BlindSeeker Posted February 3, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 3, 2010 The point is simple, are we adding to the intended meaning of the Greek and affixing our own theological understanding to it. What exactly do you think is being added to the intended meaning? Greetings Brother Shiloh, It is simple the addition of "plurality" to the word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 3, 2010 Share Posted February 3, 2010 The point is simple, are we adding to the intended meaning of the Greek and affixing our own theological understanding to it. What exactly do you think is being added to the intended meaning? Greetings Brother Shiloh, It is simple the addition of "plurality" to the word. Can you elaborate a little? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricH Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 366 Topics Per Day: 0.05 Content Count: 10,933 Content Per Day: 1.57 Reputation: 212 Days Won: 1 Joined: 04/21/2005 Status: Offline Share Posted February 4, 2010 Still, I have no problem recognizing the deity of Jesus and understanding there is one Father, Lord, God and Holy Spirit. Peace What exactly is your understanding to the nature of the relationship between the Father, Son , and Holy Spirit? My wording was made quickly with me having the luxury of knowing my intent. A more thorough statement would have been - "Still, I have no problem recognizing the scriptures' assertion of the deity of Jesus and their presentation that there is but one Father, Lord, God and Holy Spirit." Regarding you question, I believe as Jesus said, God is a Spirit who has commanded us to be holy as He is holy. Thus God is in fact the Holy Spirit. John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. 1Pe 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; 16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy. I believe in the aspect of God as the Father. Ex 4:22 And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, even my firstborn Job 31:15 Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? Pr 22:2 The rich and poor meet together: the LORD is the maker of them all. Mal 2:10 Have we not all one father? hath not one God created us? . . . I believe in the aspect of God as the Father of all things, including the humanity of Jesus, The Christ. This was accomplished when the Holy Spirit overshadowed her and she conceived, which would seem to make the Holy Ghost clearly the Father of Christ. Lu 1:35 And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. I believe Jesus was God manifested in the flesh, 1Ti 3:16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. And I accept that Jesus was both son of man and Son of God, the Christ, or Anointed One. For more information you can read my Justified in the Spirit thread from 2003. But, EricH, the OP really wasn't about "what I believe," rather about what we each believe and why. Are we keeping to the integrity of the Word to what it really says, or are we giving unintended meaning to parts of it? That is the subject matter. Peace When you say "aspect" what is it exactly that you are meaning. What is the exact nature of the relationship (in your view) between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. What differentiates them? I assumed that what you believe is fair game since you are a part of the "we" and "each". Before I can determine if what you are syaing here gives unintended meaning, I have to understand exactly what you believe. What is the nature of the relationships between Father Son and Holy Spirit. How are they different, and how are they the same? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.75 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.94 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 4, 2010 Warning: Bunny trail ahead! 27. And the Lord created man in His Likeness: [JERUSALEM TARGUM. And the Word of the Lord created man in His likeness, in the likeness of the presence of the Lord He created him, the male and his yoke-fellow He created them.] In the image of the Lord He created him, with two hundred and forty and eight members, with three hundred and sixty and five nerves, and overlaid them with skin, and filled it with flesh and blood. Male and female in their bodies He created them. Where did the words "with two hundred and forty and eight members, with three hundred and sixty and five nerves, and overlaid them with skin, and filled it with flesh and blood" come from? What are the 248 "members"? And number of nerves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 4, 2010 Warning: Bunny trail ahead! 27. And the Lord created man in His Likeness: [ JERUSALEM TARGUM. And the Word of the Lord created man in His likeness, in the likeness of the presence of the Lord He created him, the male and his yoke-fellow He created them.] In the image of the Lord He created him, with two hundred and forty and eight members, with three hundred and sixty and five nerves, and overlaid them with skin, and filled it with flesh and blood. Male and female in their bodies He created them. Where did the words "with two hundred and forty and eight members, with three hundred and sixty and five nerves, and overlaid them with skin, and filled it with flesh and blood" come from? What are the 248 "members"? And number of nerves? LOL I sure hope you aren't asking me! But apparently it is in the Jerusalem Targum . . . I think that it may be just a side note added for the readers . . . similar to a Thompson Chain reference bible . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 4, 2010 The point is simple, are we adding to the intended meaning of the Greek and affixing our own theological understanding to it. What exactly do you think is being added to the intended meaning? Greetings Brother Shiloh, It is simple the addition of "plurality" to the word. Can you elaborate a little? There is no need to elaborate Shiloh. It is right there in the OP, plain and simple. Unless you are trying to ask something I am not addressing in the OP, you have all the info there. I know very well you're an intelligent individual and you've read it all ready. So if there is something related to the OP you wish to know other than what I already stated, ask it. No games, go to the point if you have one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 4, 2010 When you say "aspect" what is it exactly that you are meaning. What is the exact nature of the relationship (in your view) between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. What differentiates them? I assumed that what you believe is fair game since you are a part of the "we" and "each". Before I can determine if what you are syaing here gives unintended meaning, I have to understand exactly what you believe. What is the nature of the relationships between Father Son and Holy Spirit. How are they different, and how are they the same? What do I mean by "aspect?" Do you really think that falls into the same category as the meaning of "Godhead?" What are you going to ask me next, what my definition of "is" is? Actually, that is not the even topic of the thread. I did not call it "What BlindSeeker believes about the Godhead," though I given you a link to Justified in the Spirit which clearly express the answer you want me to believe you are seeking. You been around here as long as me. I've stated my position and beliefs over and over and over . . . but that simply isn't the subject matter here . . . but you know that already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 4, 2010 Share Posted February 4, 2010 The point is simple, are we adding to the intended meaning of the Greek and affixing our own theological understanding to it. What exactly do you think is being added to the intended meaning? Greetings Brother Shiloh, It is simple the addition of "plurality" to the word. Can you elaborate a little? There is no need to elaborate Shiloh. It is right there in the OP, plain and simple. Unless you are trying to ask something I am not addressing in the OP, you have all the info there. I know very well you're an intelligent individual and you've read it all ready. So if there is something related to the OP you wish to know other than what I already stated, ask it. No games, go to the point if you have one. How have we pluralized the Godhead into "Godheads?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,063 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 427 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Author Share Posted February 4, 2010 The point is simple, are we adding to the intended meaning of the Greek and affixing our own theological understanding to it. What exactly do you think is being added to the intended meaning? Greetings Brother Shiloh, It is simple the addition of "plurality" to the word. Can you elaborate a little? There is no need to elaborate Shiloh. It is right there in the OP, plain and simple. Unless you are trying to ask something I am not addressing in the OP, you have all the info there. I know very well you're an intelligent individual and you've read it all ready. So if there is something related to the OP you wish to know other than what I already stated, ask it. No games, go to the point if you have one. How have we pluralized the Godhead into "Godheads?" Ok . . . Shiloh. Out of respect for you, though I know you are fully aware of "how," I will copy and paste part of the Op for you here. . . . The work of the Spirit is as such. He is part of the Godhead, or Trinity as we now put it. . . . Many people, as we see with OneLight here, interpret and understand the word "godhead" to mean and/or imply the Trinity, and do not read the word as simply divine or divinity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e lansing Posted February 4, 2010 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 895 Content Per Day: 0.17 Reputation: 9 Days Won: 1 Joined: 12/23/2009 Status: Offline Share Posted February 4, 2010 sorry did not read all the post At any rate, the Godhead to me represents the Goverment of God Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts