Brian2
Veteran Member
It is an answer that makes the Bible incorrect when it says that the elders saw God.
-
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!
Watchtower: Jesus is not "a god"!
- Thread starter Oeste
- Start date
It is an answer that makes the Bible incorrect when it says that the elders saw God.
Brian2
Veteran Member
Since DogKnox20 seems to have all the answers and insists he's right 'bout things scriptural, I suggest you ask him.Maybe he knows...
I will ask you.
Who was it that the elders of Israel saw at Exodus 24?
It says in Exodus that it was God and at other places in the Bible it says that nobody has seen the invisible God and nobody can see Him.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
YOU are asking this???
Finally, you are seeing sense with what I’ve been showing and telling you all this time!!!
YES! Trinitarian translators needed to brace up their false ideology claiming that Jesus was God and so they took every opportunity to alter the scriptures as they translated it by adding fake text or subtle changes to the original.
I said to you that you would end up believing nothing as the cocufundary of trinitarian fallacies leaves untargetted researchers like yourself with no clear conclusion as to what the true Christian faith is concerning. Even worse when you ignore the actual truth that I put to you, labelling it as ‘Strange ideas’!
I bet that if you tried to summarise what you’ve learnt so far, you would conclude a load of nonsense that plays counter to the actual scriptures verse statements.
I know you don’t answer question set to you - but please try - for me… this time… eh!!
Brian2
Veteran Member
I take the Bible literally where it can be done. In this case it can be taken literally if the angel (messenger) sent by God is actually God.
Nobody has seen the Father, the one whom Jesus called the only true God, the one in whom is Jesus and the one who is one with Jesus, one thing.
This messenger is God but does not have to appear as God is in His full glory and form.
We can see this in a number of places in the OT where a messenger is sent and claims to be or is identified as YHWH.
Zech 2:8-11 For thus said the Lord of hosts, after his glory sent me to the nations who plundered you, for he who touches you touches the apple of his eye: “Behold, I will shake my hand over them, and they shall become plunder for those who served them. Then you will know that the Lord of hosts has sent me. Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion, for behold, I come and I will dwell in your midst, declares the Lord. And many nations shall join themselves to the Lord in that day, and shall be my people. And I will dwell in your midst, and you shall know that the Lord of hosts has sent me to you.
Where is it common in the Hebrew scriptures for that to happen except where the angel is actually identified as God. In the burning bush the angel spoke as if He was God and the text actually says that YHWH spoke out of the bush. (Ex 3:4)
Three men came to Abraham on the way to Sodom and then 2 left but YHWH remained behind and spoke with Abraham.
Why does this sort of thing happen sometimes and at others we are told it is an angel and the angel does not speak as if it is God.
You are judging the other apostles by what they did not say. I judge what Thomas thought by what he said and by what Jesus said afterwards. "You believe because you have seen"
The Son of God is equal to God and the disciples knew that, having been with Him for 3 years and hearing what the Pharisees said about His claim to be the Son of God. (John 5:18)
The Son has the same nature as His Father and is therefore equal in nature and so it God just as the Father is and is actually in the Father.
Are you saying that Jesus is not God or are you speaking about just John 20:28 and what Thomas said?
Jesus is the Son of God and is YHWH along with the Father and Holy Spirit.
YHWH alone spread out the heavens and at Heb 1:10 we see that Jesus did that.
At John 1:3 we see that the Word (pre human Jesus) was not created. He has always existed with the Father.
The Father is called the only true God because He is the source of His Son and the Spirit of God. These 2 are of God and not created.
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
It think it is very sad. The Watch Tower condones the Sacrifice of Children because the scriptures say "Abstain from Fat & Blood"! Child Sacrifice in God' name; am very sure Satan was very happy!
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
YoursTrue Do you think Jesus was talking through his hat when he told Thomas.. "Blessed are those who have not seen and still believe"!? The words to Thomas start with "Jesus said"!
And Jesus is telling the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus it shows us that the Jews accepted the idea of "The Soul does not die" it goes to; The Abode of the Dead "Shoal"!
1 Peter 4:6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
Clear Whack-Oh to say the least!... I quoted texts Example below..
CSB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
I did not write it I copies and Paste the verse!
VOICE
God, unseen until now, is revealed in the Voice, God’s only Son, straight from the Father’s heart.
TPT
No one ever before gazed upon the full splendor of God except his uniquely beloved Son, who is cherished by the Father and held close to his heart. Now that he has come to us, he has unfolded the full explanation of who God truly is!
NTE
Nobody has ever seen God. The only-begotten God, who is intimately close to the father – he has brought him to light.
NLT
No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.
NLV
The much-loved Son is beside the Father. No man has ever seen God. But Christ has made God known to us.
NIVUK
No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in the closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
NIRV
No one has ever seen God. But the One and Only is God and is at the Father’s side. The one at the Father’s side has shown us what God is like.
NET
No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.
NASB1995
No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
PHILLIPS
So the word of God became a human being and lived among us. We saw his splendour (the splendour as of a father’s only son), full of grace and truth. And it was about him that John stood up and testified, exclaiming: “Here is the one I was speaking about when I said that although he would come after me he would always be in front of me; for he existed before I was born!” Indeed, every one of us has shared in his riches—there is a grace in our lives because of his grace. For while the Law was given by Moses, love and truth came through Jesus Christ. It is true that no one has ever seen God at any time. Yet the divine and only Son, who lives in the closest intimacy with the Father, has made him known.
ISV
No one has ever seen God. The uniquely existing God, who is close to the Father’s side, has revealed him.
ICB
No man has ever seen God. But God the only Son is very close to the Father. And the Son has shown us what God is like.
GNT
No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is the same as God and is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
ESV
No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father's side, he has made him known.
DLNT
No one has ever seen God; the only-born God, the One being in the bosom of the Father— that One expounded Him.
CSB
No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
AMPC
No man has ever seen God at any time; the only unique Son, or the only begotten God, Who is in the bosom [in the intimate presence] of the Father, He has declared Him [He has revealed Him and brought Him out where He can be seen; He has interpreted Him and He has made Him known].
AMP
No one has seen God [His essence, His divine nature] at any time; the [One and] only begotten God [that is, the unique Son] who is in the intimate presence of the Father, He has explained Him [and interpreted and revealed the awesome wonder of the Father].
Hi @Dogknox20 and other readers ;
1) OFFERING FAKE "BIBLE QUOTES" AND PARAPHRASES AND COMMENTARY IN THE PLACE OF ACTUAL BIBLICAL TEXT
In post #1397, Clear pointed out that the texts offered as “biblical quotes” by Dogknox20 to support his theology in post #1353 are not authentic translations of any source Greek text.
That is to say, they are bogus and inaccurate and are not “biblical” translations but are instead, inaccurate paraphrasing and commentary in the place of biblical translation.
Clear gave the original Greek text that is rated “B” in the translators GN-4 (meaning it is almost certainly the actual text) and it is the text in Nestle Aland 28 and importantly, there are no Greek variants that can be translated accurately to support the corrupted text readers were offered in post #1353,
The problem with corrupting the biblical text is that unsuspecting readers may not notice the difference and assume the poster is offering actual biblical text to support a position when in fact, the authentic and actual biblical text may support an entirely different view.
As if to prove Clears point regarding offering bogus "scripture", Dogknox20 offers a reposting of the corrupted and bogus translations :
Dogknox20 said : “Clear Whack-Oh to say the least!... I quoted texts Example below..
CSB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
I did not write it I copies and Paste the verse! (post #1407)
Dogknox20, I understand that you do not read Greek, but this does not relieve you of the burden of at least trying to make sure your religious claims have some connection with reality and truth.
The problem is that when you offer corrupted texts or paraphrases masquerading as actual biblical text, you do harm to the truth since readers may assume your text is actually biblical when they are not.
2) DOES ANY GREEK READER ON THE FORUM BELIEVE THE TRANSLATIONS OF JOHN 1:18 OFFERED BY DOGKNOX20 in post #1353 ARE ACCURATE AND AUTHENTIC TRANSLATIONS?
Greek readers on the forum :
The actual Greek source text of John 1:18 is : “Θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον νου πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο.”
IS THERE A SINGLE GREEK READER ON THIS FORUM WHO WANTS TO ARGUE THAT THE CORRECT TRANSLATION OF THIS SOURCE GREEK IS : “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.” (Dogknox20, in post #1361)
ANYONE?
3) A WILLINGNESS TO OFFER FALSE INFORMATION TO SUPPORT A PERSONAL THEOLOGY ADDS TO INACCURATE AND CHAOTIC RELIGIOUS CLAIMS
Another point is that a common tendency is to find something that appears to support our position and simply offer it up as “evidence” for our beliefs without doing even the most basic checks to see if what we are offering is even true.
When we do this, it does not tell readers what is actually true, but simply reveals what one is personally willing to do to create the appearance of truth.
If we are willing to simply offer up false texts and false narratives as “biblical” then we unmoor ourselves from authentic data and we simply add to the chaos of disputes using inaccurate data.
Clear
φυφιδρτζσιω
1) OFFERING FAKE "BIBLE QUOTES" AND PARAPHRASES AND COMMENTARY IN THE PLACE OF ACTUAL BIBLICAL TEXT
In post #1397, Clear pointed out that the texts offered as “biblical quotes” by Dogknox20 to support his theology in post #1353 are not authentic translations of any source Greek text.
That is to say, they are bogus and inaccurate and are not “biblical” translations but are instead, inaccurate paraphrasing and commentary in the place of biblical translation.
Clear gave the original Greek text that is rated “B” in the translators GN-4 (meaning it is almost certainly the actual text) and it is the text in Nestle Aland 28 and importantly, there are no Greek variants that can be translated accurately to support the corrupted text readers were offered in post #1353,
The problem with corrupting the biblical text is that unsuspecting readers may not notice the difference and assume the poster is offering actual biblical text to support a position when in fact, the authentic and actual biblical text may support an entirely different view.
As if to prove Clears point regarding offering bogus "scripture", Dogknox20 offers a reposting of the corrupted and bogus translations :
Dogknox20 said : “Clear Whack-Oh to say the least!... I quoted texts Example below..
CSB
1 John 18 No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
I did not write it I copies and Paste the verse! (post #1407)
Dogknox20, I understand that you do not read Greek, but this does not relieve you of the burden of at least trying to make sure your religious claims have some connection with reality and truth.
The problem is that when you offer corrupted texts or paraphrases masquerading as actual biblical text, you do harm to the truth since readers may assume your text is actually biblical when they are not.
2) DOES ANY GREEK READER ON THE FORUM BELIEVE THE TRANSLATIONS OF JOHN 1:18 OFFERED BY DOGKNOX20 in post #1353 ARE ACCURATE AND AUTHENTIC TRANSLATIONS?
Greek readers on the forum :
The actual Greek source text of John 1:18 is : “Θεον ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ο ων εις τον κολπον νου πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο.”
IS THERE A SINGLE GREEK READER ON THIS FORUM WHO WANTS TO ARGUE THAT THE CORRECT TRANSLATION OF THIS SOURCE GREEK IS : “No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.” (Dogknox20, in post #1361)
ANYONE?
3) A WILLINGNESS TO OFFER FALSE INFORMATION TO SUPPORT A PERSONAL THEOLOGY ADDS TO INACCURATE AND CHAOTIC RELIGIOUS CLAIMS
Another point is that a common tendency is to find something that appears to support our position and simply offer it up as “evidence” for our beliefs without doing even the most basic checks to see if what we are offering is even true.
When we do this, it does not tell readers what is actually true, but simply reveals what one is personally willing to do to create the appearance of truth.
If we are willing to simply offer up false texts and false narratives as “biblical” then we unmoor ourselves from authentic data and we simply add to the chaos of disputes using inaccurate data.
Clear
φυφιδρτζσιω
Last edited:
Hi @Dogknox20 and other readers
Dogknox20 said : "It think it is very sad. The Watch Tower condones the Sacrifice of Children because the scriptures say "Abstain from Fat & Blood"! Child Sacrifice in God' name; am very sure Satan was very happy!"
Are you aware of the thousands and thousands and thousands of Jews and other individuals including children that were murdered in the various inquisitions and the various pogroms carried out by the Catholic church in the middle ages in multiple countries?
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
I don't understand how you can justify the Catholic Church overtly murdering thousands while criticizing the Jehovahs Witnesses whose policy only affects a miniscule few.
Can you explain how murder of thousands is virtuous; more virtuous than death of an incredibly few individuals for following a religious belief?
I don't think your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling is justified in this case
Clear
Dogknox20 said : "It think it is very sad. The Watch Tower condones the Sacrifice of Children because the scriptures say "Abstain from Fat & Blood"! Child Sacrifice in God' name; am very sure Satan was very happy!"
Are you aware of the thousands and thousands and thousands of Jews and other individuals including children that were murdered in the various inquisitions and the various pogroms carried out by the Catholic church in the middle ages in multiple countries?
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
I don't understand how you can justify the Catholic Church overtly murdering thousands while criticizing the Jehovahs Witnesses whose policy only affects a miniscule few.
Can you explain how murder of thousands is virtuous; more virtuous than death of an incredibly few individuals for following a religious belief?
I don't think your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling is justified in this case
Clear
Last edited:
POST ONE OF TWO
Hi @Brian2 and other readers
Brian2 said : "I will ask you.
Who was it that the elders of Israel saw at Exodus 24?
It says in Exodus that it was God and at other places in the Bible it says that nobody has seen the invisible God and nobody can see Him. " (post #1402)
I have to agree with Brian2s point that the early literature has multiple examples where prophets have seen the God of the Old Testament and lived despite the text indicating that no man has seen God.
The texts that indicate God the Father is "unseen" by man (greek αορατοσ doesn't typically mean "invisible", but rather "unseen") may not indicate an absolute, but a relative term such as when a King operates and administrates large dominions but is not, himself present, but instead, accomplishes much that is seen while he remains unseen (not "invisible") in the accomplishment of his plans. The King is not strictly "invisible", but instead, generally is "unseen" by his typical subjects.
1) EARLY TEXTS INDICATE GOD HAS BEEN SEEN DESPITE AWARENESS OF THE TEXT THAT SAYS GOD IS NOT SEEN BY LIVING MAN.
Even the early texts indicate that individuals have seen God despite an awareness of texts indicating God was unseen. Brian2 and others have offered examples of times God has appeared to mankind but even
; “And Isaiah himself has said, ‘I see more than Moses the prophet.’ Moses said, There is no man who can see the Lord and live.’ But Isaiah has said, ‘I have seen the Lord, and behold I am alive.’ Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 3:9
The tradition that no man has ever seen God and it's connection to the sanctity and honor of God also seems to have affected the early editing of the Masoretic biblical text.
Example of changes to the text regarding God appearing to man :
Gen XVIII:22 : IN Genesis 18:22, the introduction context of the chapter is “And the Lord appeared unto him [Abraham] in the plains of Mamre…” (vs 1). The story then follows that three men came to Abraham who bowed to them (vs 2) As talk turns to the subject of Sodom and Gomorrah at least two of the men went toward Sodom. The sentence in verse 22 of the later Jewish massoretic reads And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom, “but Abraham stood yet before the Lord.”
In all three Massoretic Rubrics in the manuscripts Orient 1379, 2349 and 2365, each emphatically states that the original reading was “but the Lord stood yet before Abraham” but that the text was altered. Other lists such as the ancient List in the Maase Ephod contained with the Codex Orient confirms that the text was originally “and the Lord still stood before Abraham” (as @Brian2 indicated in post#1404)
The greatest scholar on the Massorah, Ginsberg himself tells us : “With such an emphatic declaration before us, both in the ancient post-biblical records and in the Massorah itself, it seems almost superfluous to point out that it would be most incomprehensible for the redactors of the text to state that they have here altered the text and also to give the original reading when they had in fact done no such thing.”
The context, and the logical continuity of the original narrative is more logical and reasonable and smoothly transitions in the original as compared to the textual change. It was the Lord who came down to see and tell Abraham whether the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah had acted in accordance with the bitter cry which went up to heaven;
The reason for this and other changes is often that a phrase is deemed derogatory to the character and station of Deity.
Those who changed the text were trying to honor God rather than attempting to corrupt a text.
For example, the phrase to “stand before another” is often a stock phrase denoting a state of inferiority and homage (comp Gen XVIII:8; XLI:16, Deut I:38; XVIII:7 etc) such as when one “stood before” a judge.
Thus, it seemed derogatory to say that the Lord stood before Abraham. Hence in accordance with the Massoretic rules “to remove all indelicate expressions”, this and other phrases were altered by the Sopherim.
For example : In Numb XI:15 All four ancient records and Massoretic Lists, mark this passage as an alteration of the Sopherim. The three Yemen MSS. And the Massorah inside the Maase Ephod (in C. Orient) tell us the original text was “Kill me I pray thee out of hand if I have found favour in thy sight that I may not see thy evil”.
Since the statement might be construed as ascribing evil to the Lord, the Sopherim altered it into “that I may not see my evil” (which the AV and the RV render “my wretchedness”).
Changes were made not only to make the text conform to the editors interpretation of what "protected and enhanced God", but to protect and enhance the character of other individuals as well.
For example, The lists of emendations include I Sam III:13 which originally said : “because his sons cursed God”.
However, It seemed to lessen the stature of the Eli, if his own sons openly blasphemed God without Elis’ reprimand. Thus, the Sopherim altered the text by omitting the aleph and yod and changing אלהם (God) into להם (them). Thus, they cursed “THEM” in the altered texts (rather than cursing God).
The point is that the early Judeo-Christian God was quite anthropomorphic (i.e. had similar characteristics to mankind) and had appeared to multiple prophets.
This was uncomfortable to the various later Judaisms and thus certain anthropomorphisms were to be removed as well as references where God appeared to man in later biblical narratives.
POST TWO OF TWO FOLLOWS
φυδρδρδρσεω
Hi @Brian2 and other readers
Brian2 said : "I will ask you.
Who was it that the elders of Israel saw at Exodus 24?
It says in Exodus that it was God and at other places in the Bible it says that nobody has seen the invisible God and nobody can see Him. " (post #1402)
I have to agree with Brian2s point that the early literature has multiple examples where prophets have seen the God of the Old Testament and lived despite the text indicating that no man has seen God.
The texts that indicate God the Father is "unseen" by man (greek αορατοσ doesn't typically mean "invisible", but rather "unseen") may not indicate an absolute, but a relative term such as when a King operates and administrates large dominions but is not, himself present, but instead, accomplishes much that is seen while he remains unseen (not "invisible") in the accomplishment of his plans. The King is not strictly "invisible", but instead, generally is "unseen" by his typical subjects.
1) EARLY TEXTS INDICATE GOD HAS BEEN SEEN DESPITE AWARENESS OF THE TEXT THAT SAYS GOD IS NOT SEEN BY LIVING MAN.
Even the early texts indicate that individuals have seen God despite an awareness of texts indicating God was unseen. Brian2 and others have offered examples of times God has appeared to mankind but even
; “And Isaiah himself has said, ‘I see more than Moses the prophet.’ Moses said, There is no man who can see the Lord and live.’ But Isaiah has said, ‘I have seen the Lord, and behold I am alive.’ Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 3:9
The tradition that no man has ever seen God and it's connection to the sanctity and honor of God also seems to have affected the early editing of the Masoretic biblical text.
Example of changes to the text regarding God appearing to man :
Gen XVIII:22 : IN Genesis 18:22, the introduction context of the chapter is “And the Lord appeared unto him [Abraham] in the plains of Mamre…” (vs 1). The story then follows that three men came to Abraham who bowed to them (vs 2) As talk turns to the subject of Sodom and Gomorrah at least two of the men went toward Sodom. The sentence in verse 22 of the later Jewish massoretic reads And the men turned their faces from thence, and went toward Sodom, “but Abraham stood yet before the Lord.”
In all three Massoretic Rubrics in the manuscripts Orient 1379, 2349 and 2365, each emphatically states that the original reading was “but the Lord stood yet before Abraham” but that the text was altered. Other lists such as the ancient List in the Maase Ephod contained with the Codex Orient confirms that the text was originally “and the Lord still stood before Abraham” (as @Brian2 indicated in post#1404)
The greatest scholar on the Massorah, Ginsberg himself tells us : “With such an emphatic declaration before us, both in the ancient post-biblical records and in the Massorah itself, it seems almost superfluous to point out that it would be most incomprehensible for the redactors of the text to state that they have here altered the text and also to give the original reading when they had in fact done no such thing.”
The context, and the logical continuity of the original narrative is more logical and reasonable and smoothly transitions in the original as compared to the textual change. It was the Lord who came down to see and tell Abraham whether the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah had acted in accordance with the bitter cry which went up to heaven;
The reason for this and other changes is often that a phrase is deemed derogatory to the character and station of Deity.
Those who changed the text were trying to honor God rather than attempting to corrupt a text.
For example, the phrase to “stand before another” is often a stock phrase denoting a state of inferiority and homage (comp Gen XVIII:8; XLI:16, Deut I:38; XVIII:7 etc) such as when one “stood before” a judge.
Thus, it seemed derogatory to say that the Lord stood before Abraham. Hence in accordance with the Massoretic rules “to remove all indelicate expressions”, this and other phrases were altered by the Sopherim.
For example : In Numb XI:15 All four ancient records and Massoretic Lists, mark this passage as an alteration of the Sopherim. The three Yemen MSS. And the Massorah inside the Maase Ephod (in C. Orient) tell us the original text was “Kill me I pray thee out of hand if I have found favour in thy sight that I may not see thy evil”.
Since the statement might be construed as ascribing evil to the Lord, the Sopherim altered it into “that I may not see my evil” (which the AV and the RV render “my wretchedness”).
Changes were made not only to make the text conform to the editors interpretation of what "protected and enhanced God", but to protect and enhance the character of other individuals as well.
For example, The lists of emendations include I Sam III:13 which originally said : “because his sons cursed God”.
However, It seemed to lessen the stature of the Eli, if his own sons openly blasphemed God without Elis’ reprimand. Thus, the Sopherim altered the text by omitting the aleph and yod and changing אלהם (God) into להם (them). Thus, they cursed “THEM” in the altered texts (rather than cursing God).
The point is that the early Judeo-Christian God was quite anthropomorphic (i.e. had similar characteristics to mankind) and had appeared to multiple prophets.
This was uncomfortable to the various later Judaisms and thus certain anthropomorphisms were to be removed as well as references where God appeared to man in later biblical narratives.
POST TWO OF TWO FOLLOWS
φυδρδρδρσεω
Last edited:
POST TWO OF TWO
2) THE INTERESTING USE OF THE VERBS “TO SEE” AND "TO DECLARE/EXPLAIN" IN JOHN 1:18.
John 1:18 in ENGLISH says that no man has ever “seen” God at any time and the ending phrase is that the only begotten God “has explained him” or “declared him”.
This is an unusual combination of phrases.
If the first phrase “no one has seen God” referred to visual sight, then one would expect the Greek verb of “to see” to be βλεπω (which typically refers to visual sight) or θεωρεω.
Both words took the place of οραω for visual sight (οραω is actually rarely used for visual sight).
If the second phrase is to correspond to a visual sighting of God, then it is strange to use the word εξηγησατο (generally rendered “(the son “explained” or “declared” him) typically referred to an explanation of or communication of divine secrets or mysteries.
It is not typically a visual description (I can ‘t think of a visual reference though they may exist).
However, οραω “to see” was often used with the meaning of to “see” with the mind, to “perceive” something so that it indicates deep understanding of a thing. For example, in Papyri Fay 20:19 (of 4 a.d.) it is used to say “so far as I see…” (ως εκ των παροντων ορω...).
It is an awareness and understanding which is being indicated in such usage.
In Papyri Oxy I. 120:1 (of 4 a.d.) it is used to say ”when a man finds (sees) himself in adversity…” (χρν γαρ τινα ορωοντα αιαυτον εν δυστυχια...)
When it is used in 1 Thess 5:15, “see that none render evil…”, it is again, used in the sense of being aware. In this case it is an awareness NOT to do a thing, ορατε με τις κακοε αντι....
The point is that While the verse in John 1:18 typically is rendered as a visual sighting, the words used for “to see God” in this phrase are more often used in a metaphorical sense regarding understanding and awareness.
If this is the sense of the usage, then the verse means that “no man has (truly) understood God” but the unbegotten God (the son) has “explained him” or “has declared” what God is like.
My point is that the Greek for “to see” in this phrase was much more often used as a metaphor for understanding and awareness rather than a reference to visual sight and the Greek for “to declare” or “to explain” was much more often used as a reference to clarifying than to describing an appearance.
While I cannot say conclusively what was meant by the author of this specific phrase, it is just as likely that it is not referring to a visual appearance as it is to a visual appearance of God to man.
Readers will have to come to their own conclusion regarding such things.
Clear
φυφιδρσετζω
2) THE INTERESTING USE OF THE VERBS “TO SEE” AND "TO DECLARE/EXPLAIN" IN JOHN 1:18.
John 1:18 in ENGLISH says that no man has ever “seen” God at any time and the ending phrase is that the only begotten God “has explained him” or “declared him”.
This is an unusual combination of phrases.
If the first phrase “no one has seen God” referred to visual sight, then one would expect the Greek verb of “to see” to be βλεπω (which typically refers to visual sight) or θεωρεω.
Both words took the place of οραω for visual sight (οραω is actually rarely used for visual sight).
If the second phrase is to correspond to a visual sighting of God, then it is strange to use the word εξηγησατο (generally rendered “(the son “explained” or “declared” him) typically referred to an explanation of or communication of divine secrets or mysteries.
It is not typically a visual description (I can ‘t think of a visual reference though they may exist).
However, οραω “to see” was often used with the meaning of to “see” with the mind, to “perceive” something so that it indicates deep understanding of a thing. For example, in Papyri Fay 20:19 (of 4 a.d.) it is used to say “so far as I see…” (ως εκ των παροντων ορω...).
It is an awareness and understanding which is being indicated in such usage.
In Papyri Oxy I. 120:1 (of 4 a.d.) it is used to say ”when a man finds (sees) himself in adversity…” (χρν γαρ τινα ορωοντα αιαυτον εν δυστυχια...)
When it is used in 1 Thess 5:15, “see that none render evil…”, it is again, used in the sense of being aware. In this case it is an awareness NOT to do a thing, ορατε με τις κακοε αντι....
The point is that While the verse in John 1:18 typically is rendered as a visual sighting, the words used for “to see God” in this phrase are more often used in a metaphorical sense regarding understanding and awareness.
If this is the sense of the usage, then the verse means that “no man has (truly) understood God” but the unbegotten God (the son) has “explained him” or “has declared” what God is like.
My point is that the Greek for “to see” in this phrase was much more often used as a metaphor for understanding and awareness rather than a reference to visual sight and the Greek for “to declare” or “to explain” was much more often used as a reference to clarifying than to describing an appearance.
While I cannot say conclusively what was meant by the author of this specific phrase, it is just as likely that it is not referring to a visual appearance as it is to a visual appearance of God to man.
Readers will have to come to their own conclusion regarding such things.
Clear
φυφιδρσετζω
Last edited:
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
The Watch Tower added the letter "A" to the Gospel of John verse 1 they made the word "God" start with small case! "g"
Christian Bible... 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The JW's bible.. 1 In the beginning was the Word,+ and the Word was with God,+ and the Word was a god.
NOT ONE..
No not one interpretation of John 1:1 in any Christian bible (over 40) has any interpreters include the letter "A" in the verse!
Christians teach there is ONLY one God!
The JWs add the Letter "A" they believing there is more then one God!
Christians have always taught there is ONLY one God... Jesus is God one person of the Trinity.
Christians teach "The WORD is Jesus" the Word was God. the Word was with God!
Christians have always taught as the bible tells us "Jesus became flesh and lived among us!"
Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus; because Christians teach and have always believed Jesus is God!
A universal symbol of the Christian is the "Cross"! Why? Because it was Jesus the Perfect man going the the cross that saved us!
18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
Christian Bible... 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The JW's bible.. 1 In the beginning was the Word,+ and the Word was with God,+ and the Word was a god.
NOT ONE..
No not one interpretation of John 1:1 in any Christian bible (over 40) has any interpreters include the letter "A" in the verse!
Christians teach there is ONLY one God!
The JWs add the Letter "A" they believing there is more then one God!
Christians have always taught there is ONLY one God... Jesus is God one person of the Trinity.
Christians teach "The WORD is Jesus" the Word was God. the Word was with God!
Christians have always taught as the bible tells us "Jesus became flesh and lived among us!"
Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus; because Christians teach and have always believed Jesus is God!
A universal symbol of the Christian is the "Cross"! Why? Because it was Jesus the Perfect man going the the cross that saved us!
18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
Hi @Dogknox20 and other readers :
1) BEATING A DEAD HORSE
Dogknox20 said : "The Watch Tower added the letter "A" to the Gospel of John verse 1 they made the word "God" start with small case! "g"
Christian Bible... 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The JW's bible.. 1 In the beginning was the Word,+ and the Word was with God,+ and the Word was a god.
NOT ONE..
No not one interpretation of John 1:1 in any Christian bible (over 40) has any interpreters include the letter "A" in the verse!
....
18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
Again this is another offering of incorrect information to readers.
The Jehovahs Witness @tigger2 and others have given multiple examples of texts which render the unarticled θεοσ as "a God".
I am not a Jehovahs Witness and I do not hold to their theological model but I also have offered such examples.
I might as well point out that readers of this thread have already seen that the Jehovahs Witnesses have been shown to be, grammatically, correct in their translation.
If readers simply enter how to say "the word was a god" in greek in google, it will render the unarticled version just as the Jehovahs Witnesses and others have rendered it.
Conversely, if you enter the greek ήταν θεός (the unarticled modern phrase used for John 1:1c), the english translation is he was "a God".
The computer algorithm in google translator has no religious bias.
Use any other translator you wish, it will render the grammatically correct "a god" or "a God" as a result.
(This is not to say the theology is correct or not, but rather, their rendering is grammatically correct).
Dogknox20, IF you are going to argue against the theology of "a God", you will have to do it based on religious context, and not based on greek since their greek is correct.
2) DOES OFFERING FAKE BIBLICAL TEXT PROVE A GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT SENTENCE WRONG?
Again, I have to ask readers, how is it that Dogknox20 can offer readers an incorrect and fake biblical text in the above post, yet criticize the jehovahs Witnesses for offering a grammatically correct biblical text?
Once again, Dog Knox20, I don't think your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling is justified in this case just as it was not justified in assuming the Catholic pogroms and inquisitions that murdered uncounted thousands is morally superior to the incredibly rare episode of dying by refusing blood.
I would like the answer to my question to you :
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
Clear
Φυφιδρακσεω
1) BEATING A DEAD HORSE
Dogknox20 said : "The Watch Tower added the letter "A" to the Gospel of John verse 1 they made the word "God" start with small case! "g"
Christian Bible... 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The JW's bible.. 1 In the beginning was the Word,+ and the Word was with God,+ and the Word was a god.
NOT ONE..
No not one interpretation of John 1:1 in any Christian bible (over 40) has any interpreters include the letter "A" in the verse!
....
18 No one has ever seen God; but the only and unique Son, who is identical with God and is at the Father’s side — he has made him known.
Again this is another offering of incorrect information to readers.
The Jehovahs Witness @tigger2 and others have given multiple examples of texts which render the unarticled θεοσ as "a God".
I am not a Jehovahs Witness and I do not hold to their theological model but I also have offered such examples.
I might as well point out that readers of this thread have already seen that the Jehovahs Witnesses have been shown to be, grammatically, correct in their translation.
If readers simply enter how to say "the word was a god" in greek in google, it will render the unarticled version just as the Jehovahs Witnesses and others have rendered it.
Conversely, if you enter the greek ήταν θεός (the unarticled modern phrase used for John 1:1c), the english translation is he was "a God".
The computer algorithm in google translator has no religious bias.
Use any other translator you wish, it will render the grammatically correct "a god" or "a God" as a result.
(This is not to say the theology is correct or not, but rather, their rendering is grammatically correct).
Dogknox20, IF you are going to argue against the theology of "a God", you will have to do it based on religious context, and not based on greek since their greek is correct.
2) DOES OFFERING FAKE BIBLICAL TEXT PROVE A GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT SENTENCE WRONG?
Again, I have to ask readers, how is it that Dogknox20 can offer readers an incorrect and fake biblical text in the above post, yet criticize the jehovahs Witnesses for offering a grammatically correct biblical text?
Once again, Dog Knox20, I don't think your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling is justified in this case just as it was not justified in assuming the Catholic pogroms and inquisitions that murdered uncounted thousands is morally superior to the incredibly rare episode of dying by refusing blood.
I would like the answer to my question to you :
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
Clear
Φυφιδρακσεω
Last edited:
JerryMyers
Active Member
Common sense should tell you if the angel/messenger was sent by God then, it CANNOT be ‘actually God’ even if the angel was speaking in the first person as if he was God!!
When God sent His angel to speak to the people, it means the angel sent (by God) had God’s Name in him, God’s authority to speak for God and therefore could speak as God, BUT the angel is NOT God! This becomes clear in Exodus 23:20-22 - “See, I am sending an angel ahead of you to guard you along the way and to bring you to the place I have prepared. Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, since my Name is in him. If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say, I will be an enemy to your enemies and will oppose those who oppose you’.
By saying, ‘If you listen carefully to what he says and do all that I say,…..’, God is clearly distinguishing Himself from the angel he sent.
That’s because the angel has the authority to speak for God and so when the angel spoke, you can say God was speaking.
So what do you think Jesus meant when he said, "You believe because you have seen"?? Seen what??
Nonsense! In John 5:18, the Jews, like you, took the term ‘Father’ literally and that’s why they, NOT Jesus, claimed Jesus was equating himself to God when he referred to God as his ‘Father’…. and the fact that Jesus said he, by himself, can do nothing in the very next verse (John 5:19) tells us Jesus is denying what the Jews were claiming of him!
You should listen to what Jesus said of himself and NOT what the Jews, who were trying to kill him, said of him!!
Jesus is NOT God by his own words and actions. You should try to know Jesus by his own words, NOT by the words of other people.
As for Hebrews 1:10, whose words are those? Jesus ?? God Almighty??
And where did you see Jesus in Hebrews 1:10??
John 1 is about God’s Glory in His Creations and God creates by just uttering a word (a command) and since the word was uttered by God Himself, we said it’s the Word of God, and the Word of God was God (that is, divine) only at the time of the creation after which the word is just an ordinary word and that’s why John 1:1-2 are in past-tensed.
Jesus is just one of God’s Glory in His Creations and in John 1, the creation of Jesus is narrated in John 1:14 when the Command, that is, the Word that God uttered, became flesh/human. Likewise, I can also say the tree became a table, that is after the tree was chopped down and the carpenter made a table out of it.
The ‘Word’ in John 1 was translated from the Greek word ‘Logos’ which is a masculine noun (the Greek language has a masculine and feminine noun), and that’s why at times, the ‘logos’ is referred to as a ‘he’ or ‘him’, which Trinitarian Christians mistook it as Jesus.
So, if you can remove your preconceived mindset that Jesus is God, then, you can understand John 1:3 as it was meant to be understood, and that is, NOTHING gets created or came into existence UNLESS God Commands it. In other words, only through God's Commands, all things were made, without God Commanding it, nothing was made that has been made.
It is what Psalm 33:9 said – “For He spoke, and it came to be; He commanded, and it stood firm”.
Clearly, Jesus is NOT God or the Word of God, Jesus is one of God’s Glory in His Creations.
If God can command the creation of Adam without any participation of a man and a woman, commands the creation of Eve from a man/Adam, commands the creation of mankind through the union of a man and a woman, you think God cannot create Jesus by just commanding the formation of Jesus in the womb of Mary?? Please don't deny the Greatness and the Glory of God in His Creations.
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
Christians have ALWAYS worship Jesus because Jesus is God! The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god! Clearly they believe Jesus is a second god they are NOT Christian they believe in many gods!
Christians have always taught Jesus is the second person in the trinity One God three persons!
Can't argue with History; can't argue with FACTS! To be Christian you MUST believe Jesus is God & must worship Jesus!
Christians use the symbol of a "Cross" to show the world they are Followers of Christ; to show they are Christian! "Pick up your CROSS and Follow Me!"
The Apostles are Christian all except Judas: He is a Hypocrite, because he stays with the Christians, he follows Christ in his unbelief! Judas just as the JW's SDA etc do NOT believe Jesus is God!
Satan wants to pull souls away from salvation. Satan starts churches that teach "Jesus is NOT God'! Many Anti-Christs will comes; wolves in sheep clothing! Jesus warns Christians about Satan and these Anti-Christs!
Jesus established ONE Church that Church is still around today just as Jesus promised; His Holy Church would never fail because it's foundation is ROCK!
Hi @Dogknox20 and other readers :
1) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY “LYING FOR GOD”?
Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.
However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?
Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : :
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?
3) THE ROMAN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL CHURCH OF CHRIST
Once again, Dog Knox20, your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling in attempting to claim your organization that murdered and oppressed and enslaved is the church of Christ does not seem in my mind, justified.
How does your mind and heart work that they justify condemning other religions for what are only potential, yet relatively small faults while you try to deceive readers by offering false text and pointing out their miniscule deaths associated with their faith while overlooking your own pogroms and inquisitions that actually murdered uncounted thousands and enslaved populations and oppressed it’s own adherents and other populations and beliefs?
I agree with you, that you cannot argue against factual history.
However, you are not offering readers either fact or authentic history or authentic biblical text.
FACT : The original church of Jesus did not murder or oppress or enslave.
The original Gathering to Christ is still upon the earth, but your organization that murdered and oppressed and enslaved, is not that original Church of Jesus.
Clear
φυφιφυφιτζω
1) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY “LYING FOR GOD”?
Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.
However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?
Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : :
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?
3) THE ROMAN RELIGIOUS MOVEMENT IS NOT THE ORIGINAL CHURCH OF CHRIST
Once again, Dog Knox20, your self congratulation and religious posturing and virtue signaling in attempting to claim your organization that murdered and oppressed and enslaved is the church of Christ does not seem in my mind, justified.
How does your mind and heart work that they justify condemning other religions for what are only potential, yet relatively small faults while you try to deceive readers by offering false text and pointing out their miniscule deaths associated with their faith while overlooking your own pogroms and inquisitions that actually murdered uncounted thousands and enslaved populations and oppressed it’s own adherents and other populations and beliefs?
I agree with you, that you cannot argue against factual history.
However, you are not offering readers either fact or authentic history or authentic biblical text.
FACT : The original church of Jesus did not murder or oppress or enslave.
The original Gathering to Christ is still upon the earth, but your organization that murdered and oppressed and enslaved, is not that original Church of Jesus.
Clear
φυφιφυφιτζω
Last edited:
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....
All Christian bibles say "Word was God" capital "G"!
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. No Not even one Christian bible has the letter "A" in front of "god" Small "g"!
Christians believe in ONE God NOT many god's as the JWs teach!
All Christian bibles say "Word was God" capital "G"!
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. No Not even one Christian bible has the letter "A" in front of "god" Small "g"!
Christians believe in ONE God NOT many god's as the JWs teach!
1) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY “LYING FOR GOD”?
Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
Clear responded : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.
However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?
Clear said : "Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
3) THE NWTESTAMENT IS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT IN IT'S TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1C. CONTEXT AND NOT GRAMMAR WILL DETERMINE CORRECTNESS IN THIS CASE
Clear claimed : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar”
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Dogknox20. You are unable to read the Greek source text and this specific ignorance is one reason why you seem to simply repeat talking points and religious advertisements rather than approach the actual underlying greek source text.
Answer my simple questions and I will attempt to give you grammatical examples that you can understand, including examples where Bibles created by the Catholics have both added and subtracted the article in Greek, the same as you claim the Jehovahs Witnesses have done.
Clear
φυφισισεσιω
Dogknox20 said : “The Watch Tower ADDED the letter "A" to the verse John 1 so it will say Jesus is "A" god!”
Clear responded : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar.
However, YOUR offering of John 1:18 is unauthentic and a false rendering of the source Greek.
Your offering doesn’t merely add an “a”, but it adds entire false phrases of multiple words to the Greek that are not there in the source Greek. This is much worse than your complaint against others.
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
How do you justify offering readers a falsely rendered, inauthentic commentary as scripture while complaining that the Jehovahs Witnesses offer a perfectly correct rendering of John 1:1c?
How does the fact that you are offering fake biblical text prove a grammatically correct sentence incorrect?
2) HOW DOES ONE JUSTIFY MULTIPLE THOUSANDS OF MURDERS AND SLAVERY AND OPPRESSION OF ONES OWN ORGANISATION WHILE COMPLAINING ABOUT A MINISCULE NUMBER OF DEATHS BY ADHERANCE TO AN ARTICLE OF FAITH?
Clear said : "Dognox20, I asked the uncomfortable question of you : Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
What is your answer?
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Your response did not answer the questions you were asked:
Why is the murder of thousands of innocents who were simply guilty of not being catholic or unwilling to act in conflict with their own conscience before God, more justifiable than an incredibly small number of individuals who die because they did not receive a blood transfusion?
3) THE NWTESTAMENT IS GRAMMATICALLY CORRECT IN IT'S TRANSLATION OF JOHN 1:1C. CONTEXT AND NOT GRAMMAR WILL DETERMINE CORRECTNESS IN THIS CASE
Clear claimed : “The English sentence rendered “and the Word was a God” is a grammatically correct translation of John 1:1c "και Θεος ην ο λογος".
The source greek itself grammatically lacks the definite article and so their rendering IS, grammatically, how the source greek reads.
If you disagree with the theology, you are going to have to argue historical context, and not grammar”
Dogknox20 responded : “There in NO scriptures in any Christian bible with the letter "A" in John 1! ALL ....”
Dogknox20. You are unable to read the Greek source text and this specific ignorance is one reason why you seem to simply repeat talking points and religious advertisements rather than approach the actual underlying greek source text.
Answer my simple questions and I will attempt to give you grammatical examples that you can understand, including examples where Bibles created by the Catholics have both added and subtracted the article in Greek, the same as you claim the Jehovahs Witnesses have done.
Clear
φυφισισεσιω
Last edited:
Dogknox20
Well-Known Member
.
I post scripture.. NOT ONE of all the bible interpreters over Sixty (60) of them have said the letter "A" should be first before the word "God"!
All of the scripture scholar over 60 of them has said.. "Jesus is God"! Not "A" god but FULLY GOD!
TPT
In the beginning the Living Expression was already there. And the Living Expression was with God, yet fully God.
NLT
In the beginning the Word already existed. The Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Christians teach Jesus is GOD!
Christians have ALWAYS worshiped Jesus because "Jesus is GOD"! Worship is for God ONLY as the scriptures tell you!
The universal symbol of Christianity is the "Cross"! You see a Cross on a building you KNOW it is occupied by Christians!
Any scriptures translation that has the letter "A" in John 1 is NOT Christian; It is a nefarious work! Many Anti-Christs will come along; Arius was just one of these False Teachers.. He taught "Jesus is NOT God" he was rejected by Christians as a Heretic! Arius was REJECTED as a False Teacher!
Brian2
Veteran Member
It is true that God distinguishes Himself from the angel He sent. In a trinitarian context however where the Father is the only true God, He can send Jesus or the Holy Spirit and they are still God. It is the Holy Spirit who was grieved with Israel in the wilderness (Isa 63:10) yet God said that He would go with Moses in the wilderness.
Ex 33:13 Now if indeed I have found favor in Your sight, please let me know Your ways, that I may know You and find favor in Your sight. Remember that this nation is Your people.” 14 And the LORD answered, “My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.” 15 “If Your Presence does not go with us,” Moses replied, “do not lead us up from here.…
In a trinitarian context it is not necessary to deny any of the scriptures as true. The angel, the one sent was God and God spoke from the bush and went with Israel in the wilderness and various OT people saw God even though they did not see the only true God, the Father.
OTOH you want to deny part of the scripture so that your ideas can stand. You have to deny all those places where the one who was seen is identified as being YHWH.
That is certainly not consistent in the OT even though all the angels and prophets could have done it.
Seen Jesus. Thomas believed Jesus had risen and believed all He had heard about Jesus from Jesus now that He had seen Him.
The Jews knew the language and what Jesus was claiming and Jesus did not deny being the Son of God as they had said.
He did however show that He had a Son/Father relationship with God and so He submitted to His Father's authority. John 5:19 is about authority. The Father has authority of His Son and the Son respects that. They do have the same nature however,,,,,,,,,,,the Son was not created and the scriptures tell us that clearly in a number of places (John 1:3)
It is a quote from Psalm 102:25-27 and in Heb 1 it says that God said that about the Son.
There are also other quotes from the OT in the NT and in the OT they are about YHWH and in the NT they are about Jesus.
eg 1Pet 2:8 cross referenced with Isa 8:14.
The Son certainly was alive and will during the creation and before He became a man on earth.
Heb 1:1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.
John 17:5 And now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence with the glory I had with You before the world existed.
Phil 2:5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
It has nothing to do with the gender of a word in John 1:1. There are other places in the NT where the person, the pre human Jesus, can be seen to have been there creating in the beginning.
Col 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.
If you deny or ignore those scriptures which I gave above about the pre existence of Jesus then you can say that Jesus did not exist before being conceived in Mary.
God spoke and His Word, the Spirit that was His Son, had the authority to go and create the things that God, His Father spoke.
God created through His Son, the Word, which comes from the Father and is the same nature as His Father, just as the Spirit of God is.