When Jesus said, “there is none good but one, that is, God.” did He mean nobody could be good?

[post]

Great, we are making headway sir, since you have accepted God's name, but you have a problem with the sect called Jehovah's witnesses, then let's address that issue.

Jesus The Christ is the LORD God Almighty Himself manifest in the flesh - the One Who was pierced, by Whose own blood purchased His church. THE Shepherd and only Savior.
He bodily died, was bodily entombed, bodily rose, bodily ascended and will bodily come again. The same from the beginning, the Alpha & Omega, the Aleph-Tov, the I AM.

"resurrection" is not "recreation" -- it's "resurrection" and it connotes our persistent soul being reconnected with our very own bodies having themselves been transformed.

 

[post]

@post

If Jesus was saying nobody else could be good (even if God works in them), then how do you explain these verses?

Matthew 5:45
“That ye may be the children of your Father which is in Heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.”

Matthew 7:18-20
“A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

Matthew 12:33
“Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.”

Matthew 12:35
“A good man out of the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things.”

Matthew 25:21
“His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.”

Luke 8:15
“But that on the good ground are they, which in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.”

Luke 23:50 (NKJV)
“Now behold, there was a man named Joseph, a council member, a good and just man.”

John 5:29
“And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.”

Acts of the Apostles 11:22-24
“Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem: and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch. Who, when he came, and had seen the grace of God, was glad, and exhorted them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord. For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith: and much people was added unto the Lord.”

Titus 1:7-8
“For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;”

Titus 2:4-5
“That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

(To be continued in my next post to you).

So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say,
we are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.
(Luke 17:10) ​

vanity is sin.
i will trust the Lord's words: no one is good but God alone -- He is "The Shepherd, The Good One"
i will follow His teachings: i am not good. He and He alone is good, and worthy of honor and all praise
if there is any good thing in me, it is not me but Christ in me.

as for your verse mining: nuances of linguistics and Christ is not a liar; scripture is not set against itself.
verily verily, no one but God is good: and Christ is good. therefore He is God.
these things suffice.


you've purposefully dissociated this topic from its original context and i'm not going to pursue it here. given that my time is short -- i would rather, and consider it more profitable to, glorify God to the cultist JW's than engage in glorifying men with your view of your OP.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

to be clear, "Jehovah" as 99% of English-speakers read it is not correct.
this comes from early German translations of the OT -- in Hebrew the Tetragrammaton is יהוה‎ -- or, Yod-He-Wah-He
these are consonants -- Hebrew is typically written without vowels, and those vowels are assumed by native readers, or inferred by translators. into English, and also phonetically, this translates directly like YHWH.
in the German language, the consonant 'J' is spoken with the sound of English "Y" and the consonant 'V' is spoken similarly to the English "W" .. "H" is spoken the same in both languages - so in German, JHVH -- but this is not pronounced the way the English language speaks these letters.

so when early German manuscripts came across יהוה‎ they guessed at the vowels, {e,o,a} and phonetically transliterated the Hebrew letters into Germanic ones: hence, YHWH was written as JeHoVaH
in English this reading is absolutely butchered because we don't realize how German is pronounced.

in short, JW's for all their name-worship don't even pronounce the name of their own cult right.
this should be pronounced "Yeh-Ho-WaH" not 'jay-ho-vaa'


just an aside.
i find this fact hilarious =]

Not true.

Here is an article showing otherwise.
Jehovah and Yahweh?

The lie that Jehovah is a mistake in the KJB is perpetuated by liberals like Bruce Metzger.

Anyone who regards the Bible as true would not listen to Metzger because he is a liberal.

Metzger’s theological liberalism in regard to inspiration was expressed in the Reader’s Digest Condensed Bible. He was the chairman of the project and wrote the introductions to each book, in which he questioned the authorship, traditional date, and supernatural inspiration of books penned by Moses, Daniel, Paul, James, and Peter. Consider some examples:

Metzger’s radical modernism in relation to the Scripture was also evident in the notes to the New Oxford Annotated Bible RSV, which he co-edited with Herbert May. It first appeared in 1962 as The Oxford Annotated Bible and was the first Protestant annotated edition of the Bible to be approved by the Roman Catholic Church. It was given an imprimatur in 1966 by Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston. Metzger and May claim the O.T. contains “a matrix of myth, legend, and history,” deny the worldwide flood, call Job an “ancient folktale,” claim there are two authors of Isaiah, call Jonah a “popular legend,” and otherwise attack the divine inspiration of Holy Scripture.

Introductory Notes to the Pentateuch: “The Old Testament may be described as the literary expression of the religious life of ancient Israel. ... The Israelites were more history-conscious than any other people in the ancient world. Probably as early as the time of David and Solomon, out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history, there had appeared the earliest written form of the story of the saving acts of God from Creation to the conquest of the Promised Land, an account which later in modified form became a part of Scripture” (Bruce Metzger and Herbert May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Note on the Flood: “Archaeological evidence suggests that traditions of a prehistoric flood covering the whole earth are heightened versions of local inundations, e.g. in the Tigris-Euphrates basin” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Note on Job: “The ancient folktale of a patient Job circulated orally among oriental sages in the second millennium B.C. and was probably written down in Hebrew at the time of David and Solomon or a century later (about 1000-800 B.C.)” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

to be clear, "Jehovah" as 99% of English-speakers read it is not correct.
this comes from early German translations of the OT -- in Hebrew the Tetragrammaton is יהוה‎ -- or, Yod-He-Wah-He
these are consonants -- Hebrew is typically written without vowels, and those vowels are assumed by native readers, or inferred by translators. into English, and also phonetically, this translates directly like YHWH.
in the German language, the consonant 'J' is spoken with the sound of English "Y" and the consonant 'V' is spoken similarly to the English "W" .. "H" is spoken the same in both languages - so in German, JHVH -- but this is not pronounced the way the English language speaks these letters.

so when early German manuscripts came across יהוה‎ they guessed at the vowels, {e,o,a} and phonetically transliterated the Hebrew letters into Germanic ones: hence, YHWH was written as JeHoVaH
in English this reading is absolutely butchered because we don't realize how German is pronounced.

in short, JW's for all their name-worship don't even pronounce the name of their own cult right.
this should be pronounced "Yeh-Ho-WaH" not 'jay-ho-vaa'


just an aside.
i find this fact hilarious =]

But I am in agreement with you that JW is a cult. I am setting out to make a case against it to expose it on these forums.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

bravo

the scripture tells us to mark those who teach falsely, and not to abide by them or invite them into our houses.
unlike the contemporary view that serving God equals showing 'niceness' to all
i have little interest in being 'polite' at the expense of doctrine. we are on a theological discussion board, and if we live what we believe, i believe we really have no other choice but to rebuke strongly those that oppose the fundamental tenets of the gospel

you and i may have disagreements but they aren't serious ones -- with these JW's however we have no fellowship. their core beliefs deny Christ.

=]

I agree that we are to rebuke and have no fellowship with JW’s. It does not mean I don’t love their souls, but I don’t care for their false religion (Which is based on a lie and perpetuates lies).

 

[post]

Not true.

Here is an article showing otherwise.
Jehovah and Yahweh?

The lie that Jehovah is a mistake in the KJB is perpetuated by liberals like Bruce Metzger.

Anyone who regards the Bible as true would not listen to Metzger because he is a liberal.

Metzger’s theological liberalism in regard to inspiration was expressed in the Reader’s Digest Condensed Bible. He was the chairman of the project and wrote the introductions to each book, in which he questioned the authorship, traditional date, and supernatural inspiration of books penned by Moses, Daniel, Paul, James, and Peter. Consider some examples:

Metzger’s radical modernism in relation to the Scripture was also evident in the notes to the New Oxford Annotated Bible RSV, which he co-edited with Herbert May. It first appeared in 1962 as The Oxford Annotated Bible and was the first Protestant annotated edition of the Bible to be approved by the Roman Catholic Church. It was given an imprimatur in 1966 by Cardinal Cushing, Archbishop of Boston. Metzger and May claim the O.T. contains “a matrix of myth, legend, and history,” deny the worldwide flood, call Job an “ancient folktale,” claim there are two authors of Isaiah, call Jonah a “popular legend,” and otherwise attack the divine inspiration of Holy Scripture.

Introductory Notes to the Pentateuch: “The Old Testament may be described as the literary expression of the religious life of ancient Israel. ... The Israelites were more history-conscious than any other people in the ancient world. Probably as early as the time of David and Solomon, out of a matrix of myth, legend, and history, there had appeared the earliest written form of the story of the saving acts of God from Creation to the conquest of the Promised Land, an account which later in modified form became a part of Scripture” (Bruce Metzger and Herbert May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Note on the Flood: “Archaeological evidence suggests that traditions of a prehistoric flood covering the whole earth are heightened versions of local inundations, e.g. in the Tigris-Euphrates basin” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

Note on Job: “The ancient folktale of a patient Job circulated orally among oriental sages in the second millennium B.C. and was probably written down in Hebrew at the time of David and Solomon or a century later (about 1000-800 B.C.)” (Metzger and May, New Oxford Annotated Bible).

right well i provided verifiably true and accurate linguistic evidence, and you brought up a human's name and attacked his character.

so... there is a thing called logical argumentation.

as i stated previously in another place, i am fully aware that kjv-ians are unreachable with reason. my bad for not having the prescience to realize you would skip over the factual analysis and see it only as a failure to fully adore the kjv. my apologies.

i really do think it's hilarious that JW's don't pronounce their own cult's name correctly tho -- the irony!

 

[Bible Highlighter]

So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say,
we are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.
(Luke 17:10) ​

vanity is sin.
i will trust the Lord's words: no one is good but God alone -- He is "The Shepherd, The Good One"
i will follow His teachings: i am not good. He and He alone is good, and worthy of honor and all praise
if there is any good thing in me, it is not me but Christ in me.

as for your verse mining: nuances of linguistics and Christ is not a liar; scripture is not set against itself.
verily verily, no one but God is good: and Christ is good. therefore He is God.
these things suffice.


you've purposefully dissociated this topic from its original context and i'm not going to pursue it here. given that my time is short -- i would rather, and consider it more profitable to, glorify God to the cultist JW's than engage in glorifying men with your view of your OP.

God gets the glory for our doing works.

Matthew 5:16
“Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”

I also made a biblical case showing you are in error in that God’s Word calls other people good, and 1 John 3:7 says he that does righteousness is righteous. Revelation talks about how the 144,000 are found without fault before the throne of God and this is in context to the mention of their behavior or moral conduct. Enoch was translated whereby he did not see death because he had the testimony that he pleased God. We know without faith it is impossible to please God (See: Hebrews 11:6). According to Hebrews 11: We know faith is not just a belief alone with doing nothing or and neither is the faith justifying sin. By faith… Noah built the Ark. By faith… Moses suffered with the afflictions with God’s people rather than enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season (Re-read Hebrews chapter 11). Paul says you can deny the faith and be worse than an infidel (unbeliever) if you do not provide for your own (Meaning: To provide for your own is a good work that you need to do as a part of the faith) (See: 1 Timothy 5:8).

 

[post]

Not true.

Here is an article showing otherwise.
Jehovah and Yahweh?

**AHEM**

your article confirms exactly what i said:

in short, JW's for all their name-worship don't even pronounce the name of their own cult right.
this should be pronounced "Yeh-Ho-WaH" not 'jay-ho-vaa'

my point was about the correct pronunciation of the transliterated consonants early German translators decided on & presumed vowels early German translators added, which kjv translators later adopted ((that is, co-opted from earlier versions)). kjv carried on the German tradition of transliterated consonants, even tho those consonants are not pronounced in English as they are in German.
as your article attests -- when you read 'Jehovah' in your kjv you should pronounce it in German, not in English.

JW's can't pronounce their own cult's name, and most kjv-ians don't know how to read their kjv aloud.
LOL
how God confounds the 'wise' !!
He is Beautiful

 

[post]

wanna talk about Eostare next?

know where that word first appears historically?
are you knowledgeable about its etymology?

=]

or maybe "farthing" ??
have you ever looked into the actual going price for two sparrows?

or should we just magnify Christ, instead of ourselves, and instead of translations?
maybe quit "arguing over words" and glorify God, which is our purpose in existing?

see where i'm going with this?

 

[post]

God gets the glory for our doing works.

i.e. we are not good

He is

yes

 

[Michiah-Imla]

i.e. we are not good

He is

yes

“For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.” (2 Timothy 3:2-5)

 

[post]

despisers of those that are good

bad translation.

the actual text:

 

[Bible Highlighter]

right well i provided verifiably true and accurate linguistic evidence, and you brought up a human's name and attacked his character.

so... there is a thing called logical argumentation.

The article I brought forth shows the real truth.
Your information is supported by Modern scholars like Bruce Metzger who is a liberal.
I should attack his beliefs because if his beliefs are false then we should not listen to what he blindly says on his support of the word Jehovah.
Metzger is the leading textual critic and yet he is a liberal. Liberals should not be given the time of day because they are not really believing all of the Bible.

Also, Modern scholarship perpetuates this kind of nonsense because they don’t believe God preserved His words for today. They don’t believe in any perfect Bible that they can hold in their hands today.

I believe a Christian should have a final Word of authority.
I have discovered that the KJB is the most pure when compared to other English bibles, but yet at the same time I realize that the KJB has extremely difficult archaic words within it and so a Modern Bible is a must to help update what it is saying.

Some facts between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles:

#1. There are doctrinal differences between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles.
#2. There are corruptions in Modern bibles (major blatant mistakes, the devil's name is placed in Modern bibles where they don't belong, and how some Modern bibles make Jesus appear to sin).
#3. The history of Modern bibles has dark origins whereas the KJB has more good & honorable origins.​

#1. See here for Doctrinal Differences Between the KJB vs. Modern Bibles.
Other doctrinal differences is that some Modern bibles teach that Jesus was a created second God in John 1:18 by calling Him the begotten God (instead of begotten Son), and that the Messiah in Micah 5:2 was from the distant past or ancient days instead of from everlasting (as the KJB correctly renders it). Some Modern bibles falsely teach that Jesus had faith (NIV) (CSB) (ISV) in the fact that they say He is the pioneer of our faith. Jesus is GOD and GOD cannot have faith in Himself. That's a contradiction. Our faith is to justify us before God for salvation. Jesus did not need salvation because He is salvation.

#2. For the blatant mistakes in Modern bibles:

See here to learn about how the devil tries to place his name in the Bible where it does not belong (in Modern Translations). See point #24 here for the verses on how Modern bibles make Jesus appear to sin.

#3. To check out the Dark Origins of Modern Bibles, see this documentary here:

Watch Bridge to Babylon | Prime Video

Keep in mind that this is just the tip of the iceberg of the dark origins of Modern Bibles. But again I am not saying you should not use Modern English bibles. I actually encourage you to use them, but be careful of what they say, though. To get a little more on what I am talking about, the Nestle & Aland Critical Text (used today for all Modern English bibles) is supervised (influenced) by the Vatican. You can learn about this in my post #53 within this thread.

Another King James Documentary I would recommend is this one.

Watch Kjb - The Book That Changed The World | Prime Video

The Forbidden Book:

 

[Bible Highlighter]

bad translation.

the actual text:

View attachment 25798

Your source is taken from the corrupt Alexandrian texts, and you are also assuming you know the original languages or that recent scholars know these words perfectly when neither you or them had grown up during Bible times to truly know these language fluently. The only way we can know we have the Bible today is by faith in that God preserved His words just as He said (Psalms 12:6-7).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

**AHEM**

your article confirms exactly what i said:

View attachment 25797




my point was about the correct pronunciation of the transliterated consonants early German translators decided on & presumed vowels early German translators added, which kjv translators later adopted ((that is, co-opted from earlier versions)). kjv carried on the German tradition of transliterated consonants, even tho those consonants are not pronounced in English as they are in German.
as your article attests -- when you read 'Jehovah' in your kjv you should pronounce it in German, not in English.

JW's can't pronounce their own cult's name, and most kjv-ians don't know how to read their kjv aloud.
LOL
how God confounds the 'wise' !!
He is Beautiful

I don’t see how the article agrees with you seeing the whole point of the article is that Jehovah should be in our Bible. It’s a KJB defending website, and the author of the website claims to know Greek and has done extensive research on the KJB vs. Modern Bible issue. He has read both sides of the issue extensively (reading hundreds of books, etcetera). In fact, he used to be against the KJB Only position and he changed based on his research. Most in Modern camp really have not done their homework. It’s obvious because they are supporting liberals in Modern scholarship and they do not even know that their Modern bibles are subtly influenced by the Vatican. Some do know and they simply don’t care.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

i.e. we are not good

He is

yes

We can allow God to do the good works through us whereby He makes us good (present tense and beyond).

 

[post]

Your source is taken from the corrupt

**ahem**

my 'source' is the exact article you linked saying i should read it.

Here is an article showing otherwise.
Jehovah and Yahweh?

you still seem to be missing the point: "Jehovah" in its textual existence in the not-Hebrew and not-Greek but Roman alphabet we use to write English in, is of early Germanic translation origin, and as such is meant to be pronounced using Germanic pronunciation.
that's a fact, which your own sources affirm -- so i have no idea why you're being antagonistic about it.

do you just not comprehend what we are talking about or do you not even read the things you link?
your article is addressing an entirely different topic than my comment.

so puzzling.
perhaps if you stopped thinking about kjv you would keep up a lil better, lol

 

[post]

I don’t see how the article agrees with you seeing the whole point of the article is that Jehovah should be in our Bible. It’s a KJB defending website

ah, then it's evident:
you are so blinded by your kjv-ian-ism, that you cannot even understand what i am saying.
you imagine i am attacking your idol, when in fact i am simply presenting the truth about how to pronounce a German word.
much like how in the other thread, that because i said i have put all my trust in God, you couldn't understand it and joined with others immediately accusing me of loving sin and refusing to obey.

i see.

no point in talking any more then.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

wanna talk about Eostare next?

know where that word first appears historically?
are you knowledgeable about its etymology?

=]

or maybe "farthing" ??
have you ever looked into the actual going price for two sparrows?

or should we just magnify Christ, instead of ourselves, and instead of translations?
maybe quit "arguing over words" and glorify God, which is our purpose in existing?

see where i'm going with this?

I am not against using Modern Translations to update the archaic words in the KJB. But archaic words does not mean that those words are inaccurate unless one is looking to find problems where there is none. You can see problems where none really exists. You can just point to a dictionary for a definition say, “See. Ah ha. I told you. I was right.”

Check out this article here:

Another King James Bible Believer

But words being defined by one dictionary or even another do not always determine truth. Words that are archaic may not always have that perfect definition, either. But if this is your only case against the KJB, then you are not looking at things from a balanced unbiased perspective here. You have to look at all of the evidence for both sides of the issue. Right now you are only favoring Modern Bibles (Which caters you changing the Bible or other scholars changing the Bible to what they want it to say).

 

[Bible Highlighter]

**ahem**

my 'source' is the exact article you linked saying i should read it.




you still seem to be missing the point: "Jehovah" in its textual existence in the not-Hebrew and not-Greek but Roman alphabet we use to write English in, is of early Germanic translation origin, and as such is meant to be pronounced using Germanic pronunciation.
that's a fact, which your own sources affirm -- so i have no idea why you're being antagonistic about it.

do you just not comprehend what we are talking about or do you not even read the things you link?
your article is addressing an entirely different topic than my comment.

so puzzling.
perhaps if you stopped thinking about kjv you would keep up a lil better, lol

View attachment 25805

I am pretty sure that guy who wrote the article is not agreeing with you. Talk to him about it if you think he agrees with you. I am not a linguistic expert and neither are you. I believe God preserved His words today by faith and there are MANY evidences for the King James Bible being the preserved Word of God for today.

I came up with 101 reasons why a person should make the KJB their final Word of authority today vs. Modern Bibles. For if you don’t have a perfect Bible you can hold in your hands then how do you determine what words of God are true or false? Do you become the judge over God’s Word?

In either case, Brandplucked (Will Kinney) has an even better article (with resources like a video and another article link) on the topic.

Another King James Bible Believer