1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Aspen and Tigger 2 discuss 'who is God?'

Discussion in 'Unorthodox Doctrine Forum' started by tigger 2, Jan 2, 2018.

  1. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    "I have not prooftexted."

    I didn't ask that. I asked if you only accept as 'prooftexts' those scriptures which Trinitarians use. You seem to exclude John 17:3 as a prooftext (and probably every other scripture I cite to show a single person God: YHWH the Father). However, you have cited John 1:1; 8:58; and 20:28 which are prooftexts for trinitarians

    "God’s nature is comprised of His personages."

    God's nature is spirit; His angels' nature is spirit; man's nature is flesh (and all the weaknesses thereof.) Who is God is determined by the person(s) not the nature.

    "‘Alone’ is a word denoting sovereignty and worthiness to receive glory and praise. Jesus was in a state of submission and the Holy Spirit had not been revealed yet. Jesus giving glory to his Father and the God of the Jewish people as revealed to them up until that moment in time"

    'Alone' is no such thing. All who have English as their first language know what 'alone' means.

    The HS is clearly revealed even before Jesus' birth - Luke 1:15. However, you are right that the HS (and the Messiah) were never understood by the Jews to be God. In fact the HS was considered to be a power rather than a person!!
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2018
  2. aspen

    aspen “"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few

    Messages:
    11,567
    Likes Received:
    2,660
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
     
  3. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Well you will have to show me the scriptures (one at a time, taking turns) which show Jesus revealed as Almighty God and the HS revealed as the Almighty God. It was not accepted by the Church until the 4th century (and then with much dissent and furor). If it had been clearly revealed in scripture there should have been no disagreement and the Church would have accepted it all along.

    However, we have strayed far from John 17:3. I still find your interpretation confusing and mostly off-subject. It doesn't appear that you can interpret it any clearer and make it say Jesus is God when it clearly says otherwise. Even the major Trinitarian-translated Bibles translate it as Jesus saying the Father is the only true God.

    I'm ready to move on to your chosen scripture unless you have something more about John 17:3.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2018
    bbyrd009 likes this.
  4. aspen

    aspen “"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few

    Messages:
    11,567
    Likes Received:
    2,660
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    tigger: Well you will have to show me the scriptures (one at a time, taking turns) which show Jesus revealed as Almighty God and the HS revealed as the Almighty God.

    Jesus in his rightful, exalted state; seated at the right hand of the Father is omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent. The Holy Spirt shares all three attributes, as well. Only The Almighty God has these attributes - i have verses to back this up, but you seem to get flustered when verses are presented in context.

    It was not accepted by the Church (and then with much dissent and furor) until the 4th century. If it had been clearly revealed in scripture there should have been no disagreement and the Church would have accepted it all along.

    History disagrees with your statement. The Early Church believed that all three are God - it was not articulated and declared until the fourth century because dissident teachings from herectical sects inside the church had not become pervasive enough to gain widespread legitimacy. I have a list of Catholic theologians from the 1st and 2nd centuries who taught about the divine nature of Christ and the Holy Spirit, as well as trinitarian paintings in catecombs from the time period.

    However, we have strayed far from John 17:3. I still find your interpretation confusing and mostly off-subject.

    I am not sure why. I have stated that if your exegesis is correct, your interpretation is correct. If a sentence, isolated from an entire body of work and given the authority to define the relationship of Jesus and ‘God alone’ as seperate - your intepretation is correct. The problem for me is your exegesis ignores the book of Hebrews and Revelation and not to mention, the very gospel containing the verse. So, if we were on a desert island, with the gospel of John 17:3 to tell us about God; i agree, it appears that Jesus is a man praying to God.

    It doesn't appear that you can interpret it any clearer and make it say Jesus is God when it clearly says otherwise.

    This statement is troubling for many reasons:

    1. Your misinterpretation of the verse, based on your exegisis appears to be placing the burden on me to disprove your conclusion. I feel no burden whatsoever, so why would I attempt to change scripture? My interpretation of the verse fits the surrounding gospel.

    2. My exegisis is described as ‘confusing’ by members of two churches - LDS and JWs. In both cases, members of these organizations have been taught that the doctrine of the Trinity is confusing and therefore incorrect. It is a false conclusion, but one that is taught regularly. There is nothing in the Bible that suggests we are supposed to understand God’s nature perfectly; on the contrary, God is infinite. Job discovered this when he questioned Him.

    3. The verse does not clearly or difinitively speak about the nature of God. It speaks about the relationship between Jesus in his humbled state and His Father, God. Agreeing to disagree needs to be apart of this discussion or we will end up following a predictable path - a) stating the true meaning of verses we choose to discuss, which of course is our exegesis b) declaring victory when our truth is rejected c) walking away feeling misunderstood, superior, and confirming our own feelings of persecution by a fallen world. This senario is a boring waste of time so if it goes likes that, i am just not interested in continuing.


    Even the major Trinitarian-translated Bibles translate it as Jesus saying the Father is the only true God.

    Because Christianity is montheistic. We believe in One God. Trinity means three in One.

    I'm ready to move on to your chosen scripture unless you have something more about John 17:3.

    Ok. Let’s discuss Hebrews Chapter 1. emphasis on 1:6
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2018
  5. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    "b) declaring victory when our truth is rejected c) walking away feeling misunderstood, superior, and confirming our own feelings of persecution by a fallen world. This senario [sic] is a boring waste of time so if it goes likes that, i am just not interested in continuing."

    Hey, if you want to agree to disagree (and I do disagree with that which makes little sense), we can give it up at anytime you want. And though I don't like your implications (b & c) above, I would walk away feeling that I have failed in "exchanging ideas" especially in discussing the most-used 'trinityproofs.' However, have it your way.

    If you want to continue, here's Hebrews 1:5,6:


    NIV - :5 For to which of the angels did God ever say,

    “You are my Son;
    today I have become your Father”?

    Or again,

    “I will be his Father,
    and he will be my Son”?

    :6 And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says, “Let all God’s angels worship [proskuneo] him.”
     
  6. aspen

    aspen “"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few

    Messages:
    11,567
    Likes Received:
    2,660
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Worship is reserved for God Alone
     
  7. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    The nature of God himself is spirit - Today's Dictionary of the Bible, p. 593. Even famed trinity-defender Dr. Walter Martin tells us, "God's nature has always been declared to be that of pure spirit....(John 4:24 - Greek)." - KOTC, p. 202. Also see p. 427, New Bible Dictionary (2nd ed.).

    .........................................

    The Greek word proskuneo (or proskyneo) is defined in the 1971 trinitarian United Bible Societies' A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament, p. 154: "[Proskuneo] worship; fall down and worship, kneel, bow low, fall at another's feet."

    Even trinitarian W. E. Vine writes in his An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, p. 1247:

    "PROSKUNEO ... to make obeisance, do reverence to (from pros, towards, and kuneo, to kiss), is the most frequent word rendered 'to worship'. It is used for an act of homage or reverence (a) to God ...; (b) to Christ ...; (c) to a man, Matt. 18:26." ("Obeisance," of course, shows "respect, submission, or reverence" - Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 1961.)

    Noted Bible scholar J. H. Thayer defines proskuneo:

    "prop. to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence ... hence in the N. T. by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication. It is used a. of homage shown to men of superior rank [position] ... Rev. 3:9 .... b. of homage rendered to God and the ascended Christ, to heavenly beings [angels]" - p. 548, Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Baker Book House Publ., 1977.

    The Hebrew word most often translated "worship" is shachah, and it is usually rendered as proskuneo in the Greek Septuagint version of the Old Testament. Unger and White say of this word: "Shachah ... 'to worship, prostrate oneself, bow down.'" And, "The act of bowing down in homage done before a superior [in rank] or a ruler. Thus David 'bowed' himself [shachah] before Saul (1 Sam. 24:8). Sometimes it is a social or economic superior to whom one bows, as when Ruth 'bowed' [shachah] to the ground before Boaz (Ruth 2:10)." - Nelson's Expository Dictionary of the Old Testament, 1980, Thomas Nelson Publ., p. 482.

    The trinitarian A Dictionary of the Bible, James Hastings, Vol. 4, p. 943, says the following about worship in the New Testament:

    "some indefiniteness attaches to this subject, partly owing to the two senses
    in which the Gr[eek] word [proskuneo] is used, and partly owing to the ambiguous usage of the title ['Lord']."

    It further admits that although some trinitarians insist such scriptures as Mt 2:11; 8:2; 9:18; 14:33; 15:25; 17:14,15; 20:20 28:9,17; Lk 7:37,38; 17:15,16; 24:51,52; Jn 9:35-38; 20:17 prove that Jesus was 'worshiped,'

    "it cannot be proved that in any of these cases ... more than an act of homage and humble obeisance is intended."

    So this respected trinitarian reference work admits that the Father is definitely (and most often) given the exclusive worship that is due God alone, but that there are uncertainties that such is really the case with Jesus.
     
    Last edited: Jan 6, 2018
  8. Stranger

    Stranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    1,699
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    (Luke 17:15-16) And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks:..."

    Do you not see what this verse is saying?

    Stranger
     
  9. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Do you not see that this (and about 20 others) are what Hastings' A Dictionary of the Bible is saying. I guess it's a start to pick one verse out of so many listed and complain about it. You have a lot more left that Hastings listed. And you are ignoring the main point altogether. And that is what OT and NT writers meant when using 'worship.'
     
    bbyrd009 likes this.
  10. Stranger

    Stranger Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    1,699
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Sorry but 'Hastings' is not here to answer for his comments. You are. And I have not ignored the main point. Again, do you not see what (Luke 17:15-16) is saying?

    Stranger
     
  11. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
    With your rules, you'll be on this verse for the next 20 years.
    Aspen is right, of course. If you don't believe Jesus is God, one cannot call himself a Christian. I hope you're not who I think you are. If so, this will go on forever.

    One verse cannot be taken out of context.
    Jesus knew His stuff.
    There were many Gods back then, God Father is the only one true God. There is ONLY ONE GOD. Not three.
    But he was speaking as Jesus.

    I might be back.
    This is not a closed discussion.
    Scott doesn't have to chomp at the bit.
     
    "ByGrace" likes this.
  12. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States

    Definition of Christian:

    1 a : one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ. - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Christian
     
  13. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
    Although Merriam-Webster many times quoted the bible in their dictionary, they did not invent Christianity or were the first to describe it.
    CHRISTian. A little Christ.
    To be called a Christian you must:
    Believe Jesus is God
    Believe He died and was resurrected
    Believe in the Trinity

    I do think that's it.
    And WHO decided this?
    The early church.
    Which is to be believed more than M and W.
     
  14. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
  15. amadeus

    amadeus Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Yet these things you describe as essentials are not so described in scripture. While a person may find some support for his belief in the trinity in scripture he cannot find in scripture that one who does not believe in it is not a Christian. Then again where in the scripture is a clear definition of the word, Christian?

    Why should we be concerned with what M and W believes? As far as the early Church is concerned, what evidence is available about these things within scripture alone?

    Should we disfellowship a believer who in spite of confessing the two great commandments cited by Jesus differs in belief on some of the smaller details. Shouldn't that be left until the time of the harvest? Who here has already been designated as one who is separate the tares from the wheat?

    "He said unto them, An enemy hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up?
    But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
    Let both grow together until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn." Matt 13:28-30
     
  16. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
    The two should grow together.

    We cannot go only by the bible.
    The bible is our source. It's where we get our information.
    It's our permanent center of gravity. (thank you Mika)
    But we cannot glean everything from the bible. This is why we have theologians.

    What I describe as essentials, were decided upon by the Apostolic Fathers. It is difficult to glean this from only the bible. If you're going to get only what the Holy Spirit give you, you will still know truths, you will still come to understand that Jesus is God. But the Fathers put it all together to make it easy for us. If one DOES NOT believe Jesus is God, then what makes him be a Christian? Everyone believes Jesus was a nice person and a good teacher of morality. Does that make them be Christian?

    I'm not concerned with what M and W believe. Someone gave me a definition of a Christian concept from that dictionary, and that's the only reason I mentioned it.
     
  17. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
    Tigger, I'm not going to debate you because I'm not knowledgeable enough in YOUR beliefs, and as you must surely know, that is a rule in debates - know your opponent. I know I can't debate you.

    However, I also know that Jesus is God.
    Now, I believe that we break the 1st commandment if we DO NOT believe HE is God.
    And, of course, YOU believe we break the 1st commandment exactly by believing HE is God.

    I've always found this very interesting.

    When I read through the letters, it does indeed sound like Jesus is a totally separate person from Father. Just take the beginning of any letter.

    As to John 17:3 you'll get the standard reply which @aspen has given you. When the 2nd person of the Trinity was incarnated as the person Jesus, He did lower Himself, even though He retained many aspects of God - or attributes. He was human 100%. He was God 100%.
    Since JESUS' Father was God, and not Joseph, He did have some God "DNA" in Him. So, as a human, it was correct for Him to refer to God Father, as Father.
    Philippians 2:6
    This refers, of course, to John 5:18 which clearly states that the Jews of that day considered killing Jesus because He was making Himself to be equal with God.
    Although, Jesus DID lower Himself to become a man. Jesus, who is great became small, so that we who are small could become great...

    If Jesus thought He was equal with God, was He a crazy person?
    That seems to me to be the alternative. Or maybe He really thought He was sent by God? That sounds kind of crazy too. There were others who THOUGHT they were the Messiah, but they were proven wrong.
    How do we prove Jesus was not the Messiah??
    I'm sorry, I should not use the term Messiah, I meant God, the 2nd person of the Trinity.

    I don't need a response, unless you want to reply.

    I do hope that at some point you address
    Titus 2:13 which is the clearest statement of Jesus being God.
    "Our Great God and Savior Jesus Christ" NASB
    If you want to add the word "our"...
    "Our Great God and OUR Savior Jesus Christ" as some versions do, I hope you go to verse 14 and reconcile the two.
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2018
  18. GodsGrace

    GodsGrace Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,576
    Likes Received:
    2,530
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    Italy
    P.S.
    Aspen is correct. You cannot base all your theology on one verse.
    Time to get off John 17:3.
    The FATHER IS the ONLY God.

    This is in reference to there being many gods at the time and God Father having revealed Himself to the Hebrews, Israelites, Jews, as the ONLY ONE TRUE GOD.

    The problem is that you don't believe in the trinity, so you have a problem accepting ONE TRUE GOD (but with 3 persons dwelling within Him, separate but one.)
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2018
  19. amadeus

    amadeus Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,810
    Likes Received:
    5,442
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    I do agree on this point although I look at it perhaps differently than some do. I do not worship the Bible. For me it remains by itself a dead book.
    Yes!
    I am not against theologians. They are just well studied men, but by study alone we will never get all of God's message to man. By reading from the theologians alone we will likely find ourselves in a ditch. Reading them is like reading posts on this forum. You may well and correctly say that they know more, but what they know is not necessarily knowledge of the Good which is God alone. We need a sifter.

    I remember when I was a child at home my mother was a great cook and baker. She made all of her own pie crusts and baked goods from scratch. She always had a sifter through which she sifted the flour that came out of the sack before it went into the mix. It took all of the little lumps and clumps out making it a fine evenly distributed powder. It made a big difference in the finished product.


    Our sifter is, or should be, the Holy Spirit in us.


    That they were decided by them could be a problem. Men have been making mistakes from day one. We may certainly consider what they decided, but at the same time don't let our respect for them be so great that we never doubt them and never even consider the things they decided against...


    You say if we we're only going to get what the Holy Spirit will give, but what is there that God would neglect to give to anyone who is coming to Him with the right attitude and asking of Him continuously? Did not Jesus say,

    "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
    For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened." Matt 7:7-8

    What is easier? Is it easier to take hold of the things that those Fathers put together so long ago? Remember what was written about Jesus himself?
    "And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man." Luke 2:52

    In other words, Jesus grew and so must we grow. If we take what someone else said as the final word on it, no matter how studious or wise or devout that person was, will we not eventually stagnate and die? Take hold of things for the moment, yes, things that for the moment fill a space in us, but never presume that that is the end of the road when we still have time left in which to grow. A carnal child grows to adulthood learning all along the way, but should he stop learning because he reached his 21st birthday, or his 30th birthday, or even his 70th birthday? I reached my 74th last month and still in the things of God I intend to grow until there is no more time for me:

    "He must increase, but I must decrease." John 3:30

    The "I" that needs to decrease is that in me which follows or wishes to follow the ways of the flesh [the old man]. The "He" is the Jesus in me that leads me to or along the Way of God [the new or inner man].


    Wrong question, unless being a Christian means a person is always pleasing to God. What does God expect or desire from us?

    "But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you." Matt 6:33

    To me that verse means that if we continuously put those first things first, then anything and everything else we need will be added to us. What else do we need? We can try to define them, but only God always knows what they are for each individual.

    Remember that we are to be one part of the Body of Christ. Not every part has precisely the same functions.

    That which connects the parts of the Body of Christ to the Head [Jesus] and to the other parts of the Body is the Holy Spirit dwelling in each and every part.


    So how often is it really our job to decide the correctness of every other person we meet according to God? If we really need to know and we are seeking those first things first of Matt 6:33 will not what is needed be given to us? No generalizations regarding the things of God work all of the time. That is trying to put Him in a box and He does not fit.

    A current connection with Jesus through the Holy Spirit is always required. Will not seeking always those first things first accomplish that?
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2018
    "ByGrace" likes this.
  20. tigger 2

    tigger 2 Active Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    47
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    GG: "As to John 17:3 you'll get the standard reply which @aspen has given you. When the 2nd person of the Trinity was incarnated as the person Jesus, He did lower Himself, even though He retained many aspects of God - or attributes. He was human 100%. He was God 100%.

    "Since JESUS' Father was God, and not Joseph, He did have some God "DNA" in Him. So, as a human, it was correct for Him to refer to God Father, as Father."
    ...................................


    But the point was that Jesus called his Father 'God ALONE' (or 'the ONLY true God'). And yet I believe you are saying that Jesus is 100% God and I, would suppose, that the HS is 100% God. So, if that were true, the Father cannot be the "ONLY true God."

    As for Titus 2:13, it is one in a class of a handful of scriptures that many trinitarian translators use in an attempt to avoid an alternate non-trinitarian translation.

    In an attempt to prove the trinity doctrine, Granville Sharp made up a rule in 1798. It is often called “Sharp’s Rule” by trinitarians. It says, in effect, that when two or more words (nouns) in NT Greek are joined by the word “and” (kai) they all refer to the same person if the word “the” (the article) comes before the first noun and not before the other noun(s): “THE king AND _master of the castle.”

    Sharp invented this rule after he noticed this particular construction (sometimes called a “Sharp’s construction”) was used with “God” and “Christ” in 5 places in the NT. IF he could convince others that his “rule” was true, then they would think there was finally (after 1400 years of a “trinity” tradition) absolute grammatical Bible proof that God and Jesus are the same “person”!

    Even NT Grammarian Daniel B.Wallace himself (who desperately tries for some kind of “absolute” scriptural proof for a trinity idea) complained that,

    “so many grammarians and exegetes objected to the validity of Granville Sharp’s Rule with reference to texts dealing with the Deity of Christ”!

    He specifically mentions “the great Greek grammarian,” G. B. Winer (trinitarian) and “one of the greatest grammarians of this [nineteenth/twentieth] century,” J. H. Moulton (trinitarian) as rejecting this “rule”!

    I have also seen that the Roman Catholic scholar Karl Rahner rejects this rule as do C. F. D. Moule and Henry Alford. Even famed trinitarian scholar Dr. James Moffatt (“probably the greatest biblical scholar of our day”) showed his rejection of the “absoluteness” of this rule by his rendering of Titus 2:13.

    In fact, even trinitarian NT Grammarian Daniel B. Wallace himself complains that the common translation of Titus 2:13 as found in the KJV (“the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ”) treats “‘God’ and ‘Savior’ separately”!

    In vol. 5, p. 257 the respected The Expositor's Greek Testament says: "In the present case [Jude 1:4], however, the second noun (kupiov) belongs to the class of words which may stand without the article .... A similar doubtful case is found in Tit. ii. 13.... ." [Except for kupiov, emphasis has been added by me.]

    It is no secret to NT Grammarians that when you have more than one noun connected by "and" (kai in NT Greek) and the first noun has the article, the following nouns may or may not have the article but they can still be understood to have the article.

    Moulton's Grammar of New Testament Greek says:

    "(f) Repetition of Article with several nouns connected by kai

    "The art. may be carried over from the first noun to the other(s)" - p. 181, Vol. 3, 1963.

    We might compare Matt. 22:32 (all nouns with article) with Mark 12:26 (first article understood with following nouns).

    More examples:

    Titus 2:13

    Looking for that blessed hope, and appearing of that glory of that mighty God, and of our Savior Jesus Christ. - GNV.

    "we hope and wait for the glorious denouement of the Great God and of Jesus Christ our saviour." - Phillips.

    "as we await our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ, - NAB (1970)

    "as we await the blessed hope, the appearance of the glory of the great God and of our savior Jesus Christ, - NAB (1991).

    "looking for that blessed hope and glorious appearing of the mighty God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ," - NMB.

    I have more on this false 'rule,' but I doubt that you will take the effort to carefully read what I have just written.

    ........................................

    "I've made up my mind; don't bother me with facts."
     
    bbyrd009 likes this.
Loading...