
and___ God___ was___ the____ word
All the translations translate "and God was the word" as "and the word was God".
I believe this: Its very simple. Only if one insists upon denying the deity of Christ must they twist or add to scripture. But he who calmed the sea, walked on water, multiplied the loaves and fishes, healed the multitudes, by whom all things consist, whom angels worship and who will judge the world and to whom every knee shall bow, to him who forgives sins and who paid for our sins, who is the image of the invisible God, is from everlasting, who is all knowing, omni-present, only-begotten not made is truly God incarnate as the Bible clearly teaches and has been declared from the very beginning. That is my belief.
and___ God___ was___ the____ word
All the translations translate "and God was the word" as "and the word was God".
I believe this: Its very simple. Only if one insists upon denying the deity of Christ must they twist or add to scripture. But he who calmed the sea, walked on water, multiplied the loaves and fishes, healed the multitudes, by whom all things consist, whom angels worship and who will judge the world and to whom every knee shall bow, to him who forgives sins and who paid for our sins, who is the image of the invisible God, is from everlasting, who is all knowing, omni-present, only-begotten not made is truly God incarnate as the Bible clearly teaches and has been declared from the very beginning. That is my belief.
Yes, even Shermana proved the divinity of Christ:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/2602652-post804.html
javajo
Well-Known Member
2 Corinthians 4:4 says, " Christ, who is the image of God[SIZE=+0]". This means Christ who we can see, is the very image of the invisible God whom we cannot see. [/SIZE]That's why if we have seen Christ, we have seen the Father as they are one. Jesus is God incarnate-made flesh and dwelt among us.
Shermana
Heretic
You obviously didn't understand why I used the NLT version and said "They convey what I'm trying to say". You underlined the part that makes it say something else the way you emphasize it. I am talking about the word "given". Do you know no bounds on how to deliberately misinterpret what people say?
Besides, Jesus as "a god" and the Chief Angel would have "divinity" in the sense of being a "divine being" as some translations use for "Elohim" (Divine beings) in referring to angels.
You're welcome.
And thanks for your help.
ps. Don't keep asking useless pathetic questions.
javajo
Well-Known Member
There is a very poor translation used by a certain cult but all the rest agree, The Word was God.
Shermana
Heretic
Try the NLT version and quote the whole verse. Are you deliberately avoiding the part I'm referring to? Did you not understand what I meant by "Articled god"? Apparently not. And if you disagree with it, there's plenty of commentary that supports their rendition.
Shermana
Heretic
It's only a "very poor translation" in relation to your doctrinal Theology, gramatically its fine, do you think they are the first people to translate it as such? It's been done that way since the 17th century, just not by "Mainstream Church" editions. It's also translated as "And the Word was Divine" in some cases. I think CARM is specifically and deliberately abetting this myth that the JW's invented this, there's no way that Matt Slick can possibly be unaware that the JWs didn't invent this concept, but I think he knows well and doesn't discuss its earlier use.
I hope you're done editing...
Actually it has been proved many times who the one who does the misinterpretation is.
Yes, who thought he'd finally say it
javajo
Well-Known Member
Hmm...you think the NWT is accurate??? LOL!
Shermana
Heretic
Wow. This is amazing. So you not only distort what the Bible says, you cut out what I said to make it say something I didn't say in context. That's just great. Love it. No need to get into the reason why I used the NLT translation and talked about "given". Are you intentionally trying to annoy me? Do I have to rephrase to show you what I meant to say about G-d "Giving" to Jesus?
If only I could just cut and paste what anyone said to make it agree with me. I will try this on you.
Last edited: