Do you accept this a Biblical fact or fiction?:

[Wrangler]

The KJV is my 3rd recommended Bible

Just out of curiosity, what are the other 2 translations you recommend?

 

[Robert Gwin]

Sorry but you do not accept the Bible as written then. I can't argue with your opinion, when it is there in black and white for all the world to see.

Yes sir, that is the beauty of black and white, a permanent record of what we speak without any backsliding or misunderstanding. Everything we speak is here for everyone to view and decide if it is truth or fiction.

 

[Robert Gwin]

According to you, but not according to scripture.

Let me ask you then Mike, if Jesus is God then he obviously lied at Mk 10:40 and 13:32. What hope does the world have if God is a liar?

 

[amadeus]

It’s part of what Brother Kel on YouTube calls the trinity delusion.

Well the delusion about which Apostle Paul writes is brought about a lack of love for the truth [II Thess 2:10-11]. Whether we know all of the truth or not, we must love it, or perhaps better said, "Love Him" for Jesus said that he is the truth [John 14:6].

Some people get to know their Bibles very well but they fail to really move toward loving God's truth more and more, and this means loving parts of Jesus they do not know. When one then remains still or even slides backward in that area of love of the truth, then God seeing his heart sends him a delusion, which is the deception in which they are living, supposedly for Him.

Which ever side of this disagreement on we stand, with the Trinitarians or Not, all of us need to be careful and ask God to help love His Truth from the depths of our hearts. We can serve God with a measure of ignorance, but not be deluded so as to lose out with Him in the end of the matter.

To proceed always toward the knowledge of the truth, God's truth, is important, but more important, I believe, is to love that Truth even when we do not know or are uncertain about all of the details... God knows them all. Let us trust in Him no matter what.

Give God the glory!

 

[bbyrd009]

I said “you are Elohim”

 

[charity]

Charity said:-
Hello @Robert Gwin,

The quotation itself says all that is needful. It is quoted from a Psalm of David (Psalm 110:1)

'The LORD said unto my Lord,
Sit Thou at My right hand,
until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.'

* Psalm 110:1, Referring to the royal dignity, priesthood, victories, and triumphs of the MESSIAH. 'The LORD' (Jehovah) 'said unto my Lord' (Adon). The word 'Adon' is used of God as the Lord as ruler in the Earth.

Chris I give you a thumbs up for posting that alteration in the Bible, many do not even realize that verse has been altered. That is the main verse I use to show how some Bibles deliberately alter the written word to support a doctrine. It is helpful to know as you pointed out that the second Lord was translated correctly as the original word as you mentioned was Adonai, whereas YWWH was actually what was translated LORD, which is actually Jehovah's name. It helps to know that everywhere the LORD is all capitalized that is where God's name is.

No doubt you know that Jesus was the second Lord, are you aware that sitting at the right hand of Jehovah is actually representing authority? Jesus is in the number 2 position in heaven, subject only to Jehovah Himself 1 Cor 11:3.

'The LORD said unto my Lord,
Sit Thou at My right hand,
until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool.'
(Psalm 110:1)

Hello @Robert Gwin,

I am not aware of any 'alteration', I simply quoted Psalm 110:1, and pointed out two of the names used of God, within different contexts, which are used there. Both are used of God:- (Jehovah) used of God in relationship with His People, and 'Adon', which is used in relation to His Lordship as ruler in the Earth.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[amadeus]

I said “you are Elohim”

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Psalm 82:6

So then reading that, what is Jesus saying in the following verse? Can someone explain it clearly?

"That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." John 17:21

Could it mean that we, you and I and the other guy, could become part of the God, making Him not a Trinity, but a Multiplicity?

Is Jesus' prayer for naught? Was/is Jesus a righteous man?


"... The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." James 5:16

Or do these words apply here?

"So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." Isaiah 55:11

 

[charity]

Charity said:-
Hello @Robert Gwin,
,The Name associated with God as Creator is the Hebrew word, 'Elohim' (see Genesis 1:1): it indicates His relation to mankind as His creatures. The Name Jehovah is used of God in covenant relation with His People. The context determines the usage of these names.

I will not comment on what you have said in relation to the truth revealed in Colossians 1:16. The Lord Jesus Christ is the image of the invisible God: and all things were created by Him.

I use the KJV by the way. I have had cause to refer to the Jehovah's Witness Bible and have found it wanting.

I commented in your other post Chris about your showing the alteration of the KJV of the Bible. The KJV is my 3rd recommended Bible, and truth can be found in it, but it requires a lot of work, like understanding the inconsistent way they translate words, like using by in Col 1:16 which totally changes the meaning. Take a gander at the original word en there, and the many ways they rendered it throughout the Bible:
ejn En (en);
Word Origin: Greek, Preposition, Strong #: 1722

1. in, by, with etc.

KJV Word Usage and Count
in 1874
by 141
with 134
among 117
at 112
on 46
through 37
miscellaneous 321

Perhaps like me at one time you actually think the KJV is the Bible rather than a version of it. With just a little research it is easy to see the many deliberate manipulations to support a doctrine of theirs. It is so great to live in these times where Bible truths have been revealed maam Dan 12:4

Hello @Robert Gwin,

As I said in my former response, I know of no alteration of the text of the KJV, that you assert. I also believe the KJV to be a direct translation from the original Scriptures. However, we now have available to us online the Hebrew and Greek text to refer to for confirmation.

Online Greek Interlinear Bible
Online Hebrew Interlinear Bible

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[bbyrd009]

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Psalm 82:6

So then reading that, what is Jesus saying in the following verse? Can someone explain it clearly?

"That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." John 17:21

Could it mean that we, you and I and the other guy, could become part of the God, making Him not a Trinity, but a Multiplicity?

Is Jesus' prayer for naught? Was/is Jesus a righteous man?


"... The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." James 5:16

Or do these words apply here?

"So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." Isaiah 55:11

im minded here that we have a definition of “prayer” that may not be exactly what was intended, dunno. Didnt “pray” just mean like “wish,” when the Bible was being xlated into kjv?

 

[charity]

"I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High." Psalm 82:6

So then reading that, what is Jesus saying in the following verse? Can someone explain it clearly?

"That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." John 17:21

Could it mean that we, you and I and the other guy, could become part of the God, making Him not a Trinity, but a Multiplicity?

Is Jesus' prayer for naught? Was/is Jesus a righteous man?


"... The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much." James 5:16

Or do these words apply here?

"So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." Isaiah 55:11

'I have said, Ye are gods;
and all of you are children of the most High.
But ye shall die like men,
and fall like one of the princes.'
(Psa 82:6)

Hello @amadeus,

This is a direct reference to Exodus 22: and referred to in John 10:34-35.

In Psalm 82, the word 'gods' refer to those earthly judges who represent God in Israel's civil assembly: such as Moses (Exodus 7:1 & Exodus 4:16)). It is used also of idols as representing false gods.

'Jesus answered them,
Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If He called them gods, unto whom the word of God came,
and the scripture cannot be broken;
Say ye of Him, Whom the Father hath sanctified,
and sent into the world, "Thou blasphemest";
because I said, "I am the Son of God?"
(John 10:34-36)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[amadeus]

im minded here that we have a definition of “prayer” that may not be exactly what was intended, dunno. Didnt “pray” just mean like “wish,” when the Bible was being xlated into kjv?

Communication is always a problem between people!

For me prayer is my part of a conversation between me and God.

Jesus expressed his "wish" this way:

"And he went a little farther, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt." Matt 26:39

Would it be wrong for any of us to express ourselves to God like that?

Ideally, I believe, our desires or wishes should become equal to the desires or wishes of God. But... that would be an unselfish direction to go.

Jesus went on from there to the torture of his flesh and the pain of his death on Calvary... This for him instead of moving on toward the comfortable home with natural spouse and children, a nice car, money in the bank, and no undesirable neighbors to pick at him as he sought such comfort his old age as a man of flesh. Would any of us given a choice select to travel the highway just as Jesus did?

"And an highway shall be there, and a way, and it shall be called The way of holiness; the unclean shall not pass over it; but it shall be for those: the wayfaring men, though fools, shall not err therein" Isaiah 35:8

But did not Paul declare for us here what is expected? Did not Jesus travel this way?

"Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself." Phil 2:3

 

[amadeus]

'I have said, Ye are gods;
and all of you are children of the most High.
But ye shall die like men,
and fall like one of the princes.'
(Psa 82:6)

Hello @amadeus,

This is a direct reference to Exodus 22: and referred to in John 10:34-35.

In Psalm 82, the word 'gods' refer to those earthly judges who represent God in Israel's civil assembly: such as Moses (Exodus 7:1). It is used also of idols as representing false gods. (John 10:34-36).

'Jesus answered them,
Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came,
and the scripture cannot be broken;
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified,
and sent into the world, "Thou blasphemest";
because I said, "I am the Son of God?"
(John 10:34-36)

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Thank you sister!

 

[charity]

'The light of the body is the eye:
if therefore thine eye be single,
thy whole body shall be full of light.
But if thine eye be evil,
thy whole body shall be full of darkness.
If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness,
how great is that darkness!'
(Mat 6:22-23)

Hello @Robert Gwin,

The words highlighted above I find awesome. 'If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness'.

How careful we must be to ensure that the 'light' that we have received is indeed not 'darkness' masquerading as light: For if it is. then we are of all people most miserable, for we are in a state of deception.

Within the love of Christ Jesus our living Lord and Saviour.
Chris

 

[amadeus]

'The light of the body is the eye:
if therefore thine eye be single,
thy whole body shall be full of light.
But if thine eye be evil,
thy whole body shall be full of darkness.
If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness,
how great is that darkness!'
(Mat 6:22-23)

Hello @Robert Gwin,

The words highlighted above I find awesome. 'If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness'.

How careful we must be to ensure that the 'light' that we have received is indeed not 'darkness' masquerading as light: For if it is then we are of all people most miserable; for we are in a state of deception.

Within the love of Christ Jesus our living Lord and Saviour.
Chris

Even so and then there is this:

"Yea, the darkness hideth not from thee; but the night shineth as the day: the darkness and the light are both alike to thee. Psalm 139:12

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Is this then similar to what Catholics do when they call Mary, the mother of God?

No for Jesus is God the Son, but Mary is not the Mother of God. She did not produce anything to the divinity of Jesus. He was already divine when He entered teh womb. she is the mother of Jesus humanity, not His divinity.

Dealing with the "person" of jesus, can be troublesome. For He is both eternal God and man. He is also a glorified God-man in heaven right now. So normal concepts do not apply. The hypostatic union is unique to Him alone so we have to remember that He has two distinct sides to Him in one "person".

 

[Ronald Nolette]

"No one is able to snatch them out of my Father’s hand" implies that his Father is more powerful than all living beings. Therefore Jesus is not equal to his Father, as he said ("the Father is greater than I").

You should have read just one verse prior!

1. John 10:28
   And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
   In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
2. John 10:29
   My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.

And again I am not debating the fact the Father is more exalted and greater than Jesus in position. The Father is above all!

But that does not negate the fact that jesus is equally divine in His person as teh Father is.

Lesser in position, equal in divinity.

 

[Ronald Nolette]

No. That’s just it. Trinitarian’s cannot admit the difference between an explicit teaching in Scripture, like man was created in 6 days, to verses that merely ‘supports’ a doctrine one starts with imposes a connection, such as John 1:1, where other valid interpretations of vague passages apply.

Well I take the explicit teaching of these two verses:

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

Pretty explicit there.

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Pretty explicit there.

and as for John 1:1 if the word was never identified inthe bible, I would 100% agree with you it is not explicit. but as the apostle John ( under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) explicitly tells us who the Word is in the same Chapter! and rev. 19 also shows that jesus has the name "The Word of God"

Thatr also is an explicit doctrine. You just refuse to accept it!

 

[Ronald Nolette]

Yes sir, that is the beauty of black and white, a permanent record of what we speak without any backsliding or misunderstanding. Everything we speak is here for everyone to view and decide if it is truth or fiction.

Yes and when you deny the divinity of Jesus as explicitly and unambiguously declared in Gods inerrant word- you speak fiction Robert.

 

[tigger 2]

Well I take the explicit teaching of these two verses:

18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

Pretty explicit there.

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

Pretty explicit there.

and as for John 1:1 if the word was never identified inthe bible, I would 100% agree with you it is not explicit. but as the apostle John ( under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) explicitly tells us who the Word is in the same Chapter! and rev. 19 also shows that jesus has the name "The Word of God"

Thatr also is an explicit doctrine. You just refuse to accept it!

.................................................
1 Tim. 3:16 ("God was manifest in the flesh")

As this is translated in the KJV it makes Paul say that Jesus is God “manifest in the flesh.”

Although the KJV translates 1 Tim. 3:16 with “God” as above, nearly all other translations today use a word which refers, not to God, but to Jesus: “he” (NIV; RSV; NRSV; JB; NJB; REB; NAB [‘70]; AT; GNB; CBW; and Beck’s translation), “he who” (ASV; NASB; NEB; MLB; BBE; Phillips; and Moffatt), “who,” or “which.” Even the equally old Douay version has “which was manifested in the flesh.” All the very best modern NT texts by trinitarian scholars (including Westcott and Hort, Nestle, and the text by the United Bible Societies) have the NT Greek word ὃς (“who”) here instead of θεὸς (“God”). Why do these noted trinitarian scholars support this NON-trinitarian translation of 1 Tim. 3:16? - Dr. Frederick C. Grant; United Bible Societies (UBS); Murray J. Harris; A. T. Robertson; Daniel B. Wallace; etc.

"As attractive theologically [for trinitarians, of course] as the reading θεὸς may be, it is spurious. To reject it is not to deny the deity of Christ, of course; it is just to deny any explicit reference in this text.” [italicized emphasis is by Wallace]. - pp. 341-342, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996.

John 1:1c

As for your continued use of this after I have posted #134-137, 141 above, and you embarrassed yourself with your incorrect challenges of them - I don't believe you care a whit for truth. At the very least you could have acknowledged that there is an honest alternate to the trinitarian's favorite translation.
Examining the Trinity

 

[amadeus]

Ronald Nolette said:
...No nowhere does it explicitly say "God the Son" Thatr is simply a phrase used to differentiate the persons found in the one TRUE Elohim God (plural)
and o ne true Adonai Lord (plural)

Is this then similar to what Catholics do when they call Mary, the mother of God?

No for Jesus is God the Son, but Mary is not the Mother of God...
Dealing with the "person" of jesus, can be troublesome. For He is both eternal God and man. He is also a glorified God-man in heaven right now. So normal concepts do not apply. The hypostatic union is unique to Him alone so we have to remember that He has two distinct sides to Him in one "person".

I was checking to see where you were coming from on this. Then it is according to your belief in a "hypostatic union" which men have described. I do not have faith in that.

I cannot follow @theefaith on his part in this nor can I follow you on your part. To me the two arguments sound the same.

I see neither one of them as being from God, but that is my belief by faith. I am not pressing you to accept it.

Give God the glory!