Discussion:
So many sinner Xtian denominations, why??
Add Reply
Michael Christ
2020-09-12 12:06:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.


Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.

The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.

Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??



Michael Christ


"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
Ted
2020-09-12 13:03:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person.
After a
Post by Michael Christ
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda
denominations
Post by Michael Christ
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed
anointed
Post by Michael Christ
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
What's the one word? Lemme guess.
StupidmotherfuckinglyingchristerassholeMX. How close am I?
Pat Barker+
2020-09-12 13:45:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person.
After a
Post by Michael Christ
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of
the
Post by Michael Christ
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda
denominations
Post by Michael Christ
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!!
Why
Post by Michael Christ
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and
attempt
Post by Michael Christ
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they
are and
Post by Michael Christ
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed
anointed
Post by Michael Christ
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
What's the one word? Lemme guess.
StupidmotherfuckinglyingchristerassholeMX. How close am I?
DING DING DING.....
I think we have a winner.
Ted
2020-09-12 13:58:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 09:45:33 -0400, Pat Barker+
Post by Pat Barker+
Post by Ted
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person.
After a
Post by Michael Christ
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it,
crystal
Post by Pat Barker+
Post by Ted
Post by Michael Christ
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of
the
Post by Michael Christ
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda
denominations
Post by Michael Christ
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the
core??!!
Post by Pat Barker+
Post by Ted
Why
Post by Michael Christ
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and
attempt
Post by Michael Christ
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they
are and
Post by Michael Christ
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed
anointed
Post by Michael Christ
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
What's the one word? Lemme guess.
StupidmotherfuckinglyingchristerassholeMX. How close am I?
DING DING DING.....
I think we have a winner.
LOL.
Michael Christ
2020-09-12 18:05:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person.
After a
Post by Michael Christ
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear.  Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of
the
Post by Michael Christ
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda
denominations
Post by Michael Christ
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!!
Why
Post by Michael Christ
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and
attempt
Post by Michael Christ
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong.  Just one word shows them for what they
are and
Post by Michael Christ
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why?  Surely among so many esteemed
anointed
Post by Michael Christ
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
What's the one word? Lemme guess.
StupidmotherfuckinglyingchristerassholeMX. How close am I?
Right on target with your state of mind.




Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
Pat Barker+
2020-09-13 14:38:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Christ
Right on target with your state of mind.
Why are you trolling a Catholic newsgroup?
No one wants you here.
You have no respect from anyone.
And you should just leave.
Pat Barker+
2020-09-12 13:45:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Well, the Lord told me today.......
Shaddup, liar.
Miloch
2020-09-12 14:51:37 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Next time ya have a convo with the Almighty....cudja ask him about this covid-19
thingy...and why he unleashed it?

...and while you're at it, ask why he made the shit stains in my Fruit of the
Looms so hard to get out!


*
Post by Michael Christ
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".
"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".
"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".
"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
JWS
2020-09-12 15:02:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Miloch
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Next time ya have a convo with the Almighty....cudja ask him about this covid-19
thingy...and why he unleashed it?
...and while you're at it, ask why he made the shit stains in my Fruit of the
Looms so hard to get out!
*
Post by Michael Christ
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
That's the Ring of Jesus Fire!
Michael Christ
2020-09-12 19:06:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Miloch
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Next time ya have a convo with the Almighty....cudja ask him about this covid-19
thingy...and why he unleashed it?
...and while you're at it, ask why he made the shit stains in my Fruit of the
Looms so hard to get out!
There has been lots of Covid type stuff throughout history (we turned
out back on God) and your problem could be dealt with, with toilet paper.

No charge.




Michael Christ
Post by Miloch
*
Post by Michael Christ
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
Michael Christ
"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".
"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".
"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".
"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
John Locke
2020-09-12 15:46:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
So many sinner Xtian denominations, why??
..that's really simple. Profit and control. Nearly everyone wants in
on the racket. "Sin" is the phony element used to grease the scam and
keep the gullible living in fear of hell and coughing up dollars !


---------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I
absented myself from Christian assemblies." - Ben Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Christ
2020-09-12 18:44:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
So many sinner Xtian denominations, why??
...that's really simple. Profit and control. Nearly everyone wants in
on the racket. "Sin" is the phony element used to grease the scam and
keep the gullible living in fear of hell and coughing up dollars !
Why do they fail?

Zuckerburg didn't, why do they?

Xtian denominations dance before the world, desire to be seen of men,
are seen of men.

I mean if they truly represented the God that created everything, how
could they not be a 1,000,000,000,000 times greater, more successful
than Zuckerburg?? Facebook like being the equivalent of just one page
of what they are in the earth, if you know what I mean. You know, like
King Solomon at his peak! Rather more than that though.

Why do they fail to be what they say they are and fail to do all what
they claim they are??






Michael Christ
Post by Ted
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"I have found Christian dogma unintelligible. Early in life I
absented myself from Christian assemblies." - Ben Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-14 11:30:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16)

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Post by Michael Christ
Michael Christ
"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".
"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".
"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".
"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".
servant
2020-09-14 14:22:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.

When Philop read scriptre to the ethiopian who finally came to accept the
God man Christ and was baptised, it was *only* the OT.

The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we know it was not settled as to its content for some 4
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.

The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.

The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.

As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.

Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".

The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
Michael Christ
2020-09-14 22:26:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Friend Servant, stop serving yourself. Leave my Subject title alone.

If you can't even show me that consideration, all your religion talk is
a complete waste of your time.

The Lord particularly focuses on where the rubber meets the road.





Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
Yap Honghor
2020-09-15 09:18:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Christ
Friend Servant, stop serving yourself. Leave my Subject title alone.
If you can't even show me that consideration, all your religion talk is
a complete waste of your time.
The Lord particularly focuses on where the rubber meets the road.
Which Lord from the House of Lords you are referring to??????
Michael Christ
2020-09-15 10:54:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Even an atheist has more to offer than you.

You stinking self-righteous freak!




Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
servant
2020-09-15 13:32:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Oh michael, you are such a card. What exectly in the below to which you
reply got your knickers in a twist?
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.

When Philop read scriptre to the ethiopian who finally came to accept the
God man Christ and was baptised, it was *only* the OT.

The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we know it was not settled as to its content for some 4
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.

The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.

The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.

As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.

Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
Michael Christ
2020-09-15 18:22:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Go and condescendingly waffle to your own ilk, thanks.





Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-15 11:58:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.
Show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ". I've never seen
it.
Post by servant
When Philop read scriptre to the ethiopian who finally came to accept the
God man Christ and was baptised, it was *only* the OT.
Again no proof for Jesus as a "God man Christ". SEE FOR YOURSELF. Acts
8:32,33,

"32. Now the passage of the scripture which he was reading was this:
"As a sheep led to the slaughter or a lamb before its shearer is dumb,
so he opens not his mouth.
33. In his humiliation justice was denied him. Who can describe his
generation? For his life is taken up from the earth."

No God-man here. Acts 8:35,

"Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this scripture he
told him the good news of Jesus."

No God-man here either. You must be making this up.
Post by servant
The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we know it was not settled as to its content for some 4
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.
Negative. The NT fairly close to ours today, was practiced by 2nd
century Christians according to the Muratorian Fragment.
Post by servant
The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.
See Muratorian Fragment above.
Post by servant
The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.
Then you missed this one:

-- Revised Standard
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for
teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in
righteousness,
Post by servant
As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.
I am not familiar with that quote. Fill me in.
Post by servant
Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
So be it. That is why there are so many Bible versions.
Post by servant
The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
???

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-15 12:14:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
???
i have a question for you;


who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-16 11:52:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
Well, let's see:

-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.

It was Jehovah God.

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-16 12:02:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/

Colossians 1:15-17 John 1:2-3 Isaiah 45:12
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-17 22:47:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)

John 1:2-3

-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.

Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.

Isaiah 45:12

"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."

Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.


James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-18 02:27:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-19 10:25:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
Angels representing Jehovah. Luke tells us this at:

-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-19 13:45:45 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and, of course, "Jesus" is uncreated inasmuch as All things that were
created
by and with and for and through and because of Jesus and no thing was
created
that was not created by through and for Jesus.

and check this out very carefully;

==
1 John 1

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the
Word of life— the
life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to
you that
eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that
which we have seen
and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us;
and truly our
fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. ...
==

John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
Exodus says that God speaks directly to Moses.

===
Exodus 6

Then YHWH said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh.
For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will
drive them out of his land.”

2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am YHWH.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty,
but by My name YHWH I was not known to them.
===

Exodus says line of communication goes God---Moses----people


===
Exodus 7

7 So YHWH said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==

see, in this part, Moses plays God and Aaron plays prophet,
and Moses speaks directly to Aaron

line of communication is God---Moses---people

bible does not show;

YHWH God-----angel-----Moses-----people

===
Acts 7

31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to
observe,
the voice of YHWH came to him, 32 saying, ‘I am the God of your fathers—
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’
===

see, dear Luke shows Stephen saying that the "voice of YHWH" came from
the bush.
otherwise, you have some angel claiming to be...YHWH which is a deception.


Mark 12:26 Luke 20:37 <== here YHWH spoke to Moses.


both the greek and hebrew words for 'angel'
are also used as "messenger" when referring
to human beings.


==
Genesis 32:3

Then Jacob sent Messenger before him to Esau
his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.
=
Numbers 20:14

Now Moses sent Messengers from Kadesh
to the king of Edom. “Thus says your brother Israel:
‘You know all the hardship that has befallen us,
=
Matthew 11:10

For this is he of whom it is written:
‘Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.’
==

John the baptizer is called an "angelos"
and all the OT messengers are called "mawlak"
just like the "Angel of YHWH" same word...

now, the Law was "ordained" by the Aaronic Priesthood
and so, Stephen is also saying that the law was
"transmitted" to the people through
the Aaronic Priesthood.

The levites were the 'go-between'
mediating the original covenant
and they originally transmitted
the law to the people.

even originally Aaron became -Moses- "spokeman"
and was as Prophet for Moses playing "God"

==
Exodus 7

7 So the Lord said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==

at any rate, if you look in to it

Aaron's sons were set up as the Priesthood
who ministered to God for the people, and
as such -they- are the 'angels' transmitting
the law to Israel.


===
Leviticus 10

8 Then the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying: 9 “Do not drink wine or
intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into
the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute
forever throughout your generations, 10 that you may distinguish
between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean,

11 and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes
which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses.”
===


see, it is the Aaronic priesthood which is the "messengers"
of the covenant and as such "angels"

and so, Acts 7:53 becomes;

==
Acts 7

53 who have received the law by the direction
of messengers and have not kept it.”
==


etc..

not at all that spirit Angels stand in for YHWH
in speaking and delivering the Law to Moses et al.



so, that's basically a problem;

1. Word who became Jesus is not a Created being
because every Created thing was created by
through and for Word-Jesus

2. bible says that God spoke directly to Moses and
you insert a middle man that only -calls- itself
YHWH but is not.

you should be able to see why many would simply
cut out the middle man and say that Jesus is YHWH.

===
Hebrews 1

God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past
to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken
to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through
whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His
glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things
by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins,
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become
so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance
obtained a more excellent name than they.
====

see, God spoke to the fathers through...prophets
Son -not- an 'angel'

etc.

it's much easier to say Jesus is Creator,
and eternal intercessor
as that is how he is described...

maybe the Light of this truth will get brighter and brighter
and you arian people will eventually dispose of the 'buffer god'

cuz, you basically say that YHWH is -not- God...

you say that the being who calls itself YHWH

is an impersonator who is -not- /really/ God

and -i- don't do that.

enjoy your day...
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-20 12:54:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and, of course, "Jesus" is uncreated inasmuch as All things that were
created
by and with and for and through and because of Jesus and no thing was
created
that was not created by through and for Jesus.
Yes, God did the creating (Gen 1:1) but Jesus helped in some unnamed
way: Ps 89:11,12,

11. The heavens are thine, the earth also is thine; the world and all
that is in it, thou hast founded them.
12. The north and the south, thou hast created them; Tabor and
Hermon joyously praise thy name.
Post by z***@windstream.net
and check this out very carefully;
==
1 John 1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the
Word of life— the
life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to
you that
eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that
which we have seen
and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us;
and truly our
fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. ...
==
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
But not always was. God always existed. Jesus did not:

-- Revised Standard
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born
of all creation;

Jesus probably is billions or trillions of year old and will live
eternally. But Jesus had a beginning:

-- Revised Standard
Revelation 3:14 "And to the angel of the church in La-odicea write:
'The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning
of God's creation.'"
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
Exodus says that God speaks directly to Moses.
===
Exodus 6
Then YHWH said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh.
For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will
drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am YHWH.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty,
but by My name YHWH I was not known to them.
===
Exodus says line of communication goes God---Moses----people
===
Exodus 7
7 So YHWH said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
see, in this part, Moses plays God and Aaron plays prophet,
and Moses speaks directly to Aaron
line of communication is God---Moses---people
bible does not show;
YHWH God-----angel-----Moses-----people
===
Acts 7
31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to
observe,
the voice of YHWH came to him, 32 saying, ‘I am the God of your fathers—
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’
===
see, dear Luke shows Stephen saying that the "voice of YHWH" came from
the bush.
otherwise, you have some angel claiming to be...YHWH which is a deception.
Mark 12:26 Luke 20:37 <== here YHWH spoke to Moses.
both the greek and hebrew words for 'angel'
are also used as "messenger" when referring
to human beings.
==
Genesis 32:3
Then Jacob sent Messenger before him to Esau
his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.
=
Numbers 20:14
Now Moses sent Messengers from Kadesh
‘You know all the hardship that has befallen us,
=
Matthew 11:10
‘Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.’
==
John the baptizer is called an "angelos"
and all the OT messengers are called "mawlak"
just like the "Angel of YHWH" same word...
now, the Law was "ordained" by the Aaronic Priesthood
and so, Stephen is also saying that the law was
"transmitted" to the people through
the Aaronic Priesthood.
The levites were the 'go-between'
mediating the original covenant
and they originally transmitted
the law to the people.
even originally Aaron became -Moses- "spokeman"
and was as Prophet for Moses playing "God"
==
Exodus 7
7 So the Lord said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
at any rate, if you look in to it
Aaron's sons were set up as the Priesthood
who ministered to God for the people, and
as such -they- are the 'angels' transmitting
the law to Israel.
===
Leviticus 10
8 Then the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying: 9 “Do not drink wine or
intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into
the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute
forever throughout your generations, 10 that you may distinguish
between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean,
11 and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes
which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses.”
===
see, it is the Aaronic priesthood which is the "messengers"
of the covenant and as such "angels"
and so, Acts 7:53 becomes;
==
Acts 7
53 who have received the law by the direction
of messengers and have not kept it.”
==
etc..
not at all that spirit Angels stand in for YHWH
in speaking and delivering the Law to Moses et al.
so, that's basically a problem;
There are times when angels were sent by Jehovah God to do various.
things.

Yes, many of your above Scriptures says God spoke directly to people.
And He did. But Luke tells us that the Laws of Moses were DELIVERED by
angels. Many translations agree with that:

-- Living Bible
Acts 7:53 Yes, and you deliberately destroyed God's Laws, though you
received them from the hands of angels.''

-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."

-- International English
Acts 7:53 You are the people who received the law , the commands
which God gave through the angels--but you don't obey the law!''

-- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 In spite of being given the Law through angels, you have not
kept it."

-- New American with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 You received the law as transmitted by angels, but you did
not observe it."

-- Young's Bible
Acts 7:53 who received the law by arrangement of messengers, and did
not keep [it].'

-- New Living Translation
Acts 7:53 You deliberately disobeyed God's law, though you received
it from the hands of angels.* "

-- William's NewTestament
Acts 7:53 you who received the law by order of the angels, and yet
you did not obey it!"

I am sure I could find a lot more translations saying that at
biblegateway.com

So in summary, God did literally talk to many people. But Luke tells
us he let the angels spoke for him concerning the Mosaic Laws.
Post by z***@windstream.net
1. Word who became Jesus is not a Created being
because every Created thing was created by
through and for Word-Jesus
God always did the creating but THROUGH Jesus. The Bible doesn't say
how that was accomplished. Just that it was done that way.
Post by z***@windstream.net
2. bible says that God spoke directly to Moses and
you insert a middle man that only -calls- itself
YHWH but is not.
Hey, I don't say that. Luke by means of the Holy Spirit says that.
Post by z***@windstream.net
you should be able to see why many would simply
cut out the middle man and say that Jesus is YHWH.
Jesus NEVER said that. He called himself "God's Son", never 'God' or
the 'Father'.
Post by z***@windstream.net
===
Hebrews 1
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past
to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken
to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through
whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His
glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things
by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins,
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become
so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance
obtained a more excellent name than they.
====
Yes, God THROUGH Jesus make him heir of all things.
Post by z***@windstream.net
see, God spoke to the fathers through...prophets
Son -not- an 'angel'
etc.
Tell that to the disciple Luke.
Post by z***@windstream.net
it's much easier to say Jesus is Creator,
and eternal intercessor
as that is how he is described...
Jesus was not a co-creator since God did all the creating, but did it
THROUGH Jesus:

-- King James
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

American Standard
Psalms 33:6 By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, And all the
host of them by the breath of his mouth.

Even Jesus himself said God did the actual creating: Mt 19:4-6,

"4. He answered, "Have you not read that he who made them from the
beginning made them male and female,
5. and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and
mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
6. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has
joined together, let not man put asunder."" (RSV)
Post by z***@windstream.net
maybe the Light of this truth will get brighter and brighter
and you arian people will eventually dispose of the 'buffer god'
Our spiritual light is getting brighter and brighter until the full
day. And that brings us even closer to Jehovah our loving God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
cuz, you basically say that YHWH is -not- God...
Where did you hear that nonsense?
Post by z***@windstream.net
you say that the being who calls itself YHWH
is an impersonator who is -not- /really/ God
and -i- don't do that.
Neither do I. Someone likes to fantasize.
Post by z***@windstream.net
enjoy your day...
You also.

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Pat Barker+
2020-09-20 14:03:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 08:54:36 -0400, ***@windstream.net wrote:
\
Post by Timothy Sutter
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
You do not understand the Trinity.
But again, only someone as smart as God might understand.
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-21 09:51:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 10:03:29 -0400, Pat Barker+
Post by Pat Barker+
\
Post by Timothy Sutter
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
You do not understand the Trinity.
I understand it enough to know that the 4th century Trinity doctrine
is NOT a Bible doctrine, but a doctrine of 4th century uninspired men.
Post by Pat Barker+
But again, only someone as smart as God might understand.
Pat Barker+
2020-09-21 12:35:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 10:03:29 -0400, Pat Barker+
Post by Pat Barker+
\
Post by Timothy Sutter
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
You do not understand the Trinity.
I understand it enough to know that the 4th century Trinity doctrine
is NOT a Bible doctrine, but a doctrine of 4th century uninspired men.
Post by Pat Barker+
But again, only someone as smart as God might understand.
Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in
heaven and on earth has been given to me. Matthew 28:19 Therefore go
and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

What did you change your personal bible to read?
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-22 12:44:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 08:35:18 -0400, Pat Barker+
Post by Pat Barker+
Post by z***@windstream.net
On Sun, 20 Sep 2020 10:03:29 -0400, Pat Barker+
Post by Pat Barker+
\
Post by Timothy Sutter
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
You do not understand the Trinity.
I understand it enough to know that the 4th century Trinity doctrine
is NOT a Bible doctrine, but a doctrine of 4th century uninspired men.
Post by Pat Barker+
But again, only someone as smart as God might understand.
Matthew 28:18 Then Jesus came to them and said, "All authority in
heaven and on earth has been given to me. Matthew 28:19 Therefore go
and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
What did you change your personal bible to read?
(Matthew 28:18) Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: “All
authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." (NWT)

The wording is a little different. But the thought is the same.

(Matthew 28:19) "Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all
the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son
and of the holy spirit," (NWT)

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-20 14:35:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and, of course, "Jesus" is uncreated inasmuch as All things that were
created
by and with and for and through and because of Jesus and no thing was
created
that was not created by through and for Jesus.
Yes, God did the creating (Gen 1:1) but Jesus helped in some unnamed
way: Ps 89:11,12,
11. The heavens are thine, the earth also is thine; the world and all
that is in it, thou hast founded them.
12. The north and the south, thou hast created them; Tabor and
Hermon joyously praise thy name.
it's not unnamed, John and Paul all point directly at Jesus.


your response; and this speaks of a "Word"
who became flesh and dwellt among men
// John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him
// nothing was made that was made.

also Collossians 1:15-17, here is that quote; speaking of Jesus
===
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on
earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is
before all things, and in Him all things consist.
===

this names Jesus/Word as the Creator of all things

also, see here, now, in Hebrews, the speaker is talking
directly about this "Son" and here is what he says;

===Hebrews 1
8 But to the Son He says:
<...> AND
“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
11 They will perish, but You remain;
And they will all grow old like a garment;
12 Like a cloak You will fold them up,
And they will be changed.
But You are the same,
And Your years will not fail.”
=
===
Psalm 102:25

Of old You laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
===

this person identifies 'Son" as Creator, with no ambiguity.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and check this out very carefully;
==
1 John 1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the
Word of life— the
life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to
you that
eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that
which we have seen
and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us;
and truly our
fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. ...
==
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
-- Revised Standard
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born
of all creation;
this does not say that Word/Jesus/Son is created,
this speaks directly to his being the first born
from -the dead- as we see in verse 18;

note carefully;
==
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning,
the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
==

if you make this -not- God, then you give
a lesser creation =preeminence= in ALL things

consider this;


noting Hebrews 2:5-9 which echoes Psalms 8
we consider that God is intending to place
all things in Man's hands, for God has not put
the 'world to come' in 'subjection to Angels'
but in subjection to humanity.

ok, so, now, we see that the 'new world'
is a place subject to Humanity ...

and this 'humanity' is eventually the
'Glorified Spirit Bodies" the ones who
have clothed corruption in immortallity...

so?

well, i'm getting to this point;

==
Colossians 1:18

And He is the head of the body, the church,
who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
that in all things He may have the preeminence.
==

it's quite clear that it is =GOD= who

not only intends for the 'new world' to be subject to humanity

but, who partook in humanity

became a human being, died, and was the very FIRST
to be resurrected and transformed to Glorified Spirit Body,
and so, maintains the Pre-eminence in this world to come
which is subject to mankind.

if Jesus were any other type of being,
such as an angel or some lesser god

then, GOD would not maintain the Pre-eminence
in the world to come which is subject to humanity.

this is not a denigration of GOD

but an elevation of Mankind...

so you see, Jesus can -not- be an Archangel

or otherwise, this Archangel would be pre-eminent
in all things in the world to come which
is subject to Mankind.

no, Jesus -must- be the being that is/was
-already- Preeminent in all things -before-
God moves to place all things under
the feet of mankind.

the focused Image of Almighty God

and speaking of 'firstborn from the dead'

==
Romans 1:3-5

3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of
David
according to the flesh, 4 and declared to be the Son of God with power
according
to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. 5 Through
Him we
have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith
among all nations for His name,
==

see, you are confusing Jesus the Word made flesh
and dwelling among men, who is crucified and resurrected
with the Word who lived in Abraham's day as it is the
flesh who dwellt among men, who is firstborn from the Dead.

none of this says that Word is a created being.

Yes, the flesh born seed of David is part of this creation

but the pre-existing Word -is- Creator,as we see that -nothing-
that is created is not created by and through and for Word,
including invisible powers and principalities.


and so, question;

Michael is described as a "Prince" of Israel by Daniel.

would you say that Michael is a "Principality"?

if so, then he is created by Jesus/Word.

anyway, "firstborn from the dead"
and forstborn over all creation
and firstborn of creation

does speak to his flesh existance but does not make
the Creator of all things who existed before
all created things, a creation.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Jesus probably is billions or trillions of year old and will live
-- Revised Standard
'The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning
of God's creation.'"
and the only "True Witness" can be, that which did the actual creating.

i already put that bit about 'Son" from hebrews

as how =all= angels are to bow down to Son and so,
Son can not be an 'angel' and, to Son is attributed
all creation.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
Exodus says that God speaks directly to Moses.
===
Exodus 6
Then YHWH said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh.
For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand he will
drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am YHWH.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty,
but by My name YHWH I was not known to them.
===
Exodus says line of communication goes God---Moses----people
===
Exodus 7
7 So YHWH said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
see, in this part, Moses plays God and Aaron plays prophet,
and Moses speaks directly to Aaron
line of communication is God---Moses---people
bible does not show;
YHWH God-----angel-----Moses-----people
===
Acts 7
31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to
observe,
the voice of YHWH came to him, 32 saying, ‘I am the God of your fathers—
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’
===
see, dear Luke shows Stephen saying that the "voice of YHWH" came from
the bush.
otherwise, you have some angel claiming to be...YHWH which is a deception.
Mark 12:26 Luke 20:37 <== here YHWH spoke to Moses.
both the greek and hebrew words for 'angel'
are also used as "messenger" when referring
to human beings.
==
Genesis 32:3
Then Jacob sent Messenger before him to Esau
his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.
=
Numbers 20:14
Now Moses sent Messengers from Kadesh
‘You know all the hardship that has befallen us,
=
Matthew 11:10
‘Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.’
==
John the baptizer is called an "angelos"
and all the OT messengers are called "mawlak"
just like the "Angel of YHWH" same word...
now, the Law was "ordained" by the Aaronic Priesthood
and so, Stephen is also saying that the law was
"transmitted" to the people through
the Aaronic Priesthood.
The levites were the 'go-between'
mediating the original covenant
and they originally transmitted
the law to the people.
even originally Aaron became -Moses- "spokeman"
and was as Prophet for Moses playing "God"
==
Exodus 7
7 So the Lord said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
at any rate, if you look in to it
Aaron's sons were set up as the Priesthood
who ministered to God for the people, and
as such -they- are the 'angels' transmitting
the law to Israel.
===
Leviticus 10
8 Then the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying: 9 “Do not drink wine or
intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into
the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute
forever throughout your generations, 10 that you may distinguish
between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean,
11 and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes
which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses.”
===
see, it is the Aaronic priesthood which is the "messengers"
of the covenant and as such "angels"
and so, Acts 7:53 becomes;
==
Acts 7
53 who have received the law by the direction
of messengers and have not kept it.”
==
etc..
not at all that spirit Angels stand in for YHWH
in speaking and delivering the Law to Moses et al.
so, that's basically a problem;
There are times when angels were sent by Jehovah God to do various.
things.
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says God spoke directly to people.
And He did. But Luke tells us that the Laws of Moses were DELIVERED by
and John the baptist is called an 'angel' same word,
they just translate it as "messenger" for him, but
as is staring right above, the levites were the angels of the Law.

who delivered the law to the people? the levites

very much as Aaron stood as Moses' 'prophet'

God spoke to Moses, and Moses spoke to Aaron.

aaronspoke to pharoah and also was charged
with delivering the law to the people.
Post by z***@windstream.net
-- Living Bible
Acts 7:53 Yes, and you deliberately destroyed God's Laws, though you
received them from the hands of angels.''
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
-- International English
Acts 7:53 You are the people who received the law , the commands
which God gave through the angels--but you don't obey the law!''
-- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 In spite of being given the Law through angels, you have not
kept it."
-- New American with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 You received the law as transmitted by angels, but you did
not observe it."
-- Young's Bible
Acts 7:53 who received the law by arrangement of messengers, and did
not keep [it].'
-- New Living Translation
Acts 7:53 You deliberately disobeyed God's law, though you received
it from the hands of angels.* "
-- William's NewTestament
Acts 7:53 you who received the law by order of the angels, and yet
you did not obey it!"
I am sure I could find a lot more translations saying that at
biblegateway.com
So in summary, God did literally talk to many people. But Luke tells
us he let the angels spoke for him concerning the Mosaic Laws.
and those angels were levite sons of Aaron who transmitted the law to
the people
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
1. Word who became Jesus is not a Created being
because every Created thing was created by
through and for Word-Jesus
God always did the creating but THROUGH Jesus. The Bible doesn't say
how that was accomplished. Just that it was done that way.
too bad it is described that 1. Word/Son existed before all created things
is responsible for all created things, and, as such,
is excluded from the set of created things.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
2. bible says that God spoke directly to Moses and
you insert a middle man that only -calls- itself
YHWH but is not.
Hey, I don't say that. Luke by means of the Holy Spirit says that.
Stephen is quoted by Luke as having said that 'messengers' also
called 'angels' transmitted the law to the people and those who
transmitted the law were levite sons of Aaron.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
you should be able to see why many would simply
cut out the middle man and say that Jesus is YHWH.
Jesus NEVER said that. He called himself "God's Son", never 'God' or
the 'Father'.
but he -did- say that he appeared to Abraham and that Abraham saw his day

Jesus said that Abraham -saw- him.

==
John 8

56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day,
and he saw it and was glad.” 57 Then the Jews said to Him,
“You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you,
before Abraham was, I AM.”
==

and whom did Abraham see?

==
Genesis 17
17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, YHWH appeared to Abram
and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless.
==
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
===
Hebrews 1
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past
to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken
to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through
whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His
glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things
by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins,
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become
so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance
obtained a more excellent name than they.
====
Yes, God THROUGH Jesus make him heir of all things.
as shown above, God makes =Man= an heir to all things
of God through Jesus' work, life death and resurrection,
but in so doing, still manages to keep the =pre-eminence-
inasmuch as God took part in the flesh and blood of man.

God did not seek to make an "Angel/Human" hybrid
nor to do a special work -for- 'angels'
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
see, God spoke to the fathers through...prophets
Son -not- an 'angel'
etc.
Tell that to the disciple Luke.
well, let's look at who Luke attrutes the handling of the Law;

===
Luke 5 [New World Translation]

17 On one of those days while he was teaching,
Pharisees and teachers of the Law who had come
out of every village of Galʹi·lee and Ju·deʹa
and from Jerusalem were sitting there;
and Jehovah’s power was with him to do healing.
===

here, you can see quite clearly that the "teachers of the Law"
were human beings just like the Pharisees and Jesus.

Luke calls it the "law of Moses" here ; Luke 2:22
and calls it the law of 'The Lord' here; Luke 2:24

but he never calls it a 'law of angels' anywhere

and this is moot inasmuch as you have already
seen that YHWH does, in fact, talk directly with people.

and Jesus says that -he- interacted with Abraham.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
it's much easier to say Jesus is Creator,
and eternal intercessor
as that is how he is described...
Jesus was not a co-creator since God did all the creating, but did it
-- King James
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
we certainly see that God created these things, and then, we also
see that Word/Son exists before all things and takes a hand in the
creation of all things both seen and unsee, so, maybe you are
sayingthat Jesus/Son/Word is God's hands and God
creates -through- God's hands.
Post by z***@windstream.net
American Standard
Psalms 33:6 By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, And all the
host of them by the breath of his mouth.
and Jesus -is- this 'word' or this 'word' made flesh

having come forth from God and return to God...

John 8:42 John 16:27 John 17:5
Post by z***@windstream.net
Even Jesus himself said God did the actual creating: Mt 19:4-6,
"4. He answered, "Have you not read that he who made them from the
beginning made them male and female,
5. and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and
mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
6. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has
joined together, let not man put asunder."" (RSV)
what's sort of funny, is that, here is Jesus ,

[who, evidently _was_ "He who made them"
after all, nothing was made that was not made by him]

here is Jesus , who, evidently _was_ "He who made them"

speaking of "he who made them" as if that maker were someone else...

sort of like speaking of himself in the third person

sort of like me saying;

"the person who wrote this post
believes Jesus is The Christ"

it seems like i'm talking about some other person, but, i'm not.

so, we see that Jesus has a habit of speaking
about himself in the third person, whch should not
be taken to suggest that when Jesus speaks about "God"
as another person, that he is not speaking about himself.

cuz that is exactly what he does above;

"he who made them" is "_ME_ Jesus" "I am He"

and here he is again;

==
Mark 10:6

But from the beginning of the creation,
God ‘made them male and female.’
==

this time he makes is very clear, "he who made them" is "God"

but, we already know that nothing was made

that was not made by The Word, namely Jesus...

The Word who became flesh and dwellt among men.

==
John 13:3

Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands,
and that He had come from God and was going to God,
==

and 13:3 only serves to emphasize that Jesus serves two purposes here
as God has already made clear the intention to bestow all things upon him;


""“What is MAN?
[you] have set him over the works of Your hands.
You have put all things in subjection under his feet.”""


==
John 8:42

Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me,
for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself,
but He sent Me.
==

Jesus could have said;

"I am God and I came forth into Man to taste death for all
and to elevate Man into a proper house for God"

but dear olde Jesus prefers speaking in third person

even when he is speaking in the first person as above...
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
maybe the Light of this truth will get brighter and brighter
and you arian people will eventually dispose of the 'buffer god'
Our spiritual light is getting brighter and brighter until the full
day. And that brings us even closer to Jehovah our loving God.
when you see Jesus standing there, your joy will be complete.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
cuz, you basically say that YHWH is -not- God...
Where did you hear that nonsense?
before, you said that it was 'angels' who spoke to people,
and that God never spoke to anyone. now you say that God did
speak to people, but Jesus said this;

in times past, someone called Jesus/Word...'spokeman'

==
John 5:37
And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me.
You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
==

now, we have people hearing the Voice of YHWH
but, somehow, never hearing teh voice of "Father"

now, you can say that he is only referring to those
in his presence at that time, but, he says it again elseware;

==
John 1:18
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,
who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
==

and above, you say this;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says
God spoke directly to people. And He did.
one conclusion, is, that God Almighy, with whom people interacted
in times past in various ways was appearing -as- this 'Word/Son/image
named YHWH and this "father" -is- Christ's head and mind
which nothing nor anyone -can- 'see'.

etc.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
you say that the being who calls itself YHWH
is an impersonator who is -not- /really/ God
and -i- don't do that.
Neither do I. Someone likes to fantasize.
but you did say that Moses only interacted with 'angels'

i asked;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
and you said;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Angels representing Jehovah.
but now you are saying;

you say;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says
God spoke directly to people. And He did.
if you say that Moses was only interacting
with 'angels' and those 'angels' -say-

"i am the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob...YHWH"

then, you are telling me that 'angels' are
impersonating YHWH and this is deception.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
enjoy your day...
You also.
i will
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-21 21:50:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
and, of course, "Jesus" is uncreated inasmuch as All things that were
created
by and with and for and through and because of Jesus and no thing was
created
that was not created by through and for Jesus.
Yes, God did the creating (Gen 1:1) but Jesus helped in some unnamed
way: Ps 89:11,12,
11. The heavens are thine, the earth also is thine; the world and all
that is in it, thou hast founded them.
12. The north and the south, thou hast created them; Tabor and
Hermon joyously praise thy name.
it's not unnamed, John and Paul all point directly at Jesus.
Yes, Jesus assisted God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
your response; and this speaks of a "Word"
who became flesh and dwellt among men
// John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him
// nothing was made that was made.
That right, when God did creating, Jesus was with Him and helped him.
Post by z***@windstream.net
also Collossians 1:15-17, here is that quote; speaking of Jesus
===
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on
earth,
visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or
powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is
before all things, and in Him all things consist.
Not all Bibles agree with that wording in vs 15. Notice:

King James
Colossians 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of every creature:

-- American Standard
Colossians 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of all creation;

-- Revised Standard
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born
of all creation;

- New American Standard
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn
of all creation.

-- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the unseen God,
the first-born of all creation,

-- New American with Apocrypha
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn of all creation.

-- New Revised Standard with Apocrypha
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of
all creation;

-- Young's Bible
Colossians 1:15 who is the image of the invisible God, first-born of
all creation,

-- Darby's Bible
Colossians 1:15 who is image of the invisible God, firstborn of all
creation;

- Weymouth's New Testament
Colossians 1:15 Christ is the visible representation of the invisible
God, the Firstborn and Lord of all creation.

-- Webster's Bible
Colossians 1:15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born
of every creature:

-- Montgomery New Testament
Colossians 1:15 He is a visible image of the invisible God, the
firstborn of all creation;
Post by z***@windstream.net
===
this names Jesus/Word as the Creator of all things
Yes he assisted God. God created all things THROUGH Jesus.
Post by z***@windstream.net
also, see here, now, in Hebrews, the speaker is talking
directly about this "Son" and here is what he says;
It is God speaking.
Post by z***@windstream.net
===Hebrews 1
<...> AND
“You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
11 They will perish, but You remain;
And they will all grow old like a garment;
12 Like a cloak You will fold them up,
And they will be changed.
But You are the same,
And Your years will not fail.”
Notice vs 9:

- Revised Standard
Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness
beyond thy comrades."

"thy God". Yes Jesus has a God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
=
===
Psalm 102:25
Of old You laid the foundation of the earth,
And the heavens are the work of Your hands.
That is speaking about God. You are confused because your Bible has
been tampered with by substituting Jehovah for Lord, who you think
means Jesus. The context shows it is talking about Jehovah:

-- American Standard
Psalms 102:15 So the nations shall fear the name of Jehovah, And all
the kings of the earth thy glory.
Post by z***@windstream.net
===
this person identifies 'Son" as Creator, with no ambiguity.
The Tetragrammaton is found in vs 15. Your Bible likely cut it out and
inserted "Lord", thus confusing you.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and check this out very carefully;
==
1 John 1
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes,
which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the
Word of life— the
life was manifested, and we have seen, and bear witness, and declare to
you that
eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested to us— that
which we have seen
and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us;
and truly our
fellowship is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. ...
==
John says that this "Word of Life" whichis manifested as Jesus,
whom they touched...is /eternal/ and not created.
-- Revised Standard
Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born
of all creation;
this does not say that Word/Jesus/Son is created,
this speaks directly to his being the first born
from -the dead- as we see in verse 18;
note carefully;
==
18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning,
the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.
==
if you make this -not- God, then you give
a lesser creation =preeminence= in ALL things
Negatrons. Notice carefully the context of vs 15. THINGS CREATED. And
Jesus is named as one of them.
Post by z***@windstream.net
consider this;
noting Hebrews 2:5-9 which echoes Psalms 8
we consider that God is intending to place
all things in Man's hands, for God has not put
the 'world to come' in 'subjection to Angels'
but in subjection to humanity.
ok, so, now, we see that the 'new world'
is a place subject to Humanity ...
and this 'humanity' is eventually the
'Glorified Spirit Bodies" the ones who
have clothed corruption in immortallity...
so?
well, i'm getting to this point;
==
Colossians 1:18
And He is the head of the body, the church,
who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
that in all things He may have the preeminence.
If Jesus is firstborn from the dead, what about the resurrection of
Lazarus? Was he not raised before Jesus? In what way is Jesus FIRST?
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
it's quite clear that it is =GOD= who
not only intends for the 'new world' to be subject to humanity
but, who partook in humanity
It doesn't say "God" partook of humanity. But God placed the new world
in subjection to humanity.
Post by z***@windstream.net
became a human being, died, and was the very FIRST
to be resurrected and transformed to Glorified Spirit Body,
and so, maintains the Pre-eminence in this world to come
which is subject to mankind.
GOD NEVER DIED. (all caps not shouting, just for emphasis)

-- Revised Standard
Psalms 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou
hadst formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting
thou art God.

It is JESUS who died. And then God resurrected him.
Post by z***@windstream.net
if Jesus were any other type of being,
such as an angel or some lesser god
then, GOD would not maintain the Pre-eminence
in the world to come which is subject to humanity.
this is not a denigration of GOD
but an elevation of Mankind...
Mankind was created a little lower than the angels. They are not
elevated.
Post by z***@windstream.net
so you see, Jesus can -not- be an Archangel
or otherwise, this Archangel would be pre-eminent
in all things in the world to come which
is subject to Mankind.
no, Jesus -must- be the being that is/was
-already- Preeminent in all things -before-
God moves to place all things under
the feet of mankind.
God will place all things under the feet of Jesus, not mankind:

-- Revised Standard
Ephesians 1:22 and he has put all things under his feet and has made
him the head over all things for the church,
Post by z***@windstream.net
the focused Image of Almighty God
and speaking of 'firstborn from the dead'
==
Romans 1:3-5
3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of
David
according to the flesh, 4 and declared to be the Son of God with power
according
to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. 5 Through
Him we
have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith
among all nations for His name,
==
see, you are confusing Jesus the Word made flesh
and dwelling among men, who is crucified and resurrected
with the Word who lived in Abraham's day as it is the
flesh who dwellt among men, who is firstborn from the Dead.
There is only one Word, Jesus. Who is this Word in Abraham's day?
Post by z***@windstream.net
none of this says that Word is a created being.
Notice:

"Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago." (Pr 8:22; NWT)

- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Proverbs 8:22 `Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning,
before the oldest of his works.- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha

-- Living Bible
Proverbs 8:22 The Lord formed me in the beginning, before he created
anything else.

-- Revised Standard
Proverbs 8:22 The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the
first of his acts of old.

CEB
The Lord created me at the beginning of his way, before his deeds long
in the past.

ERV
“The Lord made me in the beginning, long before he did anything else.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Yes, the flesh born seed of David is part of this creation
but the pre-existing Word -is- Creator,as we see that -nothing-
that is created is not created by and through and for Word,
including invisible powers and principalities.
That is not what Col 1:15 says.
Post by z***@windstream.net
and so, question;
Michael is described as a "Prince" of Israel by Daniel.
would you say that Michael is a "Principality"?
if so, then he is created by Jesus/Word.
anyway, "firstborn from the dead"
and forstborn over all creation
and firstborn of creation
does speak to his flesh existance but does not make
the Creator of all things who existed before
all created things, a creation.
Yes, no one created God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Jesus probably is billions or trillions of year old and will live
-- Revised Standard
'The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning
of God's creation.'"
and the only "True Witness" can be, that which did the actual creating.
Then what was "the beginning of God's creation."? Was it not Jesus?
Post by z***@windstream.net
i already put that bit about 'Son" from hebrews
as how =all= angels are to bow down to Son and so,
Son can not be an 'angel' and, to Son is attributed
all creation.
God did the Creating through Jesus:

-- Revised Standard
Colossians 1:16 for in him all things were created, in heaven and on
earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or
principalities or authorities--all things were created through him and
for him.

"for him", sounds like someone else was creating through Jesus, and
giving him those creations.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
Exodus says that God speaks directly to Moses.
===
Exodus 6
Then YHWH said to Moses, “Now you shall see what I will do to Pharaoh.
For with a strong hand he will let them go, and with a strong hand
he will
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
drive them out of his land.”
2 And God spoke to Moses and said to him: “I am YHWH.
3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty,
but by My name YHWH I was not known to them.
===
Exodus says line of communication goes God---Moses----people
===
Exodus 7
7 So YHWH said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
see, in this part, Moses plays God and Aaron plays prophet,
and Moses speaks directly to Aaron
line of communication is God---Moses---people
bible does not show;
YHWH God-----angel-----Moses-----people
===
Acts 7
31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at the sight; and as he drew near to
observe,
the voice of YHWH came to him, 32 saying, ‘I am the God of your fathers—
the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.’
===
see, dear Luke shows Stephen saying that the "voice of YHWH" came from
the bush.
otherwise, you have some angel claiming to be...YHWH which is a
deception.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Mark 12:26 Luke 20:37 <== here YHWH spoke to Moses.
both the greek and hebrew words for 'angel'
are also used as "messenger" when referring
to human beings.
==
Genesis 32:3
Then Jacob sent Messenger before him to Esau
his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom.
=
Numbers 20:14
Now Moses sent Messengers from Kadesh
‘You know all the hardship that has befallen us,
=
Matthew 11:10
‘Behold, I send My messenger before Your face,
Who will prepare Your way before You.’
==
John the baptizer is called an "angelos"
and all the OT messengers are called "mawlak"
just like the "Angel of YHWH" same word...
now, the Law was "ordained" by the Aaronic Priesthood
and so, Stephen is also saying that the law was
"transmitted" to the people through
the Aaronic Priesthood.
The levites were the 'go-between'
mediating the original covenant
and they originally transmitted
the law to the people.
even originally Aaron became -Moses- "spokeman"
and was as Prophet for Moses playing "God"
==
Exodus 7
7 So the Lord said to Moses: “See, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,
and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet. 2 You shall speak all
that I command you. And Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to
send the children of Israel out of his land.
==
at any rate, if you look in to it
Aaron's sons were set up as the Priesthood
who ministered to God for the people, and
as such -they- are the 'angels' transmitting
the law to Israel.
===
Leviticus 10
8 Then the Lord spoke to Aaron, saying: 9 “Do not drink wine or
intoxicating drink, you, nor your sons with you, when you go into
the tabernacle of meeting, lest you die. It shall be a statute
forever throughout your generations, 10 that you may distinguish
between holy and unholy, and between unclean and clean,
11 and that you may teach the children of Israel all the statutes
which the Lord has spoken to them by the hand of Moses.”
===
see, it is the Aaronic priesthood which is the "messengers"
of the covenant and as such "angels"
and so, Acts 7:53 becomes;
==
Acts 7
53 who have received the law by the direction
of messengers and have not kept it.”
==
etc..
not at all that spirit Angels stand in for YHWH
in speaking and delivering the Law to Moses et al.
so, that's basically a problem;
There are times when angels were sent by Jehovah God to do various.
things.
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says God spoke directly to people.
And He did. But Luke tells us that the Laws of Moses were DELIVERED by
and John the baptist is called an 'angel' same word,
they just translate it as "messenger" for him, but
as is staring right above, the levites were the angels of the Law.
who delivered the law to the people? the levites
very much as Aaron stood as Moses' 'prophet'
God spoke to Moses, and Moses spoke to Aaron.
aaronspoke to pharoah and also was charged
with delivering the law to the people.
And where did they get all that information?
From angels according to the physician Luke. Luke wasn't present then
so he had to have gotten his information from God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
-- Living Bible
Acts 7:53 Yes, and you deliberately destroyed God's Laws, though you
received them from the hands of angels.''
-- Revised Standard
Acts 7:53 you who received the law as delivered by angels and did not
keep it."
-- International English
Acts 7:53 You are the people who received the law , the commands
which God gave through the angels--but you don't obey the law!''
-- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 In spite of being given the Law through angels, you have not
kept it."
-- New American with Apocrypha
Acts 7:53 You received the law as transmitted by angels, but you did
not observe it."
-- Young's Bible
Acts 7:53 who received the law by arrangement of messengers, and did
not keep [it].'
-- New Living Translation
Acts 7:53 You deliberately disobeyed God's law, though you received
it from the hands of angels.* "
-- William's NewTestament
Acts 7:53 you who received the law by order of the angels, and yet
you did not obey it!"
I am sure I could find a lot more translations saying that at
biblegateway.com
So in summary, God did literally talk to many people. But Luke tells
us he let the angels spoke for him concerning the Mosaic Laws.
and those angels were levite sons of Aaron who transmitted the law to
the people
No, they were real bone fide angels.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
1. Word who became Jesus is not a Created being
because every Created thing was created by
through and for Word-Jesus
God always did the creating but THROUGH Jesus. The Bible doesn't say
how that was accomplished. Just that it was done that way.
too bad it is described that 1. Word/Son existed before all created things
is responsible for all created things, and, as such,
is excluded from the set of created things.
Correct. That is why Jesus is called the "only begotten Son". No other
person has that description. That means that God DIRECTLY created
Jesus, and all other creations were by God but went through Jesus.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
2. bible says that God spoke directly to Moses and
you insert a middle man that only -calls- itself
YHWH but is not.
Hey, I don't say that. Luke by means of the Holy Spirit says that.
Stephen is quoted by Luke as having said that 'messengers' also
called 'angels' transmitted the law to the people and those who
transmitted the law were levite sons of Aaron.
The Levites (and other Jews) were called "gods" according to Jesus,
but not angels. Show me your proof again so I can look it up.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
you should be able to see why many would simply
cut out the middle man and say that Jesus is YHWH.
Jesus NEVER said that. He called himself "God's Son", never 'God' or
the 'Father'.
but he -did- say that he appeared to Abraham and that Abraham saw his day
Jesus said that Abraham -saw- him.
The literal Abraham was in his grave at that time. (and still is)

-- King James
Psalms 146:4 His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in
that very day his thoughts perish.

What they saw was a VISION of them. Are you not talking about the
transfiguration?
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
John 8
56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day,
and he saw it and was glad.” 57 Then the Jews said to Him,
“You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham?”
58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you,
before Abraham was, I AM.”
Concerning John 8:58 and Exodus 3:13,14,

Jesus knew he existed before the world was made, but this doesn't
prove he was God Almighty. (John 17:5) Many angels also existed before
the world was created. (Job 38:7). In Exodus 3:14 God was using this
as a title and name to be used against the Egyptians.

A Bible scholar Dr. J.H. Hertz said that in that phrase 'I am that I
am' the main emphasis in on the active manifestation of God's Divine
existence. He said that God was about to show himself in behalf of his
people in great and wonderful way. He said that "I will be what I will
be" is also an approved rendering.

The footnote to the NASB Bible agrees and says, "1.14 Or I WILL BE
WHAT I WILL BE " .
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
and whom did Abraham see?
If it was really God, he would have been vaporized.

-- New King James
Exodus 33:20 But He said, "You cannot see My face; for no man shall
see Me, and live.''
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
Genesis 17
17 When Abram was ninety-nine years old, YHWH appeared to Abram
and said to him, “I am Almighty God; walk before Me and be blameless.
These had to be angels representing Almighty God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
===
Hebrews 1
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past
to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken
to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through
whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His
glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things
by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins,
sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become
so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance
obtained a more excellent name than they.
====
Yes, God THROUGH Jesus make him heir of all things.
as shown above, God makes =Man= an heir to all things
of God through Jesus' work, life death and resurrection,
but in so doing, still manages to keep the =pre-eminence-
inasmuch as God took part in the flesh and blood of man.
That means that God died. That is not only impossible, but ridiculous.
-- Revised Standard
Psalms 90:2 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou
hadst formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting
thou art God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
God did not seek to make an "Angel/Human" hybrid
nor to do a special work -for- 'angels'
No He didn't.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
see, God spoke to the fathers through...prophets
Son -not- an 'angel'
etc.
Tell that to the disciple Luke.
well, let's look at who Luke attrutes the handling of the Law;
===
Luke 5 [New World Translation]
17 On one of those days while he was teaching,
Pharisees and teachers of the Law who had come
out of every village of Gal?i·lee and Ju·de?a
and from Jerusalem were sitting there;
and Jehovah’s power was with him to do healing.
===
here, you can see quite clearly that the "teachers of the Law"
were human beings just like the Pharisees and Jesus.
Luke calls it the "law of Moses" here ; Luke 2:22
and calls it the law of 'The Lord' here; Luke 2:24
but he never calls it a 'law of angels' anywhere
The laws were from God, but DELIVERED by angels.
Post by z***@windstream.net
and this is moot inasmuch as you have already
seen that YHWH does, in fact, talk directly with people.
I didn't say he didn't. But as Luke says, the Law was delivered by
angels.
Post by z***@windstream.net
and Jesus says that -he- interacted with Abraham.
At the transfiguration?
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
it's much easier to say Jesus is Creator,
and eternal intercessor
as that is how he is described...
Jesus was not a co-creator since God did all the creating, but did it
-- King James
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
we certainly see that God created these things, and then, we also
see that Word/Son exists before all things and takes a hand in the
creation of all things both seen and unsee, so, maybe you are
sayingthat Jesus/Son/Word is God's hands and God
creates -through- God's hands.
You are making it too complicated when it isn't.

God directly created Jesus
God didn't create anything else directly, but did so through Jesus.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
American Standard
Psalms 33:6 By the word of Jehovah were the heavens made, And all the
host of them by the breath of his mouth.
and Jesus -is- this 'word' or this 'word' made flesh
having come forth from God and return to God...
John 8:42 John 16:27 John 17:5
-- Revised Standard
John 8:42 Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would
love me, for I proceeded and came forth from God; I came not of my own
accord, but he sent me.

Notice two separate wills here. Thus Jesus cannot be God.

-- Revised Standard
John 16:27 for the Father himself loves you, because you have loved
me and have believed that I came from the Father.

He should have said he was the Father, if Jesus was God.

- Revised Standard
John 17:5 and now, Father, glorify thou me in thy own presence with
the glory which I had with thee before the world was made.

Jesus is referring to a time when God didn't do any creating other
than Jesus as an only begotten Son.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Even Jesus himself said God did the actual creating: Mt 19:4-6,
"4. He answered, "Have you not read that he who made them from the
beginning made them male and female,
5. and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and
mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
6. So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has
joined together, let not man put asunder."" (RSV)
what's sort of funny, is that, here is Jesus ,
[who, evidently _was_ "He who made them"
after all, nothing was made that was not made by him]
Many Bibles say "through" instead of "by".
Post by z***@windstream.net
here is Jesus , who, evidently _was_ "He who made them"
That was Jehovah God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
speaking of "he who made them" as if that maker were someone else...
sort of like speaking of himself in the third person
sort of like me saying;
"the person who wrote this post
believes Jesus is The Christ"
it seems like i'm talking about some other person, but, i'm not.
so, we see that Jesus has a habit of speaking
about himself in the third person, whch should not
be taken to suggest that when Jesus speaks about "God"
as another person, that he is not speaking about himself.
cuz that is exactly what he does above;
"he who made them" is "_ME_ Jesus" "I am He"
and here he is again;
==
Mark 10:6
But from the beginning of the creation,
God ‘made them male and female.’
==
this time he makes is very clear, "he who made them" is "God"
but, we already know that nothing was made
that was not made by The Word, namely Jesus...
The Word who became flesh and dwellt among men.
==
John 13:3
Jesus, knowing that the Father had given all things into His hands,
and that He had come from God and was going to God,
==
and 13:3 only serves to emphasize that Jesus serves two purposes here
as God has already made clear the intention to bestow all things upon him;
""“What is MAN?
[you] have set him over the works of Your hands.
You have put all things in subjection under his feet.”""
==
John 8:42
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me,
for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself,
but He sent Me.
==
Jesus could have said;
"I am God and I came forth into Man to taste death for all
and to elevate Man into a proper house for God"
but dear olde Jesus prefers speaking in third person
even when he is speaking in the first person as above...
Your really reaching here, trying to make the Scriptures fit your
Jesus is God belief.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
maybe the Light of this truth will get brighter and brighter
and you arian people will eventually dispose of the 'buffer god'
Our spiritual light is getting brighter and brighter until the full
day. And that brings us even closer to Jehovah our loving God.
when you see Jesus standing there, your joy will be complete.
Impossible. Before Jesus went back to Heaven, he said the world would
never see him again. So his return is invisible.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
cuz, you basically say that YHWH is -not- God...
Where did you hear that nonsense?
before, you said that it was 'angels' who spoke to people,
and that God never spoke to anyone. now you say that God did
speak to people, but Jesus said this;
I never said that God never did speak to someone. For example, God
spoke to Jesus at his baptism.
Post by z***@windstream.net
in times past, someone called Jesus/Word...'spokeman'
==
John 5:37
And the Father Himself, who sent Me, has testified of Me.
You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form.
==
now, we have people hearing the Voice of YHWH
but, somehow, never hearing teh voice of "Father"
YHWY is the Father, God.
Post by z***@windstream.net
now, you can say that he is only referring to those
in his presence at that time, but, he says it again elseware;
==
John 1:18
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,
who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
Yet people saw Jesus. If he was God, they saw God and they were not
vaporized. Good trick.
Post by z***@windstream.net
==
and above, you say this;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says
God spoke directly to people. And He did.
one conclusion, is, that God Almighy, with whom people interacted
in times past in various ways was appearing -as- this 'Word/Son/image
named YHWH and this "father" -is- Christ's head and mind
which nothing nor anyone -can- 'see'.
It's not that complicated. YHWY is God which is the Father. Jesus is
His did Son. In Heaven, God (YHWH) is the head of Jesus.
Post by z***@windstream.net
etc.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
you say that the being who calls itself YHWH
is an impersonator who is -not- /really/ God
and -i- don't do that.
Neither do I. Someone likes to fantasize.
but you did say that Moses only interacted with 'angels'
i asked;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?
According to Luke, it would be angels.
Post by z***@windstream.net
and you said;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Angels representing Jehovah.
but now you are saying;
you say;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Yes, many of your above Scriptures says
God spoke directly to people. And He did.
if you say that Moses was only interacting
with 'angels' and those 'angels' -say-
"i am the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob...YHWH"
then, you are telling me that 'angels' are
impersonating YHWH and this is deception.
Not impersonating, but represents.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
enjoy your day...
You also.
i will
James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 00:13:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
the two questions at the beginning of this interchange, and are still;

who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?

and who or what did Moses interact with on Mount Sinai?

your answer seems to be that YHWH formed man
using "Word/Son/Jesus" in some manner and,

we're back to Moses interacting with Angels.

so, i address the second first, here;

you do insist that the Law was "DELIVERED" by "Angels"

you say;
Post by z***@windstream.net
No, they were real bone fide angels.
These had to be angels representing Almighty God.
The laws were from God, but DELIVERED by angels.
===
Exodus 31:18

And he [YHWH] gave to Moses, when he had made an end of speaking with him
upon Mount Sinai, the two tables of the testimony, tables of stone,
written with the finger of God.
=
Deuteronomy 9:10

And YHWH gave me the two tables of stone written with the finger of God;
and on them were all the words which YHWH had spoken with you on
the mountain out of the midst of the fire on the day of the assembly.
===

this undoubtedly shows Moses receiving communications directly
from YHWH and, if you trace through the entire reading of the Law,
over and over you see the phrase;

"YHWH spoke" start here [Exodus 12:1, 13:1, 14:1...etc]

and so, if one insists that Stephen is saying that "Angels"
like Gabriel or some spirit being are delivering the Law to Israel,
you're setting yourself up to have Stephen called a crank and incorrect
because we see very clearly that YHWH delivered this Law in person.

and all along, -i- see, "and YHWH spoke" and i see to whom YHWH
speaks and it is to Moses and sometimes Aaron, and i -Never-
even once see any reference to any 'Angel' ..never once,
and as such, i suggest that this Angel you speak of
is an -invention- of yours and is not actually found in the text.

one more time;

==
Numbers 3:1

Now these are the records of Aaron and Moses
when YHWH spoke with Moses on Mount Sinai.
==

now, the -only- beings that are told
to deliver Laws and Law to the people
are Moses and Aaron and Aaron's sons,
etc. all human beings.

and so, Stephen and the author of Hebrews
must be speaking of human messengers.

so? so what?

so, somehow, and you say it directly if you mean otherwise;

you seem to be saying that Word/Son -is- the being with
whom Moses and Aaron and the Israelites find themselves
dealing with, even if, you don't want to call
this Word/Son...YHWH

and, we're back to you saying that Moses does not interact
with the "real God" but is interacting with "Word/Son" who
later became flesh and dwellt among human beings as a human being.

now, try not to beat around the bush,
is this what you say or not?

you -are- trying to say that "Word/Son" who lived
before becoming flesh and dwelling among human beings
-is- the same being that Abraham Isaac Jacob and Moses
all actually interacted with, are you not?

you seem to be saying that "Word/Son" speaks for YHWH
and even calls [himself] YHWH but, really is -not- YHWH.

isn't that what you are saying?

don't be shy, say yes or no.

oh, just for fun, you seem to have questions
and troubles about the use of "Lord" in
the so-called "New Testament" writings.

so, try these on for size;

===
Romans 10:9

because, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is YHWH
and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved.
=
1 Corinthians 12:3

Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking by the
Spirit of God ever says “Jesus be cursed!” and no one can
say “Jesus is YHWH” except by the Holy Spirit.
===

see how convenient that is?

the New testament seems to have inserted "Jesus is Lord" in there,
but it -really- says..."Jesus is YHWH" and also, that, only the
leading of the Holy Spirit even enables one to actually see this truth.

just saying...

and far as Jesus being Creator,

first, just answer yes or no;

according to you;

is "Word" the being whom you would say speaks to Moses from the bush?

and also, YHWH did not -create- God's own manifold wisdom...

simply brings it forth.

oh, and also, as far as "God" dying,
i have to direct you to the "sign of Jonah"

where Jesus stated that this -sign- was
the only sign of his mission/identity.

Jesus says that he will be three days and three nights
in the heart of the earth in likeness to Jonah being
three days and nights in teh belly of the great fish...
[Matthew 12:40... Luke 11:30...]

Now, if you actually go back and look at Jonah, you will note this;

==
Jonah 2:1

Then Jonah prayed to the Lord his God from the fish’s belly.
==

see, when Jonah was in teh belly of the great fish,
which was the sign of Jesus' =death= and burial...

Jonah was -praying- to God and so, while we all agree
that the =Lamb= the sacrificial Lamb of God, -was-
in fact -dead-

we need not suggest that -God- was dead

and that is why some people suggest that during Jesus'
dead body's stay in the heart of the earth, that 'God'
was visiting people in jail..[1 Peter 3:18-20]

so, your problem with God not dying is solved...

the LAMB died and the LAMB was also raised



if you'll note this, though, this person says
that the "world to come" is not subject
to angels...but...to =man=
===
Hebrews 2

5 For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak,
in subjection to angels. 6 But one testified in a certain place, saying:
===

and also,;

===
1 Corinthians 6:3

Do you not know that we shall judge angels?
How much more, things that pertain to this life?
===

if man is going to be sitting in judgement of angels,
isn't that an elevation of mankind? yes...it is.

Jesus' return is invisible?

==
Matthew 26:28-30

28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many
for the remission of sins. 29 But I say to you, I will not drink of
this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink
it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”
==

so, i guess according to you, an invisible hand
raises a glass of wine in the Kingdom...

i had to cut out most of that stuff because it was too long...

i address it in my own way, most is repetetive.


one can see God without being 'vaporized'

==
Matthew 5:8

Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God.
==

answer the bit above about who precisely
is speaking from the bush and Sinai, and
we'll see how that relates to the Creator.
Ted
2020-09-22 14:26:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
the two questions at the beginning of this interchange, and are still;
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
AND, if man was made from the dust of the ground, then why is there
still dust?
Peter Pan
2020-09-22 22:15:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by Timothy Sutter
the two questions at the beginning of this interchange, and are
still;
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
AND, if man was made from the dust of the ground, then why is there
still dust?
All the extra dust is just recycled ex-humans. And
probably monkeys too.

"...for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
Ted
2020-09-23 14:07:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Pan
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 20:13:56 -0400, Timothy Sutter
Post by Timothy Sutter
the two questions at the beginning of this interchange, and are
still;
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
AND, if man was made from the dust of the ground, then why is there
still dust?
All the extra dust is just recycled ex-humans. And
probably monkeys too.
Heh, good point.
Post by Peter Pan
"...for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."
True.
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 12:01:15 UTC
Reply
Permalink
<...>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
see, you are confusing Jesus the Word made flesh
and dwelling among men, who is crucified and resurrected
with the Word who lived in Abraham's day as it is the
flesh who dwellt among men, who is firstborn from the Dead.
There is only one Word, Jesus. Who is this Word in Abraham's day?
YHWH...of course

of course you cannot be suggesting that this "Word"
came into existence in Mary's womb, cuz you would like
to suggest that this "Word" was 'created' before
everything else that was created, so, it should not be
difficult for you to comprehend that this same "Word"
who is said to have become flesh and dwellt among men,
was already aware in the days of Abraham...and Moses.

anyway, i just wanted to pick at this 'wisdom' bit below;
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
none of this says that Word is a created being.
"Jehovah produced me as the beginning of his way,
The earliest of his achievements of long ago." (Pr 8:22; NWT)
- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
Proverbs 8:22 `Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning,
before the oldest of his works.- New Jerusalem with Apocrypha
-- Living Bible
Proverbs 8:22 The Lord formed me in the beginning, before he created
anything else.
-- Revised Standard
Proverbs 8:22 The Lord created me at the beginning of his work, the
first of his acts of old.
CEB
The Lord created me at the beginning of his way, before his deeds long
in the past.
ERV
“The Lord made me in the beginning, long before he did anything else.
let's look at a few other places which enter in to this description;


===
Jeremiah 10
12 He has made the earth by His power,
He has established the world by His wisdom,
And has stretched out the heavens at His discretion.
=
Jeremiah 51:15
He has made the earth by His power;
He has established the world by His wisdom,
And stretched out the heaven by His understanding.
=
Psalm 136

5 To Him who by wisdom made the heavens,
=
Proverbs 3

19 The Lord by wisdom founded the earth;
By understanding He established the heavens;
20 By His knowledge the depths were broken up,
And clouds drop down the dew.
==

see, these speakers say that YHWH God created
the heavens and the earth _by_ and _through_ [His]
-own- Wisdom and is this Wisdom Is God's own wisdom
that God possesses from before creation, and not that
God is sitting around contemplating itself and a lightbulb
springs alive and God creates [His] own wisdom nor does
it suggest that this creation comes at the hands
of some other being's wisdom.

which is probably why Young's Literal translate it this way;

==
Proverbs 8:22

Jehovah possessed me,
the beginning of His way,
Before His works since then.
==

it's more of an aspect of the Living God
that God -shows- _in_ the creative events.

but hold on a second, cuz there's more;

notice above also that YHWH made the earth by [His] =power=

and then see here;

==
1 Corinthians 1:24

but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks,
Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
==

yes there is context around this statement, but,
Paul does seem to clearly refer to "Christ" -as-

"the power of God and the wisdom of God"

cuz like he says;
"we preach Christ crucified, and non-beleivers see that
as a stumblingblock of foolishness, butto those 'called'
[we preach] Christ, [as] "the power and wisdom of God"

that's what it says, that Christ is the wisdom and =power= of God

but Christ is not just some fabricated assemblage of Godly parts

and speaking of assemblage of parts, i'll leave it with this;

=
Luke 11:20
But if I cast out demons with the finger of God,
surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.
=
Matthew 12:28
But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God,
surely the kingdom of God has come upon you.
=

if you [in general] consider that Jesus casts out demons
by God's Spirit and this he calls God's finger and so,
now you call God's spirit, God's finger, and accept that
this finger is a part of God's own being,

so you can consider God's own word to be an integral component of God.

God's 'finger' is an integral component of God. evidently, God speaks
in a form of sign language inasmuch as Jesus says;

"my words are spirit"

==
John 6:63
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing.
The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life.
==

and here;

==
Exodus 31:18
And when He had made an end of speaking with him on Mount Sinai,
He gave Moses two tablets of the Testimony, tablets of stone,
written with the finger of God.
==

==
Deuteronomy 9:10
Then YHWH delivered to me two tablets of stone written
with the finger of God, and on them were all the words
which YHWH had spoken to you on the mountain from the
midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.
==

so here, you'd have YHWH using a finger or, God's own Spirit,
to write words down on stone tablets. these words God scribes
on stone tablets by God's finger is some part of an image
in and of God's own mind. God can inscribe God's own word
both on stone tablets and the heart and mind of man

but, remember, -we- _are_ 'epistles of God'

==
2 Corinthians 3:3
clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us,
written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God,
not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh,
that is, of the heart.
==

see, Paul calls us 'letters of Christ written by
God's [finger] on our hearts. not that God's own spirit
is just 'finger' but we can use similitudes as assists.


==
Matthew 12:34
Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil,
speak good things? For out of the abundance
of the heart the mouth speaks.

Luke 6:45
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart
brings forth good; [...] For out of the abundance
of the heart his mouth speaks.
==

see, what one speaks emanates from one's own heart.

==
John 1:18
No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son,
who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
=
John 13:23
Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom
one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved.
==

see, at the very least, this "Word" -resides-
in God's own 'bosom' and the 'bosom, is an integral
part of God's own being as we see that one of Jesus'
own disciples lays his head on Jesus' 'bosom'

and that this 'bosom' is exactly where the
heart resides and this heart is where the
words of speakers emanates.

at the very least, this "Word" resides -in- God's own heart,
but we need not chop God up into fragments in the manner you'd like.
just as you or anyone else may 'send word' to another,

so God can "send word" wheresoever God may please
and still, this 'sent word' need never be construed
to not have emanated from within the bosom or heart
of God and, therefore, reflect the exacting image
of the eternal Deity, and -be- God.
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 12:16:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
- Revised Standard
Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
therefore God, thy God, has anointed thee with the oil of gladness
beyond thy comrades."
"thy God". Yes Jesus has a God.
Post by Timothy Sutter
==
Colossians 1:18
And He is the head of the body, the church,
who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead,
that in all things He may have the preeminence.
If Jesus is firstborn from the dead, what about the resurrection of
Lazarus? Was he not raised before Jesus? In what way is Jesus FIRST?
so, you're arguing with the scritture as written?

certainly, Paul refers to Christ as "firstborn from the dead"

that's the quote...

but, seeing as how you asked and someone somewhere -may-
have an interest in this sort of thing, meditate on this;





in case some of this "firstborn from the dead"
business is perplexing, look at this;

==
John 12:23-25
But Jesus answered them, saying, "The hour has come
that the Son of Man should be glorified. Most assuredly,
I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground
and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces
much grain. He who loves his life will lose it, and
he who hates his life in this world will
keep it for eternal life.
==


Jesus is speaking about his being "glorified"
and then he mentions how a grain must die.

also remember Jesus as "first fruits"

and as that "Holy One" who shall not see "corruption"

and then look at what Paul says;

==
1 Corinthians 15:35-49

But someone will say, "How are the dead raised up?
And with what body do they come?" Foolish one, what
you sow is not made alive unless it dies. And what
you sow, you do not sow that body that shall be, but
mere grain" perhaps wheat or some other grain. But God
gives it a body as He pleases, and to each seed its own body.
All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind
of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish,
and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies and
terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one,
and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory
of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of
the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.

So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown
in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor,
it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power.
It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is
a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. 45 And so it is written,
"The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam became
a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but
the natural, and afterward the spiritual. The first man was
of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven.
As was the man of dust, so also are those who are made of dust;
and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who are heavenly.
And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall
also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
==


only, we do not say that Jesus was 'sown in corruption'
but most certainly was sown a 'natural body' and raised -back-
into that Glory known before the onset of creation.

see, the thing to consider here is how Jesus, the man,
dies, and is raised into a 'glory' that he already had
before he was 'brought forth' from 'heaven' [John 8:23]

so, in the same way as we as human decendants
of the first man, adam, will be converted into
spiritual bodies when we are ressurected and changed
in the twinkling of an eye in like manner to Jesus,

Jesus, the man, was himself raised and
'glorified' as an immortal spirit body,

only this glorified spirit body was essentially
identical to the 'glory' known before the onset
of all creation.

this makes the risen glorified Jesus
the exacting magnified image of the deity
which is the consequence of the redemption
of the material creation into unity with the Godhead.

only that we do not as yet see all
things in this manner, but we see Jesus
who was made to be a little lower than
the angels and raised and given a name
that is above all others.

so, in this respect, Jesus, the man,
is first born from the dead, in that
Jesus was raised up and, converted back
into a glorified Spiritual body like 'he'
had known before and like -we-, as human
beings, will come to know because God had
tasted death and swallowed it up.

and also, you may wish to consider this bit;

the "difference" between YHWH
and Jesus of Nazareth is
a subtle one.

while YHWH spoke thru the Mercy Seat,
atop the ark of the covenant, the wooden ark
overlayed in gold made no contribution
to the speech emanating forth.

as YHWH conceived in Mary

the fullness of Deity came to dwell bodily
in Jesus and was Jesus, but, Jesus was -not-
a wooden ark which offered no contribution
of its own.

no, Jesus had something that all human beings
have and no wooden arks have, and that is
the neo-cortex and human mind.

accepting that we camn all agree that Jesus,
the man, had a brain even though it may not
be explicitly stated in the gospels.

Jesus is said to have had hands and feet and
a head and mouth and blood and emotions, and so,
we should safely conclude that Jesus had
a brain as well, which was the seat
of a human conscious mind.

the human mind of Jesus came in to complete
subjection and full agreement with the
personal God which is the Living God
which is YHWH.

giving Jesus that perfect and substantial
Faith thru intimate personalized knowledge.

the human mind of Jesus became an identical
representation of the personalized Living God

and the Holy Spirit, which conceived in Mary,
so identified with the human mind that was born
that the subsequent indwelling was received
with a hearty declaration from God,

"This is My Son, in Whom i am well pleased"

the mind of Jesus, conceived by the Holy Spirit
in the human being, became an exact representational
Image of the Mind of God, which no thing has ever seen
or fully understood, and when the overlay was sealed
by the Indwelling of the Holy Spirit upon the symbolic
death burial and resurrection of the flesh,
no conflict was brought in to question.

that is, the mind of Jesus, birthed in the human being
by the Holy Spirit was a representational Identity
to the Holy Spirit who came to rest
upon the man's shoulders.

the 'two' were essentially identical,
and, as One, the Faith had no bounds
nor overshadowing even to the defeat of death.

now, -we-, the human beings, who are born of Adam,
see Jesus, that exact representation and Image of God,
as the doorway thru which -we- can become severely
United with God, as was intended from the beginning.

we could never identify with, or
thru, a wooden ark overlayed in Gold.

but we can commune directly with the human character
of Jesus, which has risen above mortallity, and dwells
within the unapproachable Light which is God's Presence.

that is -our- Saving Grace.

Identifying with the Presence.

at Peace


and that's all part of the thing;


the identity of "Lamb" as in "the Lamb of God"

for, we do not say that YHWH God was changed or altered -by- man

-but- that some aspect of =man= as in 'mankind'

was lifted in to the Godhead...

someone may want to check this part out;



---
Revelation 21:23
And the city has no need of the sun nor of
the moon, that they should shine for it; for
the glory of God has enlightened it, and
the lamp thereof [is] the Lamb.
---

remember who the Lamb is;

---
John 1:29
The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him,
and said, "Behold! The Lamb of God who takes
away the sin of the world!

John 1:36
And looking at Jesus as He walked,
he said, "Behold the Lamb of God!"
---

what you should see is that a "lamp"
-is- a spirit in what we may call
"bible parlance" that is, you should
see how a "lamp" is used as
synonymous with spirit.

God's Own Lamp is not a
vessel like Alladin's lamp.

a "lamp" is also the light that shines.

Holy Spirit is, in fact, a lamp.

David says this;

---
Psalm 119:105
Your word is a lamp to my
feet And a light to my path.
---

but see, he's already said this;

---
Psalm 51:11
Do not cast me from your presence
or take your Holy Spirit from me.
---


the reason that David could say that
YHWH's Word was a lamp to his feet was
-because- the Holy Spirit was a
lamp to his mind.

because;

---
Isaiah 6:10
Make the heart of this people calloused; make
their ears dull and close their eyes. Otherwise
they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears,
understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."
---


which implies that without God's light to
the mind, you can read the God's Word all
day long and get zero out of it.

like many people who make vain attempts
at attacking the bible show regularly.

and all the bits about the eye
being the lamp of the body etc.

the Holy Spirit is the Eye of God

it illuminates man.


---
Proverbs 20:26-28
A wise king sifts out the wicked, And
brings the threshing wheel over them.
the spirit of a man is the lamp of YHWH
Searching all the inner depths of his
heart. Mercy and truth preserve the king,
And by lovingkindness he upholds his throne.
---


the spirit of man is the lamp of YHWH.
therefore, a "spirit" is like a lamp.

now look here;


---
1 Corinthians 2:11
For what man knows the things of a man except the
spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one
knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.
---


alright, so you see that man has a spirit
in him and God, also, has a Spirit.
can say "is a Spirit" but that's
not the issue here.

so look, if man's spirit, is YHWH's lamp,
then God's Spirit is God's OWN Lamp.

and one that burns perpetually and never
need fueling or refilling or whathaveyou.

look at these from Exodus, which are
likenesses of the Eternal Realities.


---
Exodus 27:20
"And you shall command the children of Israel
that they bring you pure oil of pressed olives
for the light, to cause the lamp to burn continually.

Leviticus 24:2
"Command the children of Israel that they bring
to you pure oil of pressed olives for the light,
to make the lamps burn continually.

Leviticus 24:4
He shall be in charge of the lamps on the
pure gold lampstand before YHWH continually.
---
---
Hebrews 9:24
For Christ has not entered the holy places
made with hands, which are copies of the true,
but into heaven itself, now to appear in the
presence of God for us;
---


see, these Lamps are to burn continually.

yes, they are physical copies and shadows of
the eternal realities, but the point of issue
is that they are -supposed- to be ever burning
and as such, God's Spirit never ceases,
but is everlasting.

i throw this in just for good measure;

---
2 Samuel 22:28-30
You will save the humble people;
But Your eyes are on the haughty,
that You may bring them down.
"For You are my lamp, YHWH;
YHWH shall enlighten my darkness.
For by You I can run against a troop;
By my God I can leap over a wall.
---


look, YHWH is a lamp also.

just like Lamb is a lamp.

Lamp is a figurative term
used to describe a facet of God.

please, this is considering a Spiritual thing,
in terms that only shadow the reality. we are
not considering Lamb as if Lamb was a lamp
which must be continually filled with oil
and whose wick must be trimmed etc.

this is not the case.

this "lamp" is an integral part of God.

in fact, it's as if this Lamp -is- God,
and that is exactly how you should
be seeing this.

YHWH is sending YHWH into a human flesh.
that which resides in the flesh is YHWH.
the True Light.

but now, we see that Lamb is alive
forevermore and everlasting, as before.

and as above, just as the spirit in man
is YHWH's lamp, so is Christ's Spirit,
the Holy Spirit, God's OWN Lamp.

only this Lamp is perpetually lit.

and God's Glory Shines forth from God.

God is both Light and Lamp.


---
Matthew 6:22
"The lamp of the body is the eye. If therefore
your eye is good, your whole body will be full
of light.

Luke 11:34
The lamp of the body is the eye. Therefore,
when your eye is good, your whole body also
is full of light. But when your eye is bad,
your body also is full of darkness.

Revelation 5:6
And between the throne and the four living creatures
and among the elders, I saw a Lamb standing, as though
it had been slain, with seven horns and with seven eyes,
which are the seven spirits of God sent
out into all the earth;
---


see, The Lamb has seven eyes like seven
lamps only some agree that seven is ONE Week,
and these seven eyes are the seven sprits of God,
which most will agree there is but One Spirit of God.

so, this agrees quite readily
with what was shown above.

that this "Lamp" is God's Own Spirit,
and not a thing which is -not- God.

can you see this?

and God's Lamp never goes out nor is it
in need of refueling, nor is it an
abstractable thing which is -not- God.

this "Lamp" is God's OWN Spirit.

and the Lamb has -Eyes-
which are God's Spirit.

and therefore, as it were,
the Lamb is Lamp, but not
-only- Lamp.

God -is- a Holy Spirit.

and this Light burns perpetually.

and Jesus is The Lamb and
The Lamb is The Lamp and the
Lamp is The Spirit of God.

Jesus Christ, not only
is YHWH incarnate but
is the Spirit of God.

---
Ephesians 2:22
in whom you also are built into it for
a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Ephesians 3:17
and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through
faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love,

2 Timothy 1:14
guard the truth that has been entrusted to you
by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.
---


and Jesus is The Lamb and
The Lamb is The Lamp and the
Lamp is The Spirit of God.
Jesus Christ, not only
is YHWH incarnate but
is the Spirit of God.


Christ is in your midst;

there is no Temple in the world
to come, God will dwell -in- them.

---
Romans 12:5
so we, though many, are one body in Christ,
and individually members one of another.

1 Corinthians 12:12
For just as the body is one and has many members,
and all the members of the body, though many, are
one body, so it is with Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27
Now you are the body of Christ
and individually members of it.
---
1 Corinthians 15:44-46
It is sown a physical body, it is raised a
spiritual body. If there is a physical body,
there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written,
"The first man Adam became a living being"; the last
Adam became a life-giving spirit. But it is not
the spiritual which is first but the physical,
and then the spiritual.
---
Ephesians 2:21-22
in whom the whole structure is joined together
and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in
whom you also are built into it for a dwelling
place of God in the Spirit.

Revelation 21:3
and I heard a loud voice from the throne
saying, "Behold, the dwelling of God is with men.
He will dwell with them, and they shall be his
people, and God himself will be with them;

2 Corinthians 5:1-3
For we know that if the earthly tent we live
in is destroyed, we have a building from God,
a house not made with hands, eternal in the
heavens. Here indeed we groan, and long to put
on our heavenly dwelling, so that by putting
it on we may not be found naked.

John 14:10
Do you not believe that I am in the Father and
the Father in me? The words that I say to you
I do not speak on my own authority; but the
Father who dwells in me does his works.

John 14:17
even the Spirit of truth, whom the world
cannot receive, because it neither sees him
nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells
with you, and will be in you.

Acts 7:47-49
But it was Solomon who built a house for him.
Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made
with hands; as the prophet says, 'Heaven is my
throne, and earth my footstool. What house will
you build for me, says the Lord, or what
is the place of my rest?
---


there is no house that man can build
to house God. that's the whole
bloody point.


---
1 Corinthians 3:15-17
If any man's work is burned up, he will suffer loss,
though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire.
Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's
Spirit dwells in you? If any one destroys God's temple,
God will destroy him. For God's temple is holy,
and that temple you are.

Ephesians 2:22
in whom you also are built into it for
a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Ephesians 3:17
and that Christ may dwell in your hearts through
faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love,

2 Timothy 1:14
guard the truth that has been entrusted to you
by the Holy Spirit who dwells within us.

Revelation 21:2-4
And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down
out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned
for her husband; and I heard a loud voice from the
throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling of God is with
men. He will dwell with them, and they shall be his
people, and God himself will be with them; he will
wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall
be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying
nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away."
---


there is no Temple, the Body of Christ,
the Church, the Bride of Christ is a
dwelling place for God.


---
Revelation 19:7
Let us rejoice and exult and give him the glory,
for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his
Bride has made herself ready;

Revelation 21:2
And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming
down out of heaven from God, prepared as
a bride adorned for her husband;

2 Corinthians 11:2
I feel a divine jealousy for you, for
I betrothed you to Christ to present
you as a pure bride to her one husband.

Revelation 21:9
Then came one of the seven angels who had the
seven bowls full of the seven last plagues,
and spoke to me, saying, "Come, I will
show you the Bride, the wife of the Lamb."
---

Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ.
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 12:27:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Timothy Sutter
Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ.
a little addendum to this bit;


...this is interesting. look.

=
Revelation 4:8-9

The four living creatures, each having six wings,
were full of eyes around and within. And they do
not rest day or night, saying:

"Holy, holy, holy,
Lord God Almighty,
Who was and is and is to come!"

Whenever the living creatures give glory and
honor and thanks to Him who sits on the throne,
who lives forever and ever,
=

...so we know, they're talking about Almighty
...and now look;

=
Revelation 4:11

"You are worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honor and power;
For You created all things, And by
Your will they exist and were created."
=

...so, according the the living creatures, Almighty
...is worthy to "receive" glory and honor and power.

...so, the simple act of "receiving is not
...a disqualification as "Most High"

see look;

=
Revelation 4:10

the twenty-four elders fall down before him who
is seated on the throne and worship him who lives
for ever and ever; they cast their crowns before
the throne, singing,
=


..see, these "elders" cast down their own crowns
..before Almighty, and these crowns are Power.

..Almighty is "receiving" Power from these Elders.

..true, Almighty may have invented and created them
..but they possess Power, and they turn that
..Power back over to Almighty.

...but look at the next bit;


=
Revelation 5:12

saying with a loud voice:
"Worthy is the Lamb who was slain
To receive power and riches and wisdom,
And strength and honor and glory and blessing!"
=

... and this after they scan the universe for
...someone who is "worthy" to open the book
...which is sealed. and none is found worthy.


but here we see this "Lamb" is also "worthy"
and "worthy" to receive things, and to receive what?

and from whom? these same Elders living creatures and angels.

Lamb is worthy to receive the same things Almighty
is worthy to receive, Power and Honor and Glory.
and a few more things, but Almighty "receives"
Power and Honor and Glory as well,

In a certain sense, God Almighty created all
these Principalities and what not, but God
was not wielding this Power.

and "Christ" is that Creator

==
Isaiah 60:19-20
"The sun shall no longer be your light by day,
Nor for brightness shall the moon give light to you;
But YHWH will be to you an everlasting light,
And your God your glory. Your sun shall no
longer go down, Nor shall your moon withdraw itself;
For YHWH will be your everlasting light,
And the days of your mourning shall be ended.
=
Revelation 21
22 But I saw no temple in it, for the
Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple.
23 The city had no need of the sun or of the moon
to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it.
The Lamb is its light.
==


YHWH will be your everlasting Light

and

The Lamb is its Light

and a quick look at this, just so you see
the nature of the iterative compositions
used in scrittures.


==
Isaiah 60:8

To the name of YHWH your God,
And to the Holy One of Israel,
==


see, for some, one could "argue", that YHWH and
The Holy One of Israel must be non-identical
_because_ the word "and" is used in
referencing them here.

but we should be aware that YHWH
is "The Holy One of Israel"

==
2 Kings 19:22
Whom have you reproached and blasphemed?
Against whom have you raised your voice,
And lifted up your eyes on high?
Against the Holy One of Israel.

Isaiah 30:15
For thus says YHWH GOD, the Holy One of Israel:
“ In returning and rest you shall be saved;
In quietness and confidence shall be
your strength.” But you would not,
==


so, when above in Revelation and all throughout
the letters of Paul and others, you see this
"iterative" composition style, you -cannot-
safely assume that such before and after "and"
are therefore of _necessity_ non-identical.

because as we see here, the Lamb is the
Light and YHWH who is God Almighty is The Light.

and so,

"God Almighty and The Lamb are an identity as

"they" are -the- Temple.
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 13:32:02 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
and whom did Abraham see?
If it was really God, he would have been vaporized.
only, YHWH can allow people to be in God's presence
and -not- die, as we note here, and elseware...

===
Exodus 28

35 And it shall be upon Aaron when he ministers,
and its sound will be heard when he goes into
the holy place before YHWH and when he
comes out, that he may not die.
<...>
43 They shall be on Aaron and on his sons when they
come into the tabernacle of meeting, or when they
come near the altar to minister in the holy place,
that they do not incur iniquity and die.
It shall be a statute forever to him and
his descendants after him.
===

see, YHWH made special provisions for people
to touch holy things and be in holy presence
without being 'vaporized' to use your jargon,

but, when they did things improperly, they died

==
Leviticus 10

10 Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each
took his censer and put fire in it, put incense
on it, and offered profane fire before the Lord,
which He had not commanded them. 2 So fire went
out from YHWH and devoured them, and
they died before YHWH.
==


it's not just some arbitrary inability
for human beings to be in YHWH God's presence...

if YHWH wants to interact with people and
they not die, that can be accomplished...

it has to do with "holiness"

as to Abraham...

obviously, YHWH did -not- 'vaporize' Abraham, ..etc
Timothy Sutter
2020-09-22 18:43:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
this is funny;


===
Matthew 28:19

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
===


now, i never did consider that "father" and "son"
and "holy spirit" were ...-names- at all

and so, one could ponder, just what -is- this "name"

of the father son and the holy spirit?

why, here's an answer...from Peter;

===
Acts 2:38

Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you
be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins;
and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
===


and there you have it, father son and holy spirit

are all named "Jesus Christ"


which makes sense, insamuch as "Jesus" essentially means

"YHWH Savior" and "Christ" basically means smeared with the oily Spirit


God IS Messiah


etc. etc. etc....


unless there's something compelling

i'll likely leave olde MC to -his- thread,

and bow out of it...
Andrew
2020-09-21 18:46:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________


According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than *Jesus*.
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!

"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob." ~ Isiah 49:26

"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
~Hosea 13:4

There is no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.

"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
ever. Amen." ~ 2 Peter 3:18

"I, the Lord, am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob."

That's right.

Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.

Learn o Him.

Worship Him!
Post by z***@windstream.net
James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Ted
2020-09-21 18:54:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 11:46:48 -0700, "Andrew"
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him
nothing
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and
concerning
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________
According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than *Jesus*.
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!
"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob." ~ Isiah 49:26
"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
~Hosea 13:4
There is no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.
"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
ever. Amen." ~ 2 Peter 3:18
"I, the Lord, am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob."
That's right.
Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.
Learn o Him.
Worship Him!
That's a good argument, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it before.
Andrew
2020-09-21 19:04:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the earth? (see
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his Maker: Ask
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________
According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than *Jesus*.
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!
"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob." ~ Isiah 49:26
"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
~Hosea 13:4
There is no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.
"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
ever. Amen." ~ 2 Peter 3:18
"I, the Lord, am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob."
That's right.
Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.
Learn o Him.
Worship Him!
That's a good argument, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it before.
Thanks Ted!

The Bible is clear.

~ Andrew
Ted
2020-09-23 14:12:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:04:08 -0700, "Andrew"
Post by Andrew
Post by Ted
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul.
Post by Andrew
Post by Ted
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations. Who created the
earth? (see
Post by Andrew
Post by Ted
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Genesis 1:1)
John 1:2-3
-- New King James
John 1:3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing
was made that was made.
Yes, Jesus assisted God in His creations.
Isaiah 45:12
"11. Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his
Maker: Ask
Post by Andrew
Post by Ted
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and concerning
the work of my hands, command ye me.
12. I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have I
commanded."
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created man and
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________
According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than *Jesus*.
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!
"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob." ~ Isiah 49:26
"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
~Hosea 13:4
There is no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.
"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
ever. Amen." ~ 2 Peter 3:18
"I, the Lord, am thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob."
That's right.
Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.
Learn o Him.
Worship Him!
That's a good argument, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it before.
Thanks Ted!
The Bible is clear.
~ Andrew
A similar one I heard a few decades back connected the two as both
being the Alpha and Omega.
Michael Christ
2020-09-24 20:46:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17 >> > >> > Yes, Jesus assisted God in His
creations. Who created the
earth? (see
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Genesis 1:1)
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
John 1:2-3 >> > >> > -- New King James
John 1:3  All things were made through Him, and without Him
nothing
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
was made that was made. >> > >> > Yes, Jesus assisted God in His
creations. >> > >> > Isaiah 45:12
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"11.  Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his
Maker: Ask
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and
concerning
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
the work of my hands, command ye me. >> > 12.  I have made the
earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have
I
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
commanded."
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created
man and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________
Post by Timothy Sutter
According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than *Jesus*.
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty >>
One of Jacob."           ~ Isiah 49:26
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
   know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
                                        ~Hosea 13:4 > > >> There is
no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and >>
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
Post by Andrew
  ever. Amen."                ~ 2 Peter 3:18 > > >> "I, the Lord, am
thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty >>  One of Jacob." > > >>
That's right.
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.
Learn o Him.
Worship Him!
That's a good argument, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it before.
Thanks Ted!
The Bible is clear.
~ Andrew
A similar one I heard a few decades back connected the two as both being
the Alpha and Omega.
True, that the Father and the Son are one, the beginning and the end,
both God, One God, One Spirit.

Human beings can comprehend that to some degree in that two people can
be unified into one life purpose. And if two have one life purpose, how
can they be separated?? They are the alpha and omega of that thing. I
think marriage, as it should be, is an example of that.

Of course, God though, He is in all things.

A good short read here between you two!!





Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??

"Compromise will condemn you."
Ted
2020-09-25 14:18:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 06:46:44 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Post by Ted
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 12:04:08 -0700, "Andrew"
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
???
i have a question for you;
Fire away.
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the
ground, and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man
became a living soul.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
It was Jehovah God.
and, according to you, how does that relate to these; /?/
Colossians 1:15-17 >> > >> > Yes, Jesus assisted God in His
creations. Who created the
earth? (see
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Genesis 1:1)
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
John 1:2-3 >> > >> > -- New King James
John 1:3  All things were made through Him, and without Him
nothing
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
was made that was made. >> > >> > Yes, Jesus assisted God in His
creations. >> > >> > Isaiah 45:12
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"11.  Thus saith Jehovah, the Holy One of Israel, and his
Maker: Ask
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
me of the things that are to come; concerning my sons, and
concerning
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
the work of my hands, command ye me. >> > 12.  I have made the
earth, and created man upon it: I, even my
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
hands, have stretched out the heavens; and all their host have
I
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
commanded."
Post by Timothy Sutter
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Yes, it clearly was Jehovah, who using Jesus someway, created
man and
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
the earth, etc.
_____________________________________________
Post by Timothy Sutter
According to the Bible, Jehovah is none other than
*Jesus*.
Post by Michael Christ
Post by Ted
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Andrew
who became incarnate and dwelt among us. Look it up!
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"I, Jehovah, am thy Saviour, and thy Redeemer, the Mighty
One of Jacob."           ~ Isiah 49:26
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"I am Jehovah thy God from the land of Egypt; and thou shalt
   know no god but me, and besides me there is no saviour."
                                        ~Hosea 13:4 > > >>
There is
Post by Michael Christ
Post by Ted
Post by z***@windstream.net
no "Savior" other than Jesus. Glory to Him. Amen.
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory both now and for
Post by Andrew
  ever. Amen."                ~ 2 Peter 3:18 > > >> "I, the Lord, am
thy Savior and thy Redeemer, the Mighty >>  One of Jacob." > >
That's right.
Post by Andrew
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
Our Savior and Redeemer --> Jesus.
Learn o Him.
Worship Him!
That's a good argument, I'm surprised I hadn't seen it before.
Thanks Ted!
The Bible is clear.
~ Andrew
A similar one I heard a few decades back connected the two as both being
the Alpha and Omega.
True, that the Father and the Son are one, the beginning and the end,
both God, One God, One Spirit.
Human beings can comprehend that to some degree in that two people can
be unified into one life purpose. And if two have one life
purpose, how
Post by Michael Christ
can they be separated?? They are the alpha and omega of that
thing. I
Post by Michael Christ
think marriage, as it should be, is an example of that.
Of course, God though, He is in all things.
A good short read here between you two!!
Michael Christ
Thanks.

LinuxGal
2020-09-16 12:41:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
Creationists don't understand that science is a function of
evidence. So to them, updating a theory based on new data is
a sign of weakness. "Oh, look are you changing your mind!
You got it wrong! Look, our ancient book of fables never
changes!"
--
Linux Geeks: Smart. Single. Sexy.
Well, two out of three ain't bad!

https://twitter.com/LinuxGal
aaa
2020-09-16 18:39:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
Creationists don't understand that science is a function of evidence. So
to them, updating a theory based on new data is a sign of weakness. "Oh,
look are you changing your mind! You got it wrong! Look, our ancient
book of fables never changes!"
Not true. It's our ancient book of philosophy that no atheist is capable
to understand.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.

God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.

Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Peter Pan
2020-09-17 21:56:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by aaa
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
Creationists don't understand that science is a function of evidence. So
to them, updating a theory based on new data is a sign of weakness. "Oh,
look are you changing your mind! You got it wrong! Look, our ancient
book of fables never changes!"
Not true. It's our ancient book of philosophy that no atheist is capable
to understand.
That's only your misunderstanding of the bible.

In fact, you have admitted before that you depend on
atheists to explain the bible to you.
aaa
2020-09-18 15:03:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
Creationists don't understand that science is a function of evidence. So
to them, updating a theory based on new data is a sign of weakness. "Oh,
look are you changing your mind! You got it wrong! Look, our ancient
book of fables never changes!"
Not true. It's our ancient book of philosophy that no atheist is capable
to understand.
That's only your misunderstanding of the bible.
In fact, you have admitted before that you depend on
atheists to explain the bible to you.
Not true. I only depend on them to quote the Bible. They depend on me to
explain the Bible instead.
--
God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.

God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.

Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!
Ted
2020-09-18 20:30:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 08:14:17 -0400, Timothy Sutter
Post by Timothy Sutter
who or what formed man from the dust of the ground?
-- American Standard
Genesis 2:7  And Jehovah God formed man of the dust of the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
soul.
Creationists don't understand that science is a function of evidence. So
to them, updating a theory based on new data is a sign of
weakness. "Oh,
Post by Peter Pan
Post by aaa
look are you changing your mind! You got it wrong! Look, our ancient
book of fables never changes!"
Not true. It's our ancient book of philosophy that no atheist is capable
to understand.
That's only your misunderstanding of the bible.
In fact, you have admitted before that you depend on
atheists to explain the bible to you.
Not true. I only eat shit.
That's filthy and disgusting, aaa.
servant
2020-09-15 16:45:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.
Show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ". I've never seen
it.
The same place you find Jesus and Christ in the OT. God man is descriptive
of christian concepts of Him developed in the NT..
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
When Philop read scriptre to the ethiopian who finally came to accept the
God man Christ and was baptised, it was *only* the OT.
Again no proof for Jesus as a "God man Christ".
Typically irrelevant to the topic, large scripture bulk dump snipped as a
diversion..
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we know it was not settled as to its content for some 4
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.
Negative. The NT fairly close to ours today, was practiced by 2nd
century Christians according to the Muratorian Fragment.
Oh yes, here the jw vatican plugin when the topic arises.

Two problems, it lacks several books, not "nearly" to the final NT. The
lettters of peter, one of john, hebrews and james are absent. Also the
"revelation of peter" is included.

As mentioned below, several of these lists were prepared for and limited
only for local use. There was *no* agreed upon list among the various
areas of the church.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.
See Muratorian Fragment above.
See why it is irrelevant to the claim following it above.>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.
2 Timothy 3:16
Repeating what began this post does not a relevant observation make, no?
The main point, it refers only to the OT, period. The vast majority of the
NT had yet to appear when it was written. No jw joy there.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.
I am not familiar with that quote. Fill me in.
It is the relevant part of your's at the beginning.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
So be it. That is why there are so many Bible versions.
Correction, there are not "several bibles"; there are only translations
into english and other languages. Most important, nothing in the various
english translations in any meaningful way contradict
each other. The jw "translation" is the *only* one example of that.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
Using the same bible, mostly one translation, each tom and dick and harry
and charles invent very different and contridicting "real" christianity.
Michael Christ
2020-09-15 18:53:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
James has more desire to know God than you.

Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.




Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
servant
2020-09-15 20:01:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that passes all
understanding.
Michael Christ
2020-09-15 22:12:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that passes all
understanding.
Piss off. No one needs a self-righteous liar in their lives.

Thank you very much.




Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
Ted
2020-09-15 23:53:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:12:16 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Post by servant
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that passes all
understanding.
Piss off. No one needs a self-righteous liar in their lives.
Thank you very much.
Michael Christ
He's very knowledgeable.
Michael Christ
2020-09-16 00:01:10 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:12:16 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by servant
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that
passes all
Post by servant
understanding.
Piss off.  No one needs a self-righteous liar in their lives.
Thank you very much.
Michael Christ
He's very knowledgeable.
I don't care if he is a rocket scientist. He, as in a person, is full
of self-righteous religious bullshit, if he is a he, that is.





Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
Ted
2020-09-16 05:15:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:01:10 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by Michael Christ
Post by Ted
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:12:16 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by servant
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with you.
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that
passes all
Post by servant
understanding.
Piss off.  No one needs a self-righteous liar in their lives.
Thank you very much.
Michael Christ
He's very knowledgeable.
I don't care if he is a rocket scientist. He, as in a person, is full
of self-righteous religious bullshit, if he is a he, that is.
Michael Christ
True, she could be female. I'm gonna imagine what she looks like and
masturbate.
Michael Christ
2020-09-16 08:59:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Ted
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 10:01:10 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by servant
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 08:12:16 +1000, Michael Christ >
Post by Michael Christ
James has more desire to know God than you.
Go away, and take your stinky self-righteous religion with
you.
Post by servant
May God bless and protect and heal and provide that peace that >
passes all
understanding.
Post by Michael Christ
Piss off.  No one needs a self-righteous liar in their lives.
Thank you very much.
Michael Christ
He's very knowledgeable.
I don't care if he is a rocket scientist.  He, as in a person, is
full
Post by servant
of self-righteous religious bullshit, if he is a he, that is.
Michael Christ
True, she could be female. I'm gonna imagine what she looks like and
masturbate.
Innovative.



Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-16 18:28:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.
Show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ". I've never seen
it.
The same place you find Jesus and Christ in the OT. God man is descriptive
of christian concepts of Him developed in the NT..
Then show me "God man" in the NT.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
When Philop read scriptre to the ethiopian who finally came to accept the
God man Christ and was baptised, it was *only* the OT.
Again no proof for Jesus as a "God man Christ".
Typically irrelevant to the topic, large scripture bulk dump snipped as a
diversion..
Or a diversion so as to not to comment on it.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we know it was not settled as to its content for some 4
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.
Negative. The NT fairly close to ours today, was practiced by 2nd
century Christians according to the Muratorian Fragment.
Oh yes, here the jw vatican plugin when the topic arises.
What you erroneously call "plugin" is supported facts.
Post by servant
Two problems, it lacks several books, not "nearly" to the final NT. The
lettters of peter, one of john, hebrews and james are absent. Also the
"revelation of peter" is included.
It shows that 2nd century Christians were attempting to follow NT
books as they came along.
Post by servant
As mentioned below, several of these lists were prepared for and limited
only for local use. There was *no* agreed upon list among the various
areas of the church.
Yes there was. The Jews themselves already had many of the NT books.
No Church established all the NT, even though they think they did. The
Muratorian Fragment proves this.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.
See Muratorian Fragment above.
See why it is irrelevant to the claim following it above.>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.
2 Timothy 3:16
Repeating what began this post does not a relevant observation make, no?
The main point, it refers only to the OT, period. The vast majority of the
NT had yet to appear when it was written. No jw joy there.
How many books did the Muratorian Fragment consist of, since you seem
to have done your homework on it.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.
I am not familiar with that quote. Fill me in.
It is the relevant part of your's at the beginning.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
So be it. That is why there are so many Bible versions.
Correction, there are not "several bibles"; there are only translations
into english and other languages. Most important, nothing in the various
english translations in any meaningful way contradict
each other. The jw "translation" is the *only* one example of that.
That is because the JW Bible is full of truths. Yes, there are MANY
Bible versions. Most all of them start out with around 7000 errors.
They ignore the Tetragrammaton in the OT, and SUBSTITUTE "lord" or
"God" for it.

The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
Using the same bible, mostly one translation, each tom and dick and harry
and charles invent very different and contridicting "real" christianity.
Yes, and they will be judged for doing so.

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
servant
2020-09-16 20:25:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.
Show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ". I've never seen
it.
The same place you find Jesus and Christ in the OT. God man is descriptive
of christian concepts of Him developed in the NT..
Typically irrelevant to the topic, large scripture bulk dump snipped as a
diversion..
Or a diversion so as to not to comment on it.
Correction, the brush friend james likes to throw up when in a tough spot
to change the topic.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we it was not settled as to its content
for some 4
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.
Negative. The NT fairly close to ours today, was practiced by 2nd
century Christians according to the Muratorian Fragment.
Oh yes, here the jw vatican plugin when the topic arises.
What you erroneously call "plugin" is supported facts.
Correction, "facts" as invented by jw vatican as self serving circular
excuses.>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Two problems, it lacks several books, not "nearly" to the final NT. The
lettters of peter, one of john, hebrews and james are absent. Also the
"revelation of peter" is included.
It shows that 2nd century Christians were attempting to follow NT
books as they came along.
No, it correctly illustrates the various lists prepared in local areas,
all different. >
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As mentioned below, several of these lists were prepared for and limited
only for local use. There was *no* agreed upon list among the various
areas of the church.
Yes there was. The Jews themselves already had many of the NT books.
Therefore? The apostles were jews who wrote them so by definition "had
them", no?
Post by z***@windstream.net
No Church established all the NT, even though they think they did.
Indeed no single church, but local churches in the areas of the very church
Christ established came to a joit consensus as to what the canon of the NT
was to be.
Post by z***@windstream.net
The
Muratorian Fragment proves this.
Not even close, it was from only *one* of the several local churche areas
and centuries before a final concensus of *all* church made the final list.

That single area was likely somewhere near rome where long after the list
was discovered.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.
See Muratorian Fragment above.
See why it is irrelevant to the claim following it above.>
And the same info refuting the jw plugin of today above.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.
2 Timothy 3:16
Repeating what began this post does not a relevant observation make, no?
The main point, it refers only to the OT, period. The vast majority of the
NT had yet to appear when it was written. No jw joy there.
How many books did the Muratorian Fragment consist of, since you seem
to have done your homework on it.
Good point, you have only a jw plugin, I have studied church history for
years and know the severe limitations of the jw vatican, including the list
at issue.
As to number, take the missing above and subtract from 27.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.
I am not familiar with that quote. Fill me in.
It is the relevant part of your's at the beginning.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
So be it. That is why there are so many Bible versions.
Correction, there are not "several bibles"; there are only translations
into english and other languages. Most important, nothing in the various
english translations in any meaningful way contradict
each other. The jw "translation" is the *only* one example of that.
That is because the JW Bible is full of truths. Yes, there are MANY
Bible versions. Most all of them start out with around 7000 errors.
They ignore the Tetragrammaton in the OT, and SUBSTITUTE "lord" or
"God" for it.
Smile, friend james prove the "errors" exist. What you are refferring to
without personal knowledge, just part of the jw plugin, are copying
variations in the many thousandss of greek document sources from which
english translations came.

The jw vatican 'translation" did not use them, they had no greek scholars..

they rehashd english translations, period.

They then went back and "corrected" the english examples to make the jw
vatican invented doctrines work by inserting language. Then willy nilly,
they claim their doctrine is in scripture, how handy, no?

None of the thousands of greek sources used contain the jw insertions 2000
years after the fact.
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
The hebrew spelling of the name was never there to make correction
necessary in the greek OT 1st century jews used..
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
Using the same bible, mostly one translation, each tom and dick and harry
and charles invent very different and contridicting "real" christianity.
Yes, and they will be judged for doing so.
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.

Correct, judged, and not found wanting as the jw vatican corruption
distorts scripture to suit an invented agenda.

They will also stand in judgement, no?
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-18 11:35:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james had a thought as to why there are many different
Post by z***@windstream.net
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16
That refers *only* to the OT. When it was written the OT was the scripture
early christians used to affirm the coming of the God man Christ.
Show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ". I've never seen
it.
The same place you find Jesus and Christ in the OT. God man is descriptive
of christian concepts of Him developed in the NT..
Typically irrelevant to the topic, large scripture bulk dump snipped as a
diversion..
Or a diversion so as to not to comment on it.
Correction, the brush friend james likes to throw up when in a tough spot
to change the topic.
Here was the diversion you got away from:

Please show me in the OT where is says "the God man Christ".
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church spread from spain to india with out the NT in the 1st century.
The NT in the form we it was not settled as to its content
for some 4
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
or so centuries after John wrote his last letter.
Negative. The NT fairly close to ours today, was practiced by 2nd
century Christians according to the Muratorian Fragment.
Oh yes, here the jw vatican plugin when the topic arises.
What you erroneously call "plugin" is supported facts.
Correction, "facts" as invented by jw vatican as self serving circular
excuses.>
Yes, I look to the JW organization for spiritual guidance. You should
have such a truthful organization to feed off.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Two problems, it lacks several books, not "nearly" to the final NT. The
lettters of peter, one of john, hebrews and james are absent. Also the
"revelation of peter" is included.
It shows that 2nd century Christians were attempting to follow NT
books as they came along.
No, it correctly illustrates the various lists prepared in local areas,
all different. >
Not at all. That fragment was the start of the NT. It contained a lot
of the same books in the NT today. If there was various lists prepared
in local areas as you claim, it appears providence chose the
Muratorian Fragment to start the NT.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As mentioned below, several of these lists were prepared for and limited
only for local use. There was *no* agreed upon list among the various
areas of the church.
Yes there was. The Jews themselves already had many of the NT books.
Therefore? The apostles were jews who wrote them so by definition "had
them", no?
We don't know exactly what books the apostles had, or that Paul had.
At any rate, the Muratorian Fragment was the beginning of it.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
No Church established all the NT, even though they think they did.
Indeed no single church, but local churches in the areas of the very church
Christ established came to a joit consensus as to what the canon of the NT
was to be.
Specifically what Churches?
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The
Muratorian Fragment proves this.
Not even close, it was from only *one* of the several local churche areas
and centuries before a final concensus of *all* church made the final list.
As I mentioned above, providence chose that Fragment.
Post by servant
That single area was likely somewhere near rome where long after the list
was discovered.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The church finally cane to a consensus then that the NT was scripture and
what books were to be in it as inspired and canoical. Until then different
areas had different contents as canonical and they did not mirror our NT.
See Muratorian Fragment above.
See why it is irrelevant to the claim following it above.>
And the same info refuting the jw plugin of today above.
You are definitely opinionated.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The NT has no reference to itself as scripture. The only mention in the NT
of any other part of it; was Peter saying Paul had written some letters,
but they were not easy to understand.
2 Timothy 3:16
Repeating what began this post does not a relevant observation make, no?
The main point, it refers only to the OT, period. The vast majority of the
NT had yet to appear when it was written. No jw joy there.
How many books did the Muratorian Fragment consist of, since you seem
to have done your homework on it.
Good point, you have only a jw plugin, I have studied church history for
years and know the severe limitations of the jw vatican, including the list
at issue.
Again getting away from the question. I know the books, but do you?
Post by servant
As to number, take the missing above and subtract from 27.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
As to friend jame's remark above, who determines what "all the way" is and
on what authority ? That has no solution, all groups would say they "go
all the way;" and would easily provide the reasons why.
I am not familiar with that quote. Fill me in.
It is the relevant part of your's at the beginning.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Every tom and dick and harry and Charles coming down the pike after the
start of the protestant movement invented their "all the way".
So be it. That is why there are so many Bible versions.
Correction, there are not "several bibles"; there are only translations
into english and other languages. Most important, nothing in the various
english translations in any meaningful way contradict
each other. The jw "translation" is the *only* one example of that.
That is because the JW Bible is full of truths. Yes, there are MANY
Bible versions. Most all of them start out with around 7000 errors.
They ignore the Tetragrammaton in the OT, and SUBSTITUTE "lord" or
"God" for it.
Smile, friend james prove the "errors" exist.
Sure. Here is a quote from Isaiah that contains the Tetragrammaton.
Isa 19:19:

Here is what it should look like:

-- American Standard
Isaiah 19:19 In that day shall there be an altar to Jehovah in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to
Jehovah.

Here are some popular Bible translations:

-- King James
Isaiah 19:19 In that day shall there be an altar to the Lord in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof to the
Lord.

- Living Bible
Isaiah 19:19 And there will be an altar to the Lord in the heart of
Egypt in those days, and a monument to the Lord at its border.

-- Revised Standard
Isaiah 19:19 In that day there will be an altar to the Lord in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar to the Lord at its border.

-- New American Standard
Isaiah 19:19 In that day there will be an altar to the LORD in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar to the LORD near its border.

-- New Revised Standard with Apocrypha
Isaiah 19:19 On that day there will be an altar to the Lord in the
center of the land of Egypt, and a pillar to the Lord at its border.

- Webster's Bible
Isaiah 19:19 In that day shall there be an altar to the LORD in the
midst of the land of Egypt, and a pillar at its border to the LORD.

-- New Living Translation
Isaiah 19:19 In that day there will be an altar to the Lord in the
heart of Egypt, and there will be a monument to the Lord at its
border.
Post by servant
What you are refferring to
without personal knowledge, just part of the jw plugin, are copying
variations in the many thousandss of greek document sources from which
english translations came.
See above.
Post by servant
The jw vatican 'translation" did not use them, they had no greek scholars..
Then why did they get such praises from Bible scholars on the NWT?
Post by servant
they rehashd english translations, period.
Whatever you said here is nonsense.
Post by servant
They then went back and "corrected" the english examples to make the jw
vatican invented doctrines work by inserting language. Then willy nilly,
they claim their doctrine is in scripture, how handy, no?
Just like ALL Bible versions, they revise their Bible as they see fit.
For example the Catholic NAB Bible: copyright 1970, 1986, 1991, etc.
Post by servant
None of the thousands of greek sources used contain the jw insertions 2000
years after the fact.
Here was the Greek NT sources of the NWT:

Armenian Version
Coptic Versions
Syriac Versions-Curetonian, Philoxenian, Harclean,
Palestinian, Sinaitic, Peshitta
Old Latin
Latin Vulgate
Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts
Greek Cursive MSS.
Erasmus Text
Stephanus Text
Textus Receptus
Griesbach Greek Text
Emphatic Diaglott
Papyri-(e.g., Chester Beatty P45, P46, P47; Bodmer P66, P74,P75)
Early Greek Uncial MSS.-Vatican 1209 (B), Sinaitic (<H<!>H>),
Alexandrine (A), Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (C), Bezae (D)
Westcott and Hort Greek Text
Bover Greek Text
Merk Greek Text
Nestle-Aland Greek Text
United Bible Societies Greek Text
23 Hebrew Versions (14th-20th centuries), translated either from the
Greek or from the Latin Vulgate, using Tetragrammaton for divine name"
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
The hebrew spelling of the name was never there to make correction
necessary in the greek OT 1st century jews used..
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
The last 200 or so years has seen them pop up like mushrooms, each
declaring the correctness of his "all the way" 1800 years and more after
the fact.
Using the same bible, mostly one translation, each tom and dick and harry
and charles invent very different and contridicting "real" christianity.
Yes, and they will be judged for doing so.
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.
Yet they get praises from Bible scholars. Must be doing something
right.
Post by servant
Correct, judged, and not found wanting as the jw vatican corruption
distorts scripture to suit an invented agenda.
Well, that's your opinion. Give some proof of that alleged
distortions.
Post by servant
They will also stand in judgement, no?
All humans and bad angels will stand in judgement. The 144,000 will
actually judge angels as well:

- Revised Standard
1 Corinthians 6:3 Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How
much more, matters pertaining to this life!

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
servant
2020-09-18 18:22:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Friend james lacking knowledge of the early church idea of what the canon
of the NT was; wil be happy to know this from the wiki entry

By the early 3rd century, Origen may have been using the same twenty-seven
books as in the present New Testament canon, though there were
still disputes over the acceptance of the Letter to the Hebrews, James,
II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation,^[24] known as the
Antilegomena. Likewise, the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps
as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat
similar to the twenty-seven book NT canon, which included four gospels
and argued against objections to them.^[25] Thus, while there was a
good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon,
the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all
Christians by the middle of the 3rd century.^[26]

In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a
list of the books that would become the twenty-seven-book NT
canon,^[27] and he used the word "canonized" (Greek: kanonizo' ena
kanonizomena) in regard to them.^[28]^[page needed] The first council that
accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod
of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393). A brief summary of the acts
was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and
419.^[29] These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who
regarded the canon as already closed.^[30]^[31]^[32]

Me:

The book of Revelation was the last book to be accepted by consensus of all
the church areas sometime in the 4th century.

Noting the jw vatican had *no* greek scholars to know the original NT
greek, I noted their sources were rehashed english translations. Before
the jw vatican did a "translation" mid 20th century they used the kjv.

Doubtless; because the kjv had "Jehovah" in a few places the jw vatican
willy nilly used that name when it appears nowhere in bible greek.
But because the jw vatican "translation drew much on the kjv to rehash
english sources, that name was accepted in ignorance."

Friend james trying to recoup a pretence the jw vatican used their own
Sigh, a huge mistake right off the bat, the following list are
translationss in the various languages, they were *not* "greek sources". as
friend james asserts.

Did the hall give him a bum steer on this, or is it a misreading of some
"watchtower" publication coming up in an archive search? I think the
latter, the details point to a copy paste meant to impress jws of the
academic prowess of the jw vatican, no?

In fact it reveals just the oppisite, no? Note, the below list was *not*
used in the first edition of the jw vatican "translation". Such efforts
were made after the fact to excuse corrumptions in the jw vatican
"translations" and were not used in later editions.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Armenian Version
Coptic Versions
Syriac Versions-Curetonian, Philoxenian, Harclean,
Palestinian, Sinaitic, Peshitta
Old Latin
Latin Vulgate
Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts
Greek Cursive MSS.
Erasmus Text
Stephanus Text
Textus Receptus
Griesbach Greek Text
Emphatic Diaglott
Papyri-(e.g., Chester Beatty P45, P46, P47; Bodmer P66, P74,P75)
Early Greek Uncial MSS.-Vatican 1209 (B), Sinaitic (<H<!>H>),
Alexandrine (A), Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (C), Bezae (D)
Westcott and Hort Greek Text
Bover Greek Text
Merk Greek Text
Nestle-Aland Greek Text
United Bible Societies Greek Text
23 Hebrew Versions (14th-20th centuries), translated either from the
Greek or from the Latin Vulgate, using Tetragrammaton for divine name"
Friend james has already shot himselff in the foot, because the jw vatican
had *no* greee scholars, they most certainly had none in thoseof the list
of languages.

It proves my observation without doubt, if consulted those in the list were
used *only* in english translation. The truth stands, the jw version was a
cherry picked rehash of english sources only. Cherry picked because they
were consulted only to the extent they looked for some possible excuse for
the jw vatican's insertions not found in any english translations.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
Correction, in the greek no where oes "Jehovah" appear. Friend james
fulll >> well that was aa failed transliteration rcc try from 700 years ago
only.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.
Yet they get praises from Bible scholars. Must be doing something
right.
No, that is the standard jw vatic plugin taught local jw folk, who will
ever question it can be in error.>

The claim of greek scholars is an interesting one. It confessses they have
none.

When first seeing such a claim assume it is greatly misleading at best and
often false.

A real greek scholar friend james previously used, but no longer. He made
a very public statement he rejected the jw vatican's misuse and
misrepresentation of his work.

They will search the work of real scholars to find some language bit that
taken in isolation appears to support the jw vatican, the above an example

The most egregious of all, they will use seperat bits and stitch them
togather as one complete part because that frabrication also seems to
support the jw vatican claims.

There are fact finding groups who read jw vatican literature to find these
false corruptions of other's work.

In friend james' defence, he has accepted the jw vatican claim if they are
saying there is no reason to consider anything else because they represent
God's will on earth.. He knows if he should even raise the topic he faces
almost certain expulsion should he not repent of his sinful "misttake".
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-23 14:39:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Friend james lacking knowledge of the early church idea of what the canon
of the NT was; wil be happy to know this from the wiki entry
By the early 3rd century, Origen may have been using the same twenty-seven
books as in the present New Testament canon, though there were
still disputes over the acceptance of the Letter to the Hebrews, James,
II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation,^[24] known as the
Antilegomena. Likewise, the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps
as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat
similar to the twenty-seven book NT canon, which included four gospels
and argued against objections to them.^[25] Thus, while there was a
good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon,
the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all
Christians by the middle of the 3rd century.^[26]
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a
list of the books that would become the twenty-seven-book NT
canon,^[27] and he used the word "canonized" (Greek: kanonizo' ena
kanonizomena) in regard to them.^[28]^[page needed] The first council that
accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod
of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393). A brief summary of the acts
was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and
419.^[29] These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who
regarded the canon as already closed.^[30]^[31]^[32]
The book of Revelation was the last book to be accepted by consensus of all
the church areas sometime in the 4th century.
Noting the jw vatican had *no* greek scholars to know the original NT
greek,
Then why the praises from many Bible scholars? Either the JW's didn't
know what they were doing, or they did. You can't have it both ways.
Post by servant
I noted their sources were rehashed english translations. Before
the jw vatican did a "translation" mid 20th century they used the kjv.
Yes, they bought the rights to it and printed many KJV Bibles. But as
they gained spiritual light, they did their own Bible which had no
advertisers or people to impress. That is why they remained silent.
They wanted all the praises to go to Jehovah God, and not to men.
And I agree with that even if I wasn't a JW.
Post by servant
Doubtless; because the kjv had "Jehovah" in a few places the jw vatican
willy nilly used that name when it appears nowhere in bible greek.
Don't forget the Greek Septuagint of the OT. Later Septuagints have
removed the divine name from its almost 7000 occurrences. But they
found an older fragment of the Septuagint that CONTAINED the divine
name. So we have reason to believe that Jesus and the apostles used a
Septuagint that contained the divine name.

Because Jesus said:

-- Revised Standard
John 17:26 I made known to them thy name, and I will make it known,
that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in
them."

-- New King James
John 17:6 "I have manifested Your name to the men whom You have given
Me out of the world. They were Yours, You gave them to Me, and they
have kept Your word.
Post by servant
But because the jw vatican "translation drew much on the kjv to rehash
english sources, that name was accepted in ignorance."
Look at the sources below of the NWT NT.
Post by servant
Friend james trying to recoup a pretence the jw vatican used their own
Sigh, a huge mistake right off the bat, the following list are
translationss in the various languages, they were *not* "greek sources". as
friend james asserts.
That's your opinion. You looked up and read everyone of them in
detail? No way.
Post by servant
Did the hall give him a bum steer on this, or is it a misreading of some
"watchtower" publication coming up in an archive search? I think the
latter, the details point to a copy paste meant to impress jws of the
academic prowess of the jw vatican, no?
It IS impressive. Since you are anti-JW, I could have listed anything
and you would have found fault with it. That is called being
prejudiced when you don't know all the details. Go to their web page
and see for yourself what they teach and in many cases, they say why.
Post by servant
In fact it reveals just the oppisite, no? Note, the below list was *not*
used in the first edition of the jw vatican "translation".
Nor do I recall it being in any Bible translation that I have seen. I
took it from the All Scripture is Inspired book. That book also lists
all of the sources for the Hebrew, Aramaic OT in the NWT.
Post by servant
Such efforts
were made after the fact to excuse corrumptions in the jw vatican
"translations" and were not used in later editions.
You really don't know what you are talking about:)
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Armenian Version
Coptic Versions
Syriac Versions-Curetonian, Philoxenian, Harclean,
Palestinian, Sinaitic, Peshitta
Old Latin
Latin Vulgate
Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts
Greek Cursive MSS.
Erasmus Text
Stephanus Text
Textus Receptus
Griesbach Greek Text
Emphatic Diaglott
Papyri-(e.g., Chester Beatty P45, P46, P47; Bodmer P66, P74,P75)
Early Greek Uncial MSS.-Vatican 1209 (B), Sinaitic (<H<!>H>),
Alexandrine (A), Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (C), Bezae (D)
Westcott and Hort Greek Text
Bover Greek Text
Merk Greek Text
Nestle-Aland Greek Text
United Bible Societies Greek Text
23 Hebrew Versions (14th-20th centuries), translated either from the
Greek or from the Latin Vulgate, using Tetragrammaton for divine name"
Friend james has already shot himselff in the foot, because the jw vatican
had *no* greee scholars, they most certainly had none in thoseof the list
of languages.
Why don't you get a spellchecker to help with your spelling?

As I said before, you have no idea what you are saying. As for
qualifications, based on what you say, they shouldn't have ANY praises
from any non-JW. But they have.

For an example, the praise comes from the Bible scholar Edgar
Goodspeed:

“I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world
wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous
translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I
can testify.”—Letter, December 8, 1950, from Edgar J. Goodspeed,
translator of the Greek “New Testament” in An American Translation."
(g87.3/22, p.14)

"Notice this about Doctor Goodspeed:

"Edgar Johnson Goodspeed (1871–1962) was an American theologian and
scholar of Greek and the New Testament. He taught for many years at
the University of Chicago, whose collection of New Testament
manuscripts he enriched by his searches. The University's collection
is now named in his honor.

He is widely remembered for his translations of the Bible: The New
Testament: an American Translation (1923), and (with John Merlin Powis
Smith) "The Bible, An American Translation" (1935), the "Goodspeed
Bible". He is also remembered for his translation of the Apocrypha,
and that translation was included in The Complete Bible, An American
Translation (1939). Finally, Harper & Brothers issued his widely
heralded The Apostolic Fathers: An American Translation (1950).

Another example:

"Dr. Benjamin Kedar, a Hebrew scholar in Israel, made a similar
comment concerning the New World Translation. In 1989 he said: “This
work reflects an honest endeavor to achieve an understanding of the
text that is as accurate as possible. . . . I have never discovered in
the New World Translation any biased intent to read something into the
text that it does not contain.”" (from wol.jw.org)

Now see if you can pick these apart and say negative things. I have
research the NWT many times and found it SUPERIOR to other Bibles.
Esp restoring the divine name in the OT found around 7000 times.
Post by servant
It proves my observation without doubt, if consulted those in the list were
used *only* in english translation. The truth stands, the jw version was a
cherry picked rehash of english sources only. Cherry picked because they
were consulted only to the extent they looked for some possible excuse for
the jw vatican's insertions not found in any english translations.
Sorry, but your opinions are bogus. You rarely give examples to
support your opinions.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
Correction, in the greek no where oes "Jehovah" appear.
Not in the NT manuscripts. (but what should it be if the OT manuscript
contains the Tetragrammaton and quotes it?) But it does appear in the
old Greek Septuagint such as fragment Fouad 266.

Also, the shortened form of "Jehovah" is found in the NT as
Hallelujah. They didn't chop that one out.
Post by servant
Friend james
fulll >> well that was aa failed transliteration rcc try from 700 years ago
only.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.
Yet they get praises from Bible scholars. Must be doing something
right.
No, that is the standard jw vatic plugin taught local jw folk, who will
ever question it can be in error.>
Nope. I said that using my own reasoning. Is it wrong reasoning? I am
sure you will say it is, which will show readers the depth you will go
to degrade JW's.
Post by servant
The claim of greek scholars is an interesting one. It confessses they have
none.
See the examples above and read what they say about the NWT.
Post by servant
When first seeing such a claim assume it is greatly misleading at best and
often false
Are you just making this stuff up?
Post by servant
A real greek scholar friend james previously used, but no longer. He made
a very public statement he rejected the jw vatican's misuse and
misrepresentation of his work.
At the time he said things, he believed them. But he likely didn't
want his reputation ruined by agreeing with a JW 'cult'. Here is the
info you are probably talking about:

How accurate is the NWT? Notice this comment from Jason BeDuhn,
associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona
University, who compared eight major Bible translations, including the
NWT. He said it was

"remarkably good" and "better by far" and "consistently better".

He also said, "the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal,
conservative translation of the original expressions of the New
Testament writers."

And he concluded that the NWT (NT):

"is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament
currently available" and "the most accurate of the translations
compared". (Truth in Translation:Accuracy and Bias in English
Translations of the New Testament)

[info taken from the Watchtower magazine, 12/1/04, P. 30.]

Now you tell me if he refuted ALL of that.
Post by servant
They will search the work of real scholars to find some language bit that
taken in isolation appears to support the jw vatican, the above an example
See the examples above.
Post by servant
The most egregious of all, they will use seperat bits and stitch them
togather as one complete part because that frabrication also seems to
support the jw vatican claims.
You are giving NO examples of your claims. Then they are just your
negative opinions.
Post by servant
There are fact finding groups who read jw vatican literature to find these
false corruptions of other's work.
An example?
Post by servant
In friend james' defence, he has accepted the jw vatican claim if they are
saying there is no reason to consider anything else because they represent
God's will on earth.. He knows if he should even raise the topic he faces
almost certain expulsion should he not repent of his sinful "misttake".
Do you really believe what you are saying? Yes, I believe it is God's
path to His servants. So if I started chopping on the JW's, after some
elder meetings pointing out the Scriptures I violated, then I would
deserve to be ousted.

The Bible says the true religion should"all speak in agreement" AND
JW'S DO:

-- American Standard
1 Corinthians 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, through the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing and that there
be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfected together in the
same mind and in the same judgment.


James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
servant
2020-09-23 20:17:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james lacking knowledge of the early church idea of what the canon
of the NT was; wil be happy to know this from the wiki entry
By the early 3rd century, Origen may have been using the same twenty-seven
books as in the present New Testament canon, though there were
still disputes over the acceptance of the Letter to the Hebrews, James,
II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation,^[24] known as the
Antilegomena. Likewise, the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps
as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat
similar to the twenty-seven book NT canon, which included four gospels
and argued against objections to them.^[25] Thus, while there was a
good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon,
the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all
Christians by the middle of the 3rd century.^[26]
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a
list of the books that would become the twenty-seven-book NT
canon,^[27] and he used the word "canonized" (Greek: kanonizo' ena
kanonizomena) in regard to them.^[28]^[page needed] The first council that
accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod
of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393). A brief summary of the acts
was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and
419.^[29] These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who
regarded the canon as already closed.^[30]^[31]^[32]
The book of Revelation was the last book to be accepted by consensus of all
the church areas sometime in the 4th century.
Noting the jw vatican had *no* greek scholars to know the original NT
greek,
Then why the praises from many Bible scholars? Either the JW's didn't
know what they were doing, or they did. You can't have it both ways.
Hmm, let's see; there were 5 men who did the "translation". One had 2
years of university the others none. All obviously superb greek scholars
one and all, no?
As for the opinion of others, friend james tried out one of them in
another thread. When people who knew him and his work reviewed what he
was claimed to have said, well it wasn't pretty.

In short, it was one of the proven tacts the jw vatican uses to distort the
work of others to their benefit.
y.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
I noted their sources were rehashed english translations. Before
the jw vatican did a "translation" mid 20th century they used the kjv.
Yes, they bought the rights to it and printed many KJV Bibles. But as
they gained spiritual light, they did their own Bible which had no
advertisers or people to impress.
Correction, they needed a new "translation" that did not contain the
glaring contridictions to jw vatican claims in the kjv. So they rehased
the kjv to include those claims in corrupted insertions and deletions.
Post by z***@windstream.net
That is why they remained silent.
They wanted all the praises to go to Jehovah God, and not to men.
And I agree with that even if I wasn't a JW.
Smile, the jw vatican excuse when asked who did the "translation".. See
above about the 5 men who did it. A jw vatican insider outed them.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Doubtless; because the kjv had "Jehovah" in a few places the jw vatican
willy nilly used that name when it appears nowhere in bible greek.
Don't forget the Greek Septuagint of the OT. Later Septuagints have
removed the divine name from its almost 7000 occurrences. But they
found an older fragment of the Septuagint that CONTAINED the divine
name. So we have reason to believe that Jesus and the apostles used a
Septuagint that contained the divine name.
Chuckle, which is completely irrelevant to the greek NT where the
insertions were also done. It has been observed not uses of God and Lord
were changed, just those which the jw vatican do not want to say Christ was
God, how handy , no?
Post by z***@windstream.net
John 17:26 I made known to them thy name, and I will make it known,
that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in
them."
The jews had personal names for God and Lord. Now consider the jw Vatican
excuse the "name" above was the unspoken 4 letter for God. give us a
break.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
But because the jw vatican "translation drew much on the kjv to rehash
english sources, that name was accepted in ignorance."
Look at the sources below of the NWT NT.
Post by servant
Friend james trying to recoup a pretence the jw vatican used their own
Sigh, a huge mistake right off the bat, the following list are
translationss in the various languages, they were *not* "greek sources". as
friend james asserts.
That's your opinion. You looked up and read everyone of them in
detail? No way.
Friend james, the names are also the names for the languages, *none*
greek. Those which were greek said so in the name.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Did the hall give him a bum steer on this, or is it a misreading of some
"watchtower" publication coming up in an archive search? I think the
latter, the details point to a copy paste meant to impress jws of the
academic prowess of the jw vatican, no?
It IS impressive. Since you are anti-JW, I could have listed anything
and you would have found fault with it. That is called being
prejudiced when you don't know all the details. Go to their web page
and see for yourself what they teach and in many cases, they say why.
I'm pro truth against false fully invented claims. That is so regardless
of whom makes those false claims. The example at hand happens to be the jw
vatican rather crude easily refuted claims.>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
In fact it reveals just the oppisite, no? Note, the below list was *not*
used in the first edition of the jw vatican "translation".
Nor do I recall it being in any Bible translation that I have seen. I
took it from the All Scripture is Inspired book. That book also lists
all of the sources for the Hebrew, Aramaic OT in the NWT.
Shrug, the jw vatican self excuse book, no? The 5 original men who did
the ""translation" did *not* claime to have consulted that list. That list
appeared later when the fact they had no greek scholars was made known by a
jw vatican insider.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Such efforts
were made after the fact to excuse corrumptions in the jw vatican
"translations" and were not used in later editions.
You really don't know what you are talking about:)
Smile, interpretation; no jw vatican source says so, so it ain't true, no?
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Armenian Version
Coptic Versions
Syriac Versions-Curetonian, Philoxenian, Harclean,
Palestinian, Sinaitic, Peshitta
Old Latin
Latin Vulgate
Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts
No claimed greek sources, all in the language of the names.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Greek Cursive MSS.
Erasmus Text
Stephanus Text
Textus Receptus
Griesbach Greek Text
Emphatic Diaglott
Papyri-(e.g., Chester Beatty P45, P46, P47; Bodmer P66, P74,P75)
Early Greek Uncial MSS.-Vatican 1209 (B), Sinaitic (<H<!>H>),
Alexandrine (A), Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (C), Bezae (D)
Westcott and Hort Greek Text
Bover Greek Text
Merk Greek Text
Nestle-Aland Greek Text
United Bible Societies Greek Text
23 Hebrew Versions (14th-20th centuries), translated either from the
Greek or from the Latin Vulgate, using Tetragrammaton for divine name"
Friend james has already shot himselff in the foot, because the jw vatican
had *no* greee scholars, they most certainly had none in thoseof the list
of languages.
Why don't you get a spellchecker to help with your spelling?
As I said before, you have no idea what you are saying. As for
qualifications, based on what you say, they shouldn't have ANY praises
from any non-JW. But they have.
Lets cut to the hase, first show the evidence for *any* greek scholar
among the original 5 men.
Post by z***@windstream.net
For an example, the
praise comes from the Bible scholar
Ed

gar
Post by z***@windstream.net
I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world
wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous
translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I
can testify.Letter, December 8, 1950, from Edgar J. Goodspeed,
translator of the Greek New Testament in An American Translation."
(g87.3/22, p.14)
"Edgar Johnson Goodspeed (18711962) was an American theologian and
scholar of Greek and the New Testament. He taught for many years at
the University of Chicago, whose collection of New Testament
manuscripts he enriched by his searches. The University's collection
is now named in his honor.
He is widely remembered for his translations of the Bible: The New
Testament: an American Translation (1923), and (with John Merlin Powis
Smith) "The Bible, An American Translation" (1935), the "Goodspeed
Bible". He is also remembered for his translation of the Apocrypha,
and that translation was included in The Complete Bible, An American
Translation (1939). Finally, Harper & Brothers issued his widely
heralded The Apostolic Fathers: An American Translation (1950).
Now see if you can pick these apart and say negative things. I have
research the NWT many times and found it SUPERIOR to other Bibles.
Esp restoring the divine name in the OT found around 7000 times.
I did so for the above in another thread. In short, scholars who knew him
and his work say it is *highly* unlikely he said that. They provided
examles why, including discusssion with him on the very point. As for the
"letter" they have very valid reason to question it is real.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
It proves my observation without doubt, if consulted those in the list were
used *only* in english translation. The truth stands, the jw version was a
cherry picked rehash of english sources only. Cherry picked because they
were consulted only to the extent they looked for some possible excuse for
the jw vatican's insertions not found in any english translations.
Sorry, but your opinions are bogus. You rarely give examples to
support your opinions.
Smile, easy, show us an english version which includes the jw vatican
insertions. Opinion about invented opinion is not such evidence, no?>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
Correction, in the greek no where oes "Jehovah" appear.
Not in the NT manuscripts. (but what should it be if the OT manuscript
contains the Tetragrammaton and quotes it?) But it does appear in the
old Greek Septuagint such as fragment Fouad 266.
Also, the shortened form of "Jehovah" is found in the NT as
Hallelujah. They didn't chop that one out.
Post by servant
Friend james
fulll >> well that was aa failed transliteration rcc try from 700 years ago
only.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.
Yet they get praises from Bible scholars. Must be doing something
right.
No, that is the standard jw vatic plugin taught local jw folk, who will
ever question it can be in error.>
Nope. I said that using my own reasoning. Is it wrong reasoning? I am
sure you will say it is, which will show readers the depth you will go
to degrade JW's.
Post by servant
The claim of greek scholars is an interesting one. It confessses they have
none.
See the examples above and read what they say about the NWT.
And read above why that appears just to be another example of the
distortions.>>
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
When first seeing such a claim assume it is greatly misleading at best and
often false
Are you just making this stuff up?
Post by servant
A real greek scholar friend james previously used, but no longer. He made
a very public statement he rejected the jw vatican's misuse and
misrepresentation of his work.
At the time he said things, he believed them. But he likely didn't
want his reputation ruined by agreeing with a JW 'cult'. Here is the
How accurate is the NWT? Notice this comment from Jason BeDuhn,
associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona
University, who compared eight major Bible translations, including the
NWT. He said it was
"remarkably good" and "better by far" and "consistently better".
He also said, "the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal,
conservative translation of the original expressions of the New
Testament writers."
"is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament
currently available" and "the most accurate of the translations
compared". (Truth in Translation:Accuracy and Bias in English
Translations of the New Testament)
[info taken from the Watchtower magazine, 12/1/04, P. 30.]
Now you tell me if he refuted ALL of that.
Post by servant
They will search the work of real scholars to find some language bit that
taken in isolation appears to support the jw vatican, the above an example
See the examples above.
Post by servant
The most egregious of all, they will use seperat bits and stitch them
togather as one complete part because that frabrication also seems to
support the jw vatican claims.
You are giving NO examples of your claims. Then they are just your
negative opinions.
Post by servant
There are fact finding groups who read jw vatican literature to find these
false corruptions of other's work.
An example?
The one above. When I brought what he said to your attention, we have not
heard of him since.
z***@windstream.net
2020-09-24 17:45:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Friend james lacking knowledge of the early church idea of what the canon
of the NT was; wil be happy to know this from the wiki entry
By the early 3rd century, Origen may have been using the same twenty-seven
books as in the present New Testament canon, though there were
still disputes over the acceptance of the Letter to the Hebrews, James,
II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation,^[24] known as the
Antilegomena. Likewise, the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps
as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat
similar to the twenty-seven book NT canon, which included four gospels
and argued against objections to them.^[25] Thus, while there was a
good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon,
the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all
Christians by the middle of the 3rd century.^[26]
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a
list of the books that would become the twenty-seven-book NT
canon,^[27] and he used the word "canonized" (Greek: kanonizo' ena
kanonizomena) in regard to them.^[28]^[page needed] The first council that
accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod
of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393). A brief summary of the acts
was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and
419.^[29] These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who
regarded the canon as already closed.^[30]^[31]^[32]
The book of Revelation was the last book to be accepted by consensus of all
the church areas sometime in the 4th century.
Noting the jw vatican had *no* greek scholars to know the original NT
greek,
Then why the praises from many Bible scholars? Either the JW's didn't
know what they were doing, or they did. You can't have it both ways.
Hmm, let's see; there were 5 men who did the "translation". One had 2
years of university the others none. All obviously superb greek scholars
one and all, no?
As for the opinion of others, friend james tried out one of them in
another thread. When people who knew him and his work reviewed what he
was claimed to have said, well it wasn't pretty.
In short, it was one of the proven tacts the jw vatican uses to distort the
work of others to their benefit.
On the contrary, the JW organization tries to bring people to the
Bible. That why there are free Bible studies and door to door work.
Post by servant
y.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
I noted their sources were rehashed english translations. Before
the jw vatican did a "translation" mid 20th century they used the kjv.
Yes, they bought the rights to it and printed many KJV Bibles. But as
they gained spiritual light, they did their own Bible which had no
advertisers or people to impress.
Correction, they needed a new "translation" that did not contain the
glaring contridictions to jw vatican claims in the kjv. So they rehased
the kjv to include those claims in corrupted insertions and deletions.
They upgraded their situation. Was that so wrong?
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
That is why they remained silent.
They wanted all the praises to go to Jehovah God, and not to men.
And I agree with that even if I wasn't a JW.
Smile, the jw vatican excuse when asked who did the "translation".. See
above about the 5 men who did it. A jw vatican insider outed them.
Who?
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Doubtless; because the kjv had "Jehovah" in a few places the jw vatican
willy nilly used that name when it appears nowhere in bible greek.
Don't forget the Greek Septuagint of the OT. Later Septuagints have
removed the divine name from its almost 7000 occurrences. But they
found an older fragment of the Septuagint that CONTAINED the divine
name. So we have reason to believe that Jesus and the apostles used a
Septuagint that contained the divine name.
Chuckle, which is completely irrelevant to the greek NT where the
insertions were also done. It has been observed not uses of God and Lord
were changed, just those which the jw vatican do not want to say Christ was
God, how handy , no?
Negatrons. The use of God and Lord were dependant upon the source
manuscripts.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
John 17:26 I made known to them thy name, and I will make it known,
that the love with which thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in
them."
The jews had personal names for God and Lord. Now consider the jw Vatican
excuse the "name" above was the unspoken 4 letter for God. give us a
break.
What the Jews did is up to them. At a time, the whole nation was
apostate. Even God Himself told what His name is:

-- American Standard
Exodus 6:3 and I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob,
as God Almighty; but by my name Jehovah I was not known to them.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
But because the jw vatican "translation drew much on the kjv to rehash
english sources, that name was accepted in ignorance."
Look at the sources below of the NWT NT.
Post by servant
Friend james trying to recoup a pretence the jw vatican used their own
Sigh, a huge mistake right off the bat, the following list are
translationss in the various languages, they were *not* "greek sources". as
friend james asserts.
That's your opinion. You looked up and read everyone of them in
detail? No way.
Friend james, the names are also the names for the languages, *none*
greek. Those which were greek said so in the name.
That was the sources for the NT in the NWT, whether you believe it or
not.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Did the hall give him a bum steer on this, or is it a misreading of some
"watchtower" publication coming up in an archive search? I think the
latter, the details point to a copy paste meant to impress jws of the
academic prowess of the jw vatican, no?
It IS impressive. Since you are anti-JW, I could have listed anything
and you would have found fault with it. That is called being
prejudiced when you don't know all the details. Go to their web page
and see for yourself what they teach and in many cases, they say why.
I'm pro truth against false fully invented claims. That is so regardless
of whom makes those false claims. The example at hand happens to be the jw
vatican rather crude easily refuted claims.>
Name one.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
In fact it reveals just the oppisite, no? Note, the below list was *not*
used in the first edition of the jw vatican "translation".
Nor do I recall it being in any Bible translation that I have seen. I
took it from the All Scripture is Inspired book. That book also lists
all of the sources for the Hebrew, Aramaic OT in the NWT.
Shrug, the jw vatican self excuse book, no? The 5 original men who did
the ""translation" did *not* claime to have consulted that list. That list
appeared later when the fact they had no greek scholars was made known by a
jw vatican insider.
They didn't share with me any of the details on their translation
methods. Who was this "Vatican insider". Was he disfellowshipped?
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Such efforts
were made after the fact to excuse corrumptions in the jw vatican
"translations" and were not used in later editions.
You really don't know what you are talking about:)
Smile, interpretation; no jw vatican source says so, so it ain't true, no?
I don't know all the goings on at the headquarters. Write them if you
need info. That's where you will get the truth. Their Bible is the
best Bible among Bibles. But I use most all Bibles to get God's
truths.

Here is an example of the superiority of the NWT.

Notice the translation of verb forms. In the NT, the Greek verb tenses
express not only the TIME of an action or state, but also the KIND of
action, whether momentary, starting out, continuing, repetitious, or
completed. Attention to such coloring of the Greek verb forms leads to
a precise translation with the full force of the action described.

For instance, the verb form at Mt 7:7 is of the 'continuing' type, not
just a one time thing. But these other translations only show it to be
a one time thing:

-- King James Version (KJV)
Matthew 7:7, "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall
find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:"

--New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Matthew 7:7, "Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and you shall
find; knock, and it shall be opened to you."

-- New King James Version (NKJV)
Matthew 7:7, "Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will
find; knock, and it will be opened to you."

-- New American Bible (Catholic) (NAB)
Matthew 7:7, "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will
find; knock and the door will be opened to you."

-- Revised Standard Version (RSV)
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find;
knock, and it will be opened to you."

-- New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
Matthew 7:7 "Ask, and it will be given you; search, and you will
find; knock, and the door will be opened for you."

-- New International Version (NIV)
Matthew 7:7, "Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will
find; knock and the door will be opened to you."

However the NWT has rendered the verb form as it was written, and thus
intended to be read and understood. Also many other translations agree
with the NWT:

--New World Translation (NWT)

Matthew 7:7, "Keep on asking, and it will be given YOU; keep on
seeking, and YOU will find; keep on knocking, and it will be opened to
YOU."

"Keep on asking and it will be given you; keep on seeking and you will
find; keep on knocking [reverently] and [the door] will be opened to
you." (AMP--Amplified Bible)

“Keep asking, and it will be given to you; keep seeking, and you will
find; keep knocking, and the door will be opened to you."
(CJB--Complete Jewish Bible )

"“Continue to ask, and God will give to you. Continue to search, and
you will find. Continue to knock, and the door will open for you."
(ERV--Easy-to-Read Version)

"“·Ask [Keep asking], and ·God will give [L it will be given; C the
passive verb implies God as subject] to you. ·Search [Seek; Keep
seeking], and you will find. ·Knock [Keep knocking], and the door will
open for you. " (EXB--Expanded Bible)

“Keep asking, and it will be given to you. Keep searching, and you
will find. Keep knocking, and the door will be opened to you."
(HCSB--Holman Christian Standard Bible)

“Keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on
seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be
opened to you." (NLT--New Living Translation)

"Keep asking and it shall be given to you; keep searching and you
shall find; keep knocking and the delet shall be opened to you.
" (OJB--Orthodox Jewish Bible)

"Just ask and it will be given to you; seek after it and you will
find. Continue to knock and the door will be opened for you. "
(VOICE--The Voice)

The continual asking, and seeking, and knocking, is a main part of the
thought from that verse because of the verb form used there in the
original. And so should be evident there as well in the translation.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Armenian Version
Coptic Versions
Syriac Versions-Curetonian, Philoxenian, Harclean,
Palestinian, Sinaitic, Peshitta
Old Latin
Latin Vulgate
Sixtine and Clementine Revised Latin Texts
No claimed greek sources, all in the language of the names.
So what? I guarantee you other Bibles have a similar list of
references.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Greek Cursive MSS.
Erasmus Text
Stephanus Text
Textus Receptus
Griesbach Greek Text
Emphatic Diaglott
Papyri-(e.g., Chester Beatty P45, P46, P47; Bodmer P66, P74,P75)
Early Greek Uncial MSS.-Vatican 1209 (B), Sinaitic (<H<!>H>),
Alexandrine (A), Ephraemi Syri rescriptus (C), Bezae (D)
Westcott and Hort Greek Text
Bover Greek Text
Merk Greek Text
Nestle-Aland Greek Text
United Bible Societies Greek Text
23 Hebrew Versions (14th-20th centuries), translated either from the
Greek or from the Latin Vulgate, using Tetragrammaton for divine name"
Friend james has already shot himselff in the foot, because the jw vatican
had *no* greee scholars, they most certainly had none in thoseof the list
of languages.
Yet the Bible gets compliments. The proof is in the pudding.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Why don't you get a spellchecker to help with your spelling?
As I said before, you have no idea what you are saying. As for
qualifications, based on what you say, they shouldn't have ANY praises
from any non-JW. But they have.
Lets cut to the hase, first show the evidence for *any* greek scholar
among the original 5 men.
If they didn't publish the names, how am I supposed to know. It can be
anything, maybe 10 Greek/Hebrew scholars. Who knows?
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
For an example, the
praise comes from the Bible scholar
Ed
gar
Post by z***@windstream.net
I am interested in the mission work of your people, and its world
wide scope, and much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous
translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I
can testify.Letter, December 8, 1950, from Edgar J. Goodspeed,
translator of the Greek New Testament in An American Translation."
(g87.3/22, p.14)
"Edgar Johnson Goodspeed (18711962) was an American theologian and
scholar of Greek and the New Testament. He taught for many years at
the University of Chicago, whose collection of New Testament
manuscripts he enriched by his searches. The University's collection
is now named in his honor.
He is widely remembered for his translations of the Bible: The New
Testament: an American Translation (1923), and (with John Merlin Powis
Smith) "The Bible, An American Translation" (1935), the "Goodspeed
Bible". He is also remembered for his translation of the Apocrypha,
and that translation was included in The Complete Bible, An American
Translation (1939). Finally, Harper & Brothers issued his widely
heralded The Apostolic Fathers: An American Translation (1950).
Now see if you can pick these apart and say negative things. I have
research the NWT many times and found it SUPERIOR to other Bibles.
Esp restoring the divine name in the OT found around 7000 times.
Also, the Watchtower mentions his name (Goodspeed) here and there
usually agreeing with the NWT on some technical point.
Post by servant
I did so for the above in another thread. In short, scholars who knew him
and his work say it is *highly* unlikely he said that. They provided
examles why, including discusssion with him on the very point. As for the
"letter" they have very valid reason to question it is real.
Prejudicial lies.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
It proves my observation without doubt, if consulted those in the list were
used *only* in english translation. The truth stands, the jw version was a
cherry picked rehash of english sources only. Cherry picked because they
were consulted only to the extent they looked for some possible excuse for
the jw vatican's insertions not found in any english translations.
Sorry, but your opinions are bogus. You rarely give examples to
support your opinions.
Smile, easy, show us an english version which includes the jw vatican
insertions.
What insertions? Do you mean the Tetragrammaton in the NWT?
Post by servant
Opinion about invented opinion is not such evidence, no?>
We all have opinions.
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
The NWT is one of the few Bibles that has restored God's name in the
OT.
Correction, in the greek no where oes "Jehovah" appear.
Not in the NT manuscripts. (but what should it be if the OT manuscript
contains the Tetragrammaton and quotes it?) But it does appear in the
old Greek Septuagint such as fragment Fouad 266.
Also, the shortened form of "Jehovah" is found in the NT as
Hallelujah. They didn't chop that one out.
Post by servant
Friend james
fulll >> well that was aa failed transliteration rcc try from 700 years ago
only.
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
Smile, the jw vatican directed that same translation be used before some 75
years inventing their "translation" without greek scholars.
Yet they get praises from Bible scholars. Must be doing something
right.
No, that is the standard jw vatic plugin taught local jw folk, who will
ever question it can be in error.>
Nope. I said that using my own reasoning. Is it wrong reasoning? I am
sure you will say it is, which will show readers the depth you will go
to degrade JW's.
Post by servant
The claim of greek scholars is an interesting one. It confessses they have
none.
See the examples above and read what they say about the NWT.
And read above why that appears just to be another example of the
distortions.>>
Distortions are in your mind, not in the NWT. See above the accuracy
of the NWT on just one verse. (Mt 7:7)
Post by servant
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
When first seeing such a claim assume it is greatly misleading at best and
often false
Are you just making this stuff up?
Post by servant
A real greek scholar friend james previously used, but no longer. He
made
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by servant
a very public statement he rejected the jw vatican's misuse and
misrepresentation of his work.
At the time he said things, he believed them. But he likely didn't
want his reputation ruined by agreeing with a JW 'cult'. Here is the
How accurate is the NWT? Notice this comment from Jason BeDuhn,
associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona
University, who compared eight major Bible translations, including the
NWT. He said it was
"remarkably good" and "better by far" and "consistently better".
He also said, "the greater accuracy of the NW as a literal,
conservative translation of the original expressions of the New
Testament writers."
"is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament
currently available" and "the most accurate of the translations
compared". (Truth in Translation:Accuracy and Bias in English
Translations of the New Testament)
[info taken from the Watchtower magazine, 12/1/04, P. 30.]
Now you tell me if he refuted ALL of that.
Post by servant
They will search the work of real scholars to find some language bit that
taken in isolation appears to support the jw vatican, the above an example
See the examples above.
Post by servant
The most egregious of all, they will use seperat bits and stitch them
togather as one complete part because that frabrication also seems to
support the jw vatican claims.
You are giving NO examples of your claims. Then they are just your
negative opinions.
Post by servant
There are fact finding groups who read jw vatican literature to find these
false corruptions of other's work.
An example?
The one above. When I brought what he said to your attention, we have not
heard of him since.
I just quoted him above. And I can't believe he refuted ALL of his
statements.

James
www.jw.org
The Bible is truths
Michael Christ
2020-09-14 22:06:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Sep 2020 22:06:46 +1000, Michael Christ
Post by z***@windstream.net
Post by Michael Christ
Well, the Lord told me today, praise His name and His Person. After a
number of events He gave me just one word that explains it, crystal
clear. Yet that one word encapsulates and explicates the whole of the
so-called Christian organisations on the Earth.
Why are there so many religious coulda, woulda, shoulda denominations
that declare themselves to be of God yet are false to the core??!! Why
do they downplay their deliberate and blatant sinful actions and attempt
to explain them away as 'mistakes' and 'dumb decisions'.
The Lord is never wrong. Just one word shows them for what they are and
why they are where they are.
Perhaps someone else knows why? Surely among so many esteemed anointed
agents of truth here that at least one would know??
They don't follow the Bible all the way. (2 Tim 3:16)
What sinner does?? Okay then, so what do they do instead?

You are very close to what the Lord revealed to me but can you in all
your bible learning take the next step into the Spirit of Truth?
Rather, make the case with the Lord in prayer to reveal it to you?





Michael Christ

--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??
Colonel Edmund J. Burke
2020-09-18 05:08:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Michael? You seem to have thrown out a lotta chum for the tards of late.
Michael Christ
2020-09-18 10:29:47 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Michael?  You seem to have thrown out a lotta chum for the tards of late.
One has to deal with what one gets.




Michael Christ
--
Rom 5:8  But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were
YET sinners, Christ died for us.

"To seek your own will is to seek your own glory".

"If God is not first in everything He is not first in anything".

"Sin is not what you do, it is what you are".

"What makes the bible the truth?" "The resonance of God".

"All men were born sinners. Why? Because all men were born not loving
God with all their heart, soul and mind. An abomination". What do you
think sin is? Just a word??

"Compromise will condemn you."
Loading...