Shall we discuss this?

[Truther]

Yes. Unlike your view where Jesus is only a person God possesses.

No, "fully indwells, bodily".

 

[Truther]

"From" and "since" is derived from the Greek "apo"... According to Greek lexicons (Perschbacher, Moulton, Bauer, Liddell and Scott), the word "from" in both of these passages which is the Greek word "apo," does not carry the idea of "at" or “before.” Perschbacher states in agreement with the others, “apo, prep., forth, from; hence, it variously signifies departure; distance of time or place, avoidance; riddance; derivation from a quarter, source, or material…” Bauer states, 2. of time from--(on), since…” Liddell and Scott has "later of Time, from, after, since." Notice that “at” or “before” are not even listed. The sense of "apo" is "away from," never "before."

You cannot just dismiss the observation by simply saying "close enough" since words mean things. The Greek is emphatic and clear, and even in English, "close enough" does not fly for lexical fact.

....lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

This means way back then.

 

[Truther]

Ancient Greek had not "died off." The English translation was simply for the benefit of English speaking people, not any imaginary "plumbline" of God to replace what he inspired to be written in Greek in the First Century.

Nobody speak ancient Greek. It is a dead language.

Folks simply tinker with it's meanings after they get a few credentials.

The have a blast inventing "deeper" meanings, such a Strongs etc.

 

[Truther]

We understand Greek far better than when the translators of the King James Bible lived. It was not until the 1890's that they discovered the key to the Greek tenses.

Showing what did not exist in Scripture for the first 500 years of Christianity is in no way "debunking parts of the Bible." The King James Only crowd are the MSNBC of propagandists.

I bet you think Google is smarter than ancient men that still spoke their ancient languages too?

Do you realize how absurd your statement is?

Modern men know ancient languages better than ancient men?

If Joe Biden were here, he would say 'C'mon man"!

 

[Candidus]

Nobody speak ancient Greek. It is a dead language.

Folks simply tinker with it's meanings after they get a few credentials.

The have a blast inventing "deeper" meanings, such a Strongs etc.

Nobody "speaks" Old English either! Thanks for proving a point!

 

[Candidus]

I bet you think Google is smarter than ancient men that still spoke their ancient languages too?

Do you realize how absurd your statement is?

Modern men know ancient languages better than ancient men?

If Joe Biden were here, he would say 'C'mon man"!

C'mon man! Certainly your argument is an meaningful as Joe's OCD and lack of a vocabulary.

What does Google have to do with anything in this conversation/debate? Do you realize how specious, empty and absurd your beating the air is?

 

[Candidus]

Nobody speak ancient Greek. It is a dead language.

Folks simply tinker with it's meanings after they get a few credentials.

The have a blast inventing "deeper" meanings, such a Strongs etc.

Notice how those who do not understand the antiquated English in the King James Bible get a "credentialed" preacher to stand up and "explain" it to their deer-in-the-headlights congregation every Sunday? You know... finding "deeper meanings" from the English word "from" as being "close enough" to dogmatically declare that it means "before"?

 

[marks]

Knew as in communicated with him....

6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7 I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee....


Amazing!

The Father and the Son were together before creation? Communicating?

Much love!

 

[marks]

Just stick to the KJV.

The fellers that love to create modern translations think they understand ancient Greek better than ancient men did, but they just get hand me down redefinitions in their classrooms.

These seminary teachers are even bent on debunking parts of the Bible.

They are the CNN of Christianity.

So then have you ever studied any of the manuscripts?

There's an interesting example of Oxyrhynchus, they dug of the landfill dump around 100 years ago, in the desert in Africa, with 1000's of parchments from the times of the Apostles.

They learned that chierographon, handwriting, was actually used in a technical sense of "promisory note", a hand-written promise to pay.

In Colossians, where the KJV reads, "removing the handwriting of ordinances that was against us", that was an accurate translation of the word, but an inaccurate translation of what Paul was saying. Paul was referring to the same cultural practice that he used with Philemon,

18 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account;
19 I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it

The handwriting, the chierographon, was cancelled by tetelestai, It is Finished. This was also learned from the parchments.

So, again, the King James is technically accurate, but still tends to give the wrong idea, as if there is a set of handwritten ordinances, and these were blotted out, and taken out of our way, being nailed to the cross.

Holman translates that passage in Colossians,

14 He erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the cross.

The New King James footnotes this word with "certificate of debt". This is just something they didn't know at the time of the King James translation.

But when we read this passage with this understanding in mind, it's not saying somehow that God had blotted out the Law, the 10 Commandments, but He's blotted out our debt for having violated the Law, by nailing that debt to the cross. He became sin, who knew no sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. And now our certificate of indebtedness to God is completely blank, clean.

I don't mind anyone preferring the King James Bible, it's my personal favorite. I do hope that we can recognize truth when we come across it.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Exactly. That is why the man is God by default.

He represents God because all of God is inside his spirit body.

This is why the baby/son of Isaiah is EVENTUALLY called the Everlasting Father/Mighty God.

Still trying to understand here . . .

It seems to me that one of these must describe your POV,

The Father God becomes the Son God.
or
The Father God stops being God and the Son God is then God
or
The Son God becomes a second God, so that there are two Gods
or
the Son does not actually become God, but is God in name, or some other sense, while not actually BEING God.

Can you help narrow this down?

Much love!

 

[kcnalp]

... he was resurrected from the dead he was resurrected not a man but instead a powerful spiritual being who was given immortality and inherited incorruption. The point is that when Jesus says he has a Father and God at John 20:17 he wasn't a man, so I don't agree with your statement that the reason Jesus called his Father his God was that he was a man.

You can't prove any of that!
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

 

[kcnalp]

Exactly. That is why the man is God by default.

He represents God because all of God is inside his spirit body.

This is why the baby/son of Isaiah is EVENTUALLY called the Everlasting Father/Mighty God.

You need to try to comprehend how the Father, fathers us THROUGH the son per Col 2:9.

A man CANNOT be MADE God! Are you a SciFi fanatic?

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

You can't prove any of that!
John 1:1
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

In the Bible it tells us that those who will be in heaven with Jesus will have a resurrection like Jesus who was given immortality and inherited incorruption. No human is immortal all humans are mortal. Jesus wasn't raised back to life as a human

 

[Truther]

Nobody "speaks" Old English either! Thanks for proving a point!

I would rather interpret old English than a defunct ancient language.

 

[Truther]

C'mon man! Certainly your argument is an meaningful as Joe's OCD and lack of a vocabulary.

What does Google have to do with anything in this conversation/debate? Do you realize how specious, empty and absurd your beating the air is?

Because you fellers Google each other for cool new modern redefinitions. You don't need "Strongs or Thayers etc" in the book form.

Just say "SIRI, what is the Greek redefinition for ...."

 

[Candidus]

Because you fellers Google each other for cool new modern redefinitions. You don't need "Strongs or Thayers etc" in the book form.

Just say "SIRI, what is the Greek redefinition for ...."

It's that easy?

And silly me! I study Greek and have actual books! All this time I could have just talked to SIRI!

 

[Truther]

Notice how those who do not understand the antiquated English in the King James Bible get a "credentialed" preacher to stand up and "explain" it to their deer-in-the-headlights congregation every Sunday? You know... finding "deeper meanings" from the English word "from" as being "close enough" to dogmatically declare that it means "before"?

Look.

Face it, if you and I get a PHD, we can use Google to make our own modern translation. That is all we need to con folks into buying our stuff.

Keep in mind though, we must make sure our work is about 50,000 words different than the hundreds of modern versions to avoid copyright infringement issues, all the while, keeping our work as close to being considered the "word of God" as possible..

 

[Candidus]

I would rather interpret old English than a defunct ancient language.

I would rather look at the original language than to use a deficient second-hand bad interpretation in Old English as somehow superior to first-hand language.

 

[Truther]

The Father and the Son were together before creation? Communicating?

Much love!

In the mind/will of God, yes.

It(future) is reality to a God that transcends time.

 

[Truther]

So then have you ever studied any of the manuscripts?

There's an interesting example of Oxyrhynchus, they dug of the landfill dump around 100 years ago, in the desert in Africa, with 1000's of parchments from the times of the Apostles.

They learned that chierographon, handwriting, was actually used in a technical sense of "promisory note", a hand-written promise to pay.

In Colossians, where the KJV reads, "removing the handwriting of ordinances that was against us", that was an accurate translation of the word, but an inaccurate translation of what Paul was saying. Paul was referring to the same cultural practice that he used with Philemon,

18 If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account;
19 I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it

The handwriting, the chierographon, was cancelled by tetelestai, It is Finished. This was also learned from the parchments.

So, again, the King James is technically accurate, but still tends to give the wrong idea, as if there is a set of handwritten ordinances, and these were blotted out, and taken out of our way, being nailed to the cross.

Holman translates that passage in Colossians,

14 He erased the certificate of debt, with its obligations, that was against us and opposed to us, and has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the cross.

The New King James footnotes this word with "certificate of debt". This is just something they didn't know at the time of the King James translation.

But when we read this passage with this understanding in mind, it's not saying somehow that God had blotted out the Law, the 10 Commandments, but He's blotted out our debt for having violated the Law, by nailing that debt to the cross. He became sin, who knew no sin, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. And now our certificate of indebtedness to God is completely blank, clean.

I don't mind anyone preferring the King James Bible, it's my personal favorite. I do hope that we can recognize truth when we come across it.

Much love!

You debunked the KJV.