The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

[Spiritual Israelite]

Nope

Psst You have changed the meaning of scripture in your befuddled Amil mind to have the meaning of zoe (life) to mean living | being alive in the body [zao]

Why are you so dishonest? Lying is a sin. Show me one Greek resource that shows a definition of the word "zao" as meaning "being alive in the body"? If you can't do that, then it proves you are just a flat out liar who is willing to lie just to support your doctrine, which is just sad.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

My understanding is messed up simply because I believe Bible Scripture AS WRITTEN?? And that includes any metaphors, parables, or analogies that God shows us it is to be understood as those things.

But what YOU have done instead, which makes your mind a show of being even farther... from the Truth, is how you have believed a false doctrine of men that REJECTS GOD'S WORD AS WRITTEN, and instead MAKES UP THEIR OWN ANALOGIES AND ALLEGORIES WHICH GOD DID NOT MAKE!

And you have the audacity to accuse my understanding as being messed up???

I will do the same. Your understanding is messed up.

 

[Zao is life]

You're a broken record. Again, scripture rarely even refers to those who are not bodily alive. If you were honest, which you are not, you would acknowledge that the definition for the word "zao" is NOT "to bodily live, to be bodily alive" and is instead "to live, to be alive". You also would acknowledge that the souls John saw in heaven were alive, as Revelation 6:9-11 clearly shows. Why would a word that means "to be alive" not be able to be used to refer to the souls of bodily dead martyrs? Are you afraid to answer this question?

Your lies become you. YOUR dishonesty is showing really, really well in your last few posts

The souls John spoke about had eternal life [zoe] because Christ who is eternal life [zoe] is with them and in them.

But they are not bodily alive [zao]. They are what the New Testament calls DEAD. D- E - A -D.

Tell the apostles who used that word and words describing DEATH in respect of all those who are no longer living | alive [zao] in their bodies that their dishonesty shows.

You are a false teacher - not the apostles who used ZOE in respect of spiritual life which is in Christ and is given to us, and ZAO in respect of bodily life which until the resurrection of the body from the dead, ENDS IN DEATH.

If you keep arguing against the language those who wrote the scriptures chose to use in reference to the above two types of life, then the subject is CLOSED between me and you.

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

 

[Zao is life]

@Zao is life Stop wasting time with your weak arguments. The only thing you could do to convince me that your view could be true is by proving that the word "zao" means "to bodily live" or "to be bodily alive". Do you have any Greek resources to show that as a definition for the word "zao"?

You also would need to somehow prove that the souls of physically/bodily dead martyrs that John saw in Revelation 6:9-11 are not alive. Can you do that? If not, then stop wasting your time trying to convince me of what you believe since you have no real evidence to support it.

You have now proved to anyone who can discern what is going on here that you are a false teacher - deliberately going against scripture over and over and over again in order to attempt to have scripture comply with a false doctrine that you have placed ABOVE the Word of God.

Continue to believe your own lies. You're good at it.

This subject is now CLOSED between you and me.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Your lies become you.

Yes, you would know a lot about that because you LIE and say that the word "zao" is defined as meaning "to bodily live, to be bodily alive" even though Greek lexicons define it as "to live, to be alive".

YOUR dishonesty is showing really, really well in your last few posts

How honest do you think you're being when you will not even address the fact that you create a definition for the word "zao" that you cannot find in any Greek resource? How honest do you think you are when you won't address what is indicated in Revelation 6:9-11?

The souls John spoke about had eternal life [zoe] because Christ who is eternal life [zoe] is with them and in them.

But they are not bodily alive [zao]. They are what the New Testament calls DEAD. D- E - A -D.

Yet, Revelation 6:9-11 shows their souls as being alive. Why will you not address this? If you think you're so honest, then you will address it. So, tell me how you interpret that passage.

Tell the apostles who used that word and words describning DEATH in respect of all those who are no longer living | alive [zao] in their bodies that their dishonesty shows.

You are the false teacher here. Not the apostles who used ZOE in respect of spiritual life which is in Christ and is given to us, and ZAO in respect of bodily life which until the resurrection of the body from the dead, ENDS IN DEATH.

If you keep arguing against the language those who wrote the scriptures chose to use in reference to the above two types of life, then the subject is CLOSED between me and you.

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

Empty words from someone who tries to change the definition of the word "zao" and won't acknowledge that the souls of the dead martyrs that John saw were alive.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You have now proved to anyone who can discern what is going on here that you are a false teacher - deliberately going against scripture over and over and over again in order to attempt to have scripture comply with a false doctrine that you have placed ABOVE the Word of God.

Continue to believe your own lies. You're good at it.

This subject is now CLOSED between you and me.

Yes, I'm not surprised that you would want to stop talking about it since everyone here can see that you try to change the definition of the word "zao" from "to live, to be alive" to "to bodily live" and "to be bodily alive" and you won't even address the fact that Revelation 6:9-11 shows the souls of the dead in Christ as being alive.

 

[Zao is life]

Yes, I'm not surprised that you would want to stop talking about it since everyone here can see that you try to change the definition of the word "zao" from "to live, to be alive" to "to bodily live" and "to be bodily alive" and you won't even address the fact that Revelation 6:9-11 shows the souls of the dead in Christ as being alive.

You've now made it totally plain and clear that you NEVER read scripture to allow the Holy Spirit and scripture to teach you - you read scripture to have scripture submit to your false doctrine.

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

The many errors and contradictions found in Amillennialism.

This makes no sense whatsoever. You say it says "they came to life", but then look at what you reference there. Strong's Greek 2198, which is the word "zao" and you even show there that it means "to live, be alive". What gives here? To live and be alive does not require someone to be bodily...

www.christianityboard.com

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You've now made it totally plain and clear that you NEVER read scripture to allow the Holy Spirit and scripture to teach you - you read scripture to have scripture submit to your false doctrine.

You made that clear about yourself long ago. Why are you so AFRAID to address the FACT that you tried to create your own definition for the word "zao" that you can't find in any Greek resource? Why are you AFRAID to address what is indicated in Revelation 6:9-11? You expect me to take comments like this seriously when you are so AFRAID to address these things?

 

[WPM]

My understanding is messed up simply because I believe Bible Scripture AS WRITTEN?? And that includes any metaphors, parables, or analogies that God shows us it is to be understood as those things.

But what YOU have done instead, which makes your mind a show of being even farther... from the Truth, is how you have believed a false doctrine of men that REJECTS GOD'S WORD AS WRITTEN, and instead MAKES UP THEIR OWN ANALOGIES AND ALLEGORIES WHICH GOD DID NOT MAKE!

And you have the audacity to accuse my understanding as being messed up???

I recommend that as soon as you are able, go home and get some OIL to anoint yourself with, and cast OUT those demons in the Name of Jesus Christ, because you have picked up those demons from some place teaching you those false doctrines of men, because the devil himself lives there where you picked up those false doctrines.

Yah-de-dah-de-dah. This sums up your argument. This is all noise.

 

[Davidpt]

EXACTLY! Millennialists refuse to believe that Christ has given those of faith His Word! Once we believe we have been born again spiritually, and though our mortal flesh will perish, our spirit, being a living soul will NEVER die because the life we received in Christ according to God's grace through faith is FOREVER! Millennialists refuse to acknowledge what eternal/everlasting life means! That's why they continue to make unbiblical arguments inventing "two" physical resurrections separated by literally ONE thousand years.

Start by convincingly proving that the following are the same thing.

But the rest of the dead lived not again BODILY until the thousand years were finished.

The rest of the dead and those that have part in the first resurrection lived not again BODILY until the thousand years were finished.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if the rest of the dead don't live bodily again until the thousand years are finished, this indicates that some of the dead already did.

The following makes perfect sense of verse 5.

and I saw the souls of them---this is the first resurrection--thus they bodily lived again--and they bodily lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished.

But Amil would have us believe this instead.

and I saw the souls of them---and they, while still in a disembodied state, lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years while remaining in a disembodied state the entire time---this is the first resurrection. But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished.

Umm, per this Amil scenario---what about those that have part in the first resurrection? When do they too get to live again in a bodily state? It obviously can't be after the thousand years are finished, because if it did mean that the text in verse 5 would have mentioned them as well. Why didn't the text mention those that have part in the first resurrection don't live again bodily until after the thousand years are finished?

Once again it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. The reason why verse 5 doesn't mention them as well is because they don't need to live bodily again after the thousand years. IOW, they already began living bodily again at the beginning of the thousand years. And that it is ludicrous that anyone needs to live bodily again numerous times. Therefore, Amil is debunked. But not that this is the first time and only thing that debunks Amil. Numerous other things also debunk Amil.

This one though, is undeniable, unless one is an Amil and is in denial because of doctrinal bias'. Just because Amils are in denial that Amil has been debunked, that hardly proves Amil hasn't been debunked. That would be like JWs being in denial that Jesus is not God has been debunked. Just because they are in denial about it hardly proves it was never debunked, that Jesus is not God.

Or we could use Pretribbers as an example. Just because Pretribbers are in denial that a Pretrib rapture has been debunked hardly proves that Pretrib has never been debunked.

As to Premil, it has never been debunked. Certainly this doesn't debunk Premil---But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished. But it would debunk Premil if it had said this instead--And the rest of the dead and those that have part in the first resurrection lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished. So why is it that I can admit that this would debunk Premil had verse 5 said that instead? But Amils can't admit that it debunks Amil since it didn't say that instead? Who is the one being intellectually honest in this case? Me or Amils? Assuming one of us is being intellectually honest, well it can't be both of us that's for sure.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Yah-de-dah-de-dah. This sums up your argument. This is all noise.

He has nothing of substance to offer. He's an angry, bitter big mouth who has terrible reading comprehension and debate skills.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Start by convincingly proving that the following are the same thing.

Too funny. If you aren't convinced by now after MANY years of us explaining our view to you, what can convince you now?

But the rest of the dead lived not again BODILY until the thousand years were finished.

The rest of the dead and those that have part in the first resurrection lived not again BODILY until the thousand years were finished.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that if the rest of the dead don't live bodily again until the thousand years are finished, this indicates that some of the dead already did.

The following makes perfect sense of verse 5.

and I saw the souls of them---this is the first resurrection--thus they bodily lived again--and they bodily lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished.

But Amil would have us believe this instead.

and I saw the souls of them---and they, while still in a disembodied state, lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years while remaining in a disembodied state the entire time---this is the first resurrection. But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished.

Umm, per this Amil scenario---what about those that have part in the first resurrection? When do they too get to live again in a bodily state? It obviously can't be after the thousand years are finished, because if it did mean that the text in verse 5 would have mentioned them as well.

Who made you the one to decide what should be included in the text or not? Why is the word "zao" used to describe those who have part in the first resurrection instead of the word "anazao" that is used to describe the rest of the dead living again after the thousand years? You don't think you need to explain that?

Why didn't the text mention those that have part in the first resurrection don't live again bodily until after the thousand years are finished?

Because the text doesn't have to mention something that other scripture already makes clear, which is that the saved and lost are resurrected and judged at the same time (Daniel 12:1-2, John 5:28-29, Matthew 13:36-43, Matthew 13:47-50, Matthew 25:31-46, etc.).

Once again it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you are trying to interpret Revelation 20 in isolation from the rest of scripture which is a terrible way of interpreting scripture. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that the rest of scripture describes the first resurrection as being Christ's resurrection and that Premills like you don't take that into account and try to change the first resurrection into something different than the rest of scripture tells us is the first resurrection.

The first resurrection:

Acts 26:23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Having part in the first resurrection:

Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

The reason why verse 5 doesn't mention them as well is because they don't need to live bodily again after the thousand years. IOW, they already began living bodily again at the beginning of the thousand years. And that it is ludicrous that anyone needs to live bodily again numerous times. Therefore, Amil is debunked.

LOL! You are such a comedian. Always acting like you have proven something as FACT while sharing your OPINION. You act as if we would not know that believers are bodily resurrected after the thousand years unless verse 5 told us that. Other scripture tells us that believers will be bodily resurrected at the same time as unbelievers (Daniel 12:1-2, John 5:28-29) and that believers will be bodily resurrected at "the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father" (1 Cor 15:22-24, Matthew 13:40-43). But, far be it from you to take other scripture into account here. You think we should ignore the rest of scripture and assume that we can interpret Revelation 20 in isolation from the rest of scripture.

But not that this is the first time and only thing that debunks Amil. Numerous other things also debunk Amil.

Nothing debunks Amil. Your weak arguments certainly do not.

This one though, is undeniable, unless one is an Amil and is in denial because of doctrinal bias'.

LOL. Ridiculous.

Just because Amils are in denial that Amil has been debunked, that hardly proves Amil hasn't been debunked.

You have proven nothing here. To prove what you're saying is true, you need to show how the rest of scripture agrees with what you're saying, which you are not doing.

That would be like JWs being in denial that Jesus is not God has been debunked. Just because they are in denial about it hardly proves it was never debunked, that Jesus is not God.

You are delusional. You think that interpreting one passage of scripture is enough to debunk Amil? That is beyond ludicrous. Show how your interpretation of Revelation 20 agrees with the rest of scripture and then we'll talk about you supposedly debunking Amil.

Do you use just one passage of scripture to debunk JWs?

Or we could use Pretribbers as an example. Just because Pretribbers are in denial that a Pretrib rapture has been debunked hardly proves that Pretrib has never been debunked.

Do you use just one passage of scripture to debunk Pretribbers the way you think you can just use one passage of scripture to debunk Amils?

As to Premil, it has never been debunked.

LOL. Give me your address. I feel like I should pay you for all the laughs you provide.

Certainly this doesn't debunk Premil---But the rest of the dead lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished. But it would debunk Premil if it had said this instead--And the rest of the dead and those that have part in the first resurrection lived not bodily again until the thousand years are finished. So why is it that I can admit that this would debunk Premil had verse 5 said that instead. But Amils can't admit that it debunks Amil since it didn't say that instead? Who is the one being intellectually honest in this case? Me or Amils?

Certainly not you. How is it being intellectually honest to think that you can debunk Amil with just one passage? That is insane. No other person except you thinks that can be done. And no Amil would try to say that one passage alone debunks Premil, either. Everyone but you knows better than that.

 

[Davidpt]

Yes, I'm not surprised that you would want to stop talking about it since everyone here can see that you try to change the definition of the word "zao" from "to live, to be alive" to "to bodily live" and "to be bodily alive" and you won't even address the fact that Revelation 6:9-11 shows the souls of the dead in Christ as being alive.

As to souls in general, what point are you trying to make here to begin with? When ppl physically die the first death, including both the saved and lost, their soul doesn't die as well, right? Obviously then, even upon death of the physical body the soul remains alive, regardless. Even the souls of the lost. Therefore, your argument is absurd in regards to the souls seen per the 5th seal. Those souls are going to be alive, regardless. They are alive while still in a physical body prior to death, and they continue to remain alive upon death of the body. Except now the soul has to find another place to dwell, whether that is meaning in heaven or hell, until it is reunited with a physical body again. I'm not telling you anything you don't already clearly know. I'm just illustrating why your argument is absurd to begin with.

What you need to do is find an example where zao is used in regards to humans, where it is then being applied to humans in a disembodied state at the time. That way it supports what you are arguing in regards to to the souls John sees in Revelation 20:4. I don't understand why Amils can't connect the dots here, that unless something is clearly stated, it can't mean that then?


Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.


No one denies, not even Premils, that when John sees these at this point, they are in a disembodied state at the time---and I saw the souls of them. But what hasn't happened at this point is this--This is the first resurrection. But once that does happen it then equals this---and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years. And we know without a doubt that it is meaning living again in a bodily state based on what we are told here---But the rest of the dead lived not again BODILY until the thousand years were finished.

This obviously tells us that someone already lived again bodily, and that the only ones remaining that still need to live bodily again are the rest of the dead that didn't already bodily live again at the beginning of the thousand years. But because of doctrinal bias' Amils are adding to the text something not even remotely found in the text, that verse 5 is also including those who have part in the first resurrection, that they don't live bodily again either until the thousand years are finished.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

As to souls in general, what point are you trying to make here to begin with?

I believe I made that clear. He believes in soul sleep and that dead people are completely dead, so he doesn't even allow for the possibilty that the word "zao", which means "to live, to be alive" could be used in reference to the souls of physically/bodily dead people. So, I'm showing that the souls of bodily dead people are alive, which means there's no reason why that word can't be used to refer to them.

When ppl physically die the first death, including both the saved and lost, their soul doesn't die as well, right?

Uh huh.

Obviously then, even upon death of the physical body the soul remains alive, regardless.

Yes, but he doesn't believe that because he does not think a word that means "to live, to be alive" can be applied to people whose souls are alive.

Even the souls of the lost. Therefore, your argument is absurd in regards to the souls seen per the 5th seal.

Once again, for the billionth time, you are saying something about what I've said based on a flawed understanding of what I said. I'm either terrible at communicating or your reading comprehension skills are terrible. Obviously, you know which of those options I believe is the case.

Those souls are going to be alive, regardless. They are alive while still in a physical body prior to death, and they continue to remain alive upon death of the body. Except now the soul has to find another place to dwell, whether that is meaning in heaven or hell, until it is reunited with a physical body again. I'm not telling you anything you don't already clearly know. I'm just illustrating why your argument is absurd to begin with.

But, you don't even know what my argument is. Once again, you have decided to criticize an argument of mine without even knowing what my argument is, as proven by the fact that you asked what my point was. Why do you do that? Why don't you just ask me what my point is and let me tell you instead of just making assumptions and then wasting your time making a straw man argument?

What you need to do is find an example where zao is used in regards to humans, where it is then being applied to humans in a disembodied state at the time.

Why do I need to do that? How many times are people referred to in a disembodied state in scripture? Only a few times. So, why does the word "zao" have to be used in reference to them in those few occasions they are referenced in order to prove that a word that means "to live, to be alive" can be used to refer to them. The word does NOT mean "to bodily live, to bodily be alive". You will not find that definition for that word anywhere. Can you acknowledge that?

Tell me what other word should be used instead to refer to the souls of dead people being alive? Why can't that word be used to describe them living and being alive?

That way it supports what you are arguing in regards to to the souls John sees in Revelation 20:4. I don't understand why Amils can't connect the dots here, that unless something is clearly stated, it can't mean that then?

I don't understand why you waste tons of time making straw man arguments due to not getting clarification of what someone is saying first before wasting your time making an argument against something that I'm not even saying. You do that over and over again. Can you explain why you do that?

Revelation 20:4 And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
5 But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection.


No one denies, not even Premils, that when John sees these at this point, they are in a disembodied state at the time---and I saw the souls of them.

Hello? Saying that is like saying no Premils believe in soul sleep, but we have several Premils here who believe in soul sleep. What some Premils believe is that John is seeing souls with the word "souls" being a synonym for "human beings". So, they don't believe he is seeing their souls separate from their bodies, they believe he is seeing the resurrected bodies of souls/human beings. That is what SDAs, who are all Premills believe, as well as people like Zao is life and CTK. I just saw another new Premill poster here, whose username I forget offhand, also indicate a belief in soul sleep and someone in that thread said he is a Christadelphian.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You're not taking about me, so who you are implying believes in soul sleep I don't know.

You have accused me falsely of believing in soul sleep before so if you are doing the same again it's because your lies become you.

Souls are souls. They are aware of themselves. Whether they are with Christ or in hades.

Why do you claim that the word "zao" can't refer to the souls of the dead in Christ then? You acknowledge that they are alive despite being bodily dead. What other word besides "zao" would be used to describe them living or being alive?

What Greek resource can you show which says that the word "zao" means "to bodily live, to be bodily alive"?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

@Zao is life @Davidpt

Here is a verse where the Greek word "zao" is used purely in a spiritual sense.

John 6:57 As the living (zao) Father hath sent me, and I live (zao) by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live (zao) by me.

God the Father is a Spirit (John 4:24) and the word "zao" is used here to refer to Him, proving the word can be used to refer to spiritual life. The other two uses of the word "zao" in the verse refer to spiritual life as well.

Mark 12:26 And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? 27 He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living (zao): ye therefore do greatly err.

Jesus here was correcting the Sadducees' belief that a person ceases to exist when they physically die by showing that since God is not the God of the dead, but of the living, then that means Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive or else God wouldn't be their God. So, the word "zao" in Mark 12:27 refers to the souls of dead believers like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

So, there you go. The word "zao" can be used to refer to the spiritual life of someone without a body and therefore there is no basis for claiming that the word "zao" can't refer to the souls of the dead martyrs referenced in Revelation 20. Now, let's get back to actually discussing the scriptures instead of wasting any more time arguing over the definitions of words.

 

[Zao is life]

Why are you so dishonest? Lying is a sin. Show me one Greek resource that shows a definition of the word "zao" as meaning "being alive in the body"? If you can't do that, then it proves you are just a flat out liar who is willing to lie just to support your doctrine, which is just sad.

LOL. You're just exposing yourself again, because you cannot show me one verse in the New Testament where eternal life in the Greek is called aionios zao, because in the New Testament, eternal life in the Greek is always written as aionios zoe,

because zoe refers to eternal life which is in the Word of God and only Christ has in Himself, and which is given IN CHRIST to those who have been born of the Spirit of God, but zao does not refer to the same thing.

PLUS I gave you a link to a list of the New Testament verses using the word zao QUOTED and because those verses are all in the Bible, your extra-biblical Greek resources will not help you.

Thayer's Greek Lexicon defines zaō firstly as meaning to live, breathe, be among the living (not lifeless, not dead).

Your extra-Biblical Greek resources do not change the fact that in the Bible itself whenever the verses containing the word zao are referring to God, they are referring to the living [zao] God who has eternal life [zoe] in Himself, but whenever the verses containing the word zao are referring to created humans who are alive | living [zao], the verses themselves are referring to humans who are alive in their human bodies (not dead | not lifeless), regardless of whether or not they have eternal life [zoe]. For example:

"Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth [zao]? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth [zao]; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband." (Romans 7:1-2).

The fact that you keep doubling down on your false arguments and have now out of desperation left scripture itself to appeal to extra-biblical Greek resources in order to uphold your false doctrine despite the above facts, has exposed you again (and you have exposed yourself already - but apparently you are not exposed enough yet for your liking so you continue to expose yourself more and more, as someone who loves his false doctrine more than the Word of God Almighty.

Psst The Bible will never, ever, ever submit to your false doctrine regarding the meaning of either the word zao or the word zoe as they are used in each and every verse in the New Testament.

 

[Zao is life]

@Zao is life @Davidpt

Here is a verse where the Greek word "zao" is used purely in a spiritual sense.

John 6:57 As the living (zao) Father hath sent me, and I live (zao) by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live (zao) by me.

Jesus is talking about His being alive in the body and His disciples being alive in the body. In every verse where He talks about spiritual life and in every verse where the apostles talk about spiritual life Jesus and the apostles use the word zoe.

You are exposing yourself more and more and more showing how you will choose to attempt to get scripture to submit to your false doctrine.

Pssst Scripture will never ever ever submit to your false doctrine.

Keep exposing yourself @Spiritual Israelite

New Testament verses where zao refers to the God who is alive [zao] | the living [zao] God:

THE LIVING [zao] GOD,
THE LIVING [zao] WORD,
THE LIVING [záō] CHRIST,
AND LIVING [zao] WATER

Matthew 16:16:
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living [zao] God.

Matthew 26:63:
But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living [zao] God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

Matthew 27:63:
Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive [zao], After three days I will rise again.

Luke 24:5:
And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living [zao] among the dead?

Luke 24:23:
And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive [zao].

John 6:51:
I am the living [zao] bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live [zao] for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

John 6:57:
As the living [zao] Father hath sent me, and I live [zao] by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live [zao] by me.

John 14:19:
Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live [zao], ye shall live [zao] also.

Jesus is not talking about spiritual life [zoe]. He's talking about being alive in the body [zao] because He will be alive in the body [zao] - He's referring to HIs resurrectrion and the coming resurrection of all those who have been given eternal life [zoe] IN HIM.

@Spiritual Israelite Your false doctrine has made you unable to discern because you are determined to keep conflating zoe and zao in order that scripture submit to your false doctrine - and you keep making it very, very obvious by your statements that this is what you are doing.

John 6:69:
And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living [zao] God.

John 7:38:
He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living [zao] water.

John 4:10:
Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living [zao] water.

John 4:11:
The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living [zao] water?

Acts 1:3:
To whom also he shewed himself alive [zao] after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

Acts 7:38:
This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sinai, and with our fathers: who received the living [zao] oracles to give unto us.

Acts 25:19:
But had certain questions against him of their own superstition, and of one Jesus, which was dead, whom Paul affirmed to be alive [zao].

Romans 9:26:
And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living [zao] God.

Romans 14:11:
For it is written, As I live [zao], saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Acts 14:15:
And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living [zao] God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein.

Romans 14:9:
For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and lived again (anazao), that he might be Lord both of the dead and living [zao].

II Corinthians 3:3:
Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living [zao] God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

II Corinthians 6:16:
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living [zao] God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

II Corinthians 13:4:
For though he was crucified through weakness, yet he liveth [zao] by the power of God. For we also are weak in him, but we shall live [zao] with him by the power of God toward you.

I Thessalonians 1:9:
For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living [zao] and true God.

I Timothy 3:15:
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living [zao] God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

I Timothy 4:10:
For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living [zao] God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

I Timothy 6:17:
Charge them that are rich in this world, that they be not highminded, nor trust in uncertain riches, but in the living [zao] God, who giveth us richly all things to enjoy.

Hebrews 3:12:
Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living [zao] God.

Hebrews 4:12:
For the word of God is alive [zao], and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Hebrews 9:14:
How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living [zao] God?

Hebrews 7:25:
Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth [zao] to make intercession for them.

Hebrews 10:20:
By a new and living [zao] way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh.

Hebrews 10:31:
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living [zao] God.

Hebrews 12:22:
But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living [zao] God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels.

I Peter 1:23:
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth [zao] and abideth for ever.

I Peter 2:4:
To whom coming, as unto a living [zao] stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious.

Revelation 1:18:
I am he that liveth [zao], and was dead; and, behold, I am alive [zao] for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Revelation 2:8:
And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write; These things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive [zao].

Revelation 4:9:
And when those beasts give glory and honour and thanks to him that sat on the throne, who liveth [zao] for ever and ever.

Revelation 4:10:
The four and twenty elders fall down before him that sat on the throne, and worship him that liveth [zao] for ever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne.

Revelation 5:14:
And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth [zao] for ever and ever.

Revelation 7:2:
And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living [zao] God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea.

Revelation 7:17:
For the Lamb which is in the midst of the throne shall feed them, and shall lead them unto living [zao] fountains of waters: and God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes.

Revelation 10:6:
And sware by him that liveth [zao] for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

Revelation 15:7:
And one of the four beasts gave unto the seven angels seven golden vials full of the wrath of God, who liveth [zao] for ever and ever.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Jesus is talking about being alive in the body. In every verse where He talks about spiritual life and in every verse where the apostles talk about spiritual life Jesus and the apostles use the word zoe.

Wow. You are just dishonest to the core. I showed you that the verse refers to God the Father, who is a Spirit without a body, as living (zao) and you didn't even address that! Did you think I wouldn't notice that? How can the word be applied to the living (zao) God the Father, who has no body, but not to the soul of a believer who has no body?

But, we have proof that it can apply to the souls of dead believers without bodies as well because of how the word is used to apply to the living who belong to God even while they are physically dead like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as Jesus indicated.

You are exposing yourself more and more and more showing how you will choose to attempt to get scripture to submit to your false doctrine.

You are so dishonest that you won't even address the points I made, showing God the Father, who is a Spirit and has no body, as "zao" and the souls of those who belong to God like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as "zao". Why are you so afraid to admit you were wrong? That's much better than remaining prideful while denying the truth that has been presented to you.

Proverbs 16:18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

 

[Zao is life]

Wow. You are just dishonest to the core. I showed you that the verse refers to God the Father, who is a Spirit without a body, as living (zao) and you didn't even address that! Did you think I wouldn't notice that? How can the word be applied to the living (zao) God the Father, who has no body, but not to the soul of a believer who has no body?

But, we have proof that it can apply to the souls of dead believers without bodies as well because of how the word is used to apply to the living who belong to God even while they are physically dead like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as Jesus indicated.


You are so dishonest that you won't even address the points I made, showing God the Father, who is a Spirit and has no body, as "zao" and the souls of those who belong to God like Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as "zao". Why are you so afraid to admit you were wrong? That's much better than remaining prideful while denying the truth that has been presented to you.

Proverbs 16:18 Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

Like I said, you are so determined to keep conflating zoe and zao in order to have scripture submit to your false doctrine that you are unable to discern.

You have already exposed yourself and continue to expose yourself as being dishonest, aside from frequently being VERY disrespectful to scripture by being dishonest in your approach AND sneaky by then accusing the person you're arguing with of being dishonest.

You really expose yourself well when you start. I'm enjoying this.