that's no excuse, the whole English bible is a translation or a transliteration of Aramaic or Hebrew concepts, so you cannot use that excuse. I have have no problem with any of the titles.
Well i was maybe meaning a diff thing @ messiah and savior, meaning those were appropriated, even if they really belong to Christ, i agree there
and as for "Lord" it correctly identify God as the diversity of himself in flesh, and LORD without flesh. it's just men don't understand the scriptures.
and you do, right, look, if you wanna conflate God or Christ with the xlation "Lord" that is certainly your right, ok, but imo "God" will always stay God that way, and prolly never become
Father in your thought? Lords are English ppl who got or bought titles, and operate Slave States, and reinstitute
the law of sin and death, death for killing one of the "Lords" rabbits Bc starving, etc. I'll pass. Did that for like forty years, don't get me wrong, served me well at the time. But
God is Love, right
see, when people say or that's not a good translation or this is better. that's is the first step in trying to get a good translation removed. but that ain't working either.
I understand, and my reply is that translations are undertaken by
scribes, servants, and there is nothing wrong with starting there, but finishing there? After you discover Lex and then Inter? Enter, imo. "Good translation" is arbitration by you, right, see now i got
two ppl between me and Father lol
yes, YOUR obv but clearly qualified?
Qualified
statements, g, in my opinion, this is my guess,
i don't know expressed however ok
maybe in your own opinion. was we not speaking of the Lord Jesus, and not Caesars, or david?
well see as soon as you say Lord i hear
the law of sin and death, which i could even Quote for them other guys, right, you could too?
true, neither was the Christ or the Messiah, but Jesus did declear that he is the Messiah, which is
clearly qualified and not ... my opinion, but the scriptures.
"like"