Jump to content
IGNORED

Jesus Is God


KiwiChristian

Recommended Posts

Guest shiloh357
15 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again Justin Adams,

 

Are you suggesting that he was slain twice? Once before the foundation of the world and then again 2000 years ago? Or did God when he contemplated the creation of the world, he also saw the fall of man and the necessity of providing the Lamb of God (not God the Lamb).

 

Kind regards

Trevor

 

In Revelation 13:8 it refers to Jesus as the Lamb "slain from the foundations of the earth."   But when you examine the Greek construction, it refers not to something that happened time, but something that was predetermined in the past, but has a continued effect in the present.   It would be appropriate to read it as, "the Lamb [considered]slain from the foundation of the world." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  26
  • Topic Count:  61
  • Topics Per Day:  0.03
  • Content Count:  9,602
  • Content Per Day:  4.02
  • Reputation:   7,795
  • Days Won:  21
  • Joined:  09/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Judges are normally called judges (humans).

Angels, 'Man', Messenger, 'Like unto the son of man', gods (elohim plural) are normally members of the High Council, archons (principalities) none human entities. El does not refer to humans. Yeshua is often referenced in human-like form in the OT.

In other words, there are humans and animals etc. Then there are all the other created non-human creatures probably vastly outnumbering us few human beings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again Adstar, shiloh357and Justin Adams,

 

23 hours ago, Adstar said:

If you believe the KJV is not without error then you do not believe it is the inspired word of God...

My religion is based on the KJV which i recognize as the Word of God..

Yes i totally reject all that you have said and all that you will ever say because you have no foundation ,, You have no Rock,, All you have is your own fallible faulty human judgement..

And again you do not believe in the Bible because you believe it is not without fault.. If some of it is faulty then you cannot have faith in any of it..

So please don't end your post by saying you believe in the Bible ... You don't ..

I believe the Bible is inspired not the KJV. In my meeting we have a German and two Italians. When our German sister goes to Germany to visit her sister and father who do not speak English, what inspired Bible should they use? Similarly with our two Italian brethren, what Bible should they use in Italy? Some time ago I considered the meaning of the Greek word Ekklesia, usually translated church in the KJV. My impression is that the KJV translators were not happy with Tyndale’s translation congregation. Perhaps almost a hint of being non-conformist, and possibly one reason the established Church persecuted and killed Tyndale. Also in the course of checking this I found the expression “robbers of churches” in Acts 19:37. Could you explain the meaning of the word “churches” here in the KJV of Acts 19:37? What churches existed in Ephesus at that time?

 

23 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

In Revelation 13:8 it refers to Jesus as the Lamb "slain from the foundations of the earth."   But when you examine the Greek construction, it refers not to something that happened time, but something that was predetermined in the past, but has a continued effect in the present.   It would be appropriate to read it as, "the Lamb [considered]slain from the foundation of the world." 

I appreciate your explanation, but I was responding to the following from Justin Adams.

On ‎17‎/‎03‎/‎2018 at 12:26 AM, Justin Adams said:

From TrevorL: "as I do not believe that Jesus pre-existed before he was born,"

I hope in time that you will revise this thought. He (Yeshua) was slain from before the foundation of the world.

I do not know for sure if what you are saying supports Justin’s claim that the Lamb slain proves Jesus’ pre-existence. Another thought is that “the world” could also be the Jewish world, and Jesus is the Passover Lamb(s) slain in Egypt which brought about the formation of the nation.

 

16 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Judges are normally called judges (humans).

Angels, 'Man', Messenger, 'Like unto the son of man', gods (elohim plural) are normally members of the High Council, archons (principalities) none human entities. El does not refer to humans. Yeshua is often referenced in human-like form in the OT.

In other words, there are humans and animals etc. Then there are all the other created non-human creatures probably vastly outnumbering us few human beings.

But the word Elohim is used for the Judges in Exodus 21:6 (KJV). Are you suggesting contrary to Adstar that the KJV is not inspired here? (I am not serious with this last comment, as I do not advocate the KJV only view, but simply hinting at the dilemma of the contrary views expressed here). As far as your Post is concerned, no I cannot accept your view or the 14 page article that you previously referenced. I briefly stated why I rejected the article, or the start of the article.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Edited by TrevorL
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  75
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,399
  • Content Per Day:  0.43
  • Reputation:   1,307
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/01/2002
  • Status:  Offline

32 minutes ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again Adstar, shiloh357and Justin Adams,

  Also in the course of checking this I found the expression “robbers of churches” in Acts 19:37. Could you explain the meaning of the word “churches” here in the KJV of Acts 19:37? What churches existed in Ephesus at that time?

 

In context it spoken by the townclerk of the city who was a worshiper of Diana::

Acts 19: KJV

35 "And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter? {36} Seeing then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly. {37} For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess."

So in context the man is talking about the temple / temples dedicated to Diana so in context the word church is being used to show places of worship of Diana.. It is not talking about Christian congregations...  I really have no idea why you are asking me this?

Are you saying because at the time there where no Christian churches there that the KJV Bible is therefore faulty??  Because that would be an incredibly weak and pathetic accusation..

And another thing that just popped into my head.. This is recording the words of a pagan... Are you saying that the words of a pagan need to be infallible in the Bible???  The Bible has recorded the faulty words of many faulty men as part of it's message..  The Revelation that men are faulty beings is part of the Holy Bible's narrative ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again Adstar,

 

8 hours ago, Adstar said:

In context it spoken by the townclerk of the city who was a worshiper of Diana::

Acts 19: KJV

35 "And when the townclerk had appeased the people, he said, Ye men of Ephesus, what man is there that knoweth not how that the city of the Ephesians is a worshipper of the great goddess Diana, and of the image which fell down from Jupiter? {36} Seeing then that these things cannot be spoken against, ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly. {37} For ye have brought hither these men, which are neither robbers of churches, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess."

So in context the man is talking about the temple / temples dedicated to Diana so in context the word church is being used to show places of worship of Diana.. It is not talking about Christian congregations...  I really have no idea why you are asking me this?

Are you saying because at the time there where no Christian churches there that the KJV Bible is therefore faulty??  Because that would be an incredibly weak and pathetic accusation..

And another thing that just popped into my head.. This is recording the words of a pagan... Are you saying that the words of a pagan need to be infallible in the Bible???  The Bible has recorded the faulty words of many faulty men as part of it's message..  The Revelation that men are faulty beings is part of the Holy Bible's narrative ...

Well done, you have given an accurate explanation despite the minor difficulty with the KJV. I did not know whether you would go to a dictionary to see whether the word church was an archaic word that also applied to pagan temples, or a different translation such as the RV has “robbers of churches”, but rather you seem to have worked out and corrected the KJV by the context. No I do not think that the town-clerk got the word wrong. By the way my KJV margin has “Gr. the temple keeper” instead of the KJV “a worshipper” in verse 35. In your estimation was this marginal note a part of the original translation and also thus inspired, or was this a later addition by an editor? Is "the temple keeper" the correct translation, thus following the original inspired text? The RV has temple-keeper as the translation. Are they wrong? 

 

Also do you use a copy of the original 1611 KJV, or a later edition where they changed the spelling and some pronunciation marks? Would you prefer Tyndale’s translation “Congregation” which helps to distinguish between a church building and the members of those believers who have been called out of the world by the gospel message? In many countries the established church is very much in league with the state, and is thus not separate from the world as the word Ekklesia implies. By the way it has been claimed that up to 80% of the KJV is based upon Tyndale's translation, but the KJV translators never acknowledged him because the established Church of England persecuted and killed Tyndale. The Church of England had conflict with non-conformists for many years, so I view the KJV as the official Bible of the established church, often in conflict with the faithful remnant. Nevertheless the KJV is an excellent God given Bible as are the many other Bible versions after this. Only the original Bible was inspired. All translations show some errors including the KJV and German and Italian Bibles.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

Edited by TrevorL
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  1,022
  • Topics Per Day:  0.16
  • Content Count:  39,193
  • Content Per Day:  6.14
  • Reputation:   9,977
  • Days Won:  78
  • Joined:  10/01/2006
  • Status:  Offline

On 3/17/2018 at 6:37 AM, shiloh357 said:

In Revelation 13:8 it refers to Jesus as the Lamb "slain from the foundations of the earth."   But when you examine the Greek construction, it refers not to something that happened time, but something that was predetermined in the past, but has a continued effect in the present.   It would be appropriate to read it as, "the Lamb [considered]slain from the foundation of the world." 

That is how I understand that passage as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Worthy Ministers
  • Followers:  68
  • Topic Count:  185
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  14,204
  • Content Per Day:  3.35
  • Reputation:   16,629
  • Days Won:  30
  • Joined:  08/14/2012
  • Status:  Offline

Yes, God the Son, the Word, pre existed with Father God in the beginning.  When He was born of Mary He was named Jesus.  He was crucified for our sins, was buried and arose from the dead, ascended into heaven and was given a Name above every name.  He was given the glory He previously had with the Father.  So the Word God became Jesus, and Jesus was returned to His original status as being with the Father.  The Word created all things.  

Col 1:15  He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. Col 1:16  For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.

Col 1:17  And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. Col 1:18  And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.

Col 1:19  For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, Col 1:20  and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

  • Praise God! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

15 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

Yes I meant to write John 11.

John 11:40-42 (KJV): 40 Then they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up his eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. 42  And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me. 43  And when he thus had spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth.

Yes it was Jesus that raised Lazarus, but it is evident that Jesus first prayed to God, his Father.

 

WHAT did He pray?

 

You are assuming He asked God the father to raise lazarus or give Him the power. There is ZERO Biblical support for this assumption.

 

15 hours ago, TrevorL said:

We are not told exactly what he prayed, but it appears that he was given the affirmative to raise Lazarus. “Heard” in this context means more than just listening, but almost consent.

 

Doesn't appear that way to me at all.

Again, you are starting with the presupposition that Jesus is NOT God and did NOT have the power to raise lazarus.

Your interpretation and bias ( for want of a better phrase ) leads you to that conclusion.

 

15 hours ago, TrevorL said:

 

 No one profound, but simply our Bible Class. The various selected speakers usually run a series, and recent and current topics have been 1 Peter, Isaiah, Zechariah and Hebrews, expounding a chapter per night. I notice on many occasions that their explanation lines up with the RV or NASB in words and sometimes sense.

 

So, WHO? Who publishes this "series".

 

If the explanations line up with the rv or nasb, i would be very worried indeed as these are, i believe based on the corrupt Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and westcot and hort texts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Trinitarian
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  308
  • Content Per Day:  0.10
  • Reputation:   139
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/13/2016
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  02/14/1944

Greetings again KiwiChristian,

 

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

Again, you are starting with the presupposition that Jesus is NOT God and did NOT have the power to raise lazarus.

My understanding of Jesus is that he was a man, and the evidence that he was approved of God were the miracles that he performed and it was God who performed these miracles through Jesus. Jesus received the Holy Spirit at his baptism.

Acts 2:22 (KJV): Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know:

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

So, WHO? Who publishes this "series".

I am speaking of our normal Bible Class which is similar to most mid-week Bible Classes in our fellowship. I assume then that this is unfamiliar to your experience. I am the librarian for our meeting and record all the meetings on Sunday and mid-week and collect any slides. I then distribute a CD each month to some members and make copies of individual talks and series. I do not post these talks on the Internet but some of our meetings do post, and for example I have a series of 100 talks on Isaiah given over 10 years at another meeting.

4 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

If the explanations line up with the rv or nasb, i would be very worried indeed as these are, i believe based on the corrupt Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus and westcot and hort texts.

You may like to comment on my post to Adstar on Church / Temple and also congregation. Also what is your view on the KJV margin “Gr. the temple keeper” instead of the KJV “a worshipper” in Acts 19:35. This does not depend on the MSS on this occasion. The RV has temple-keeper as the translation. Are they wrong? One cap does not fit all.
 

Kind regards Trevor

Edited by TrevorL
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  75
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,399
  • Content Per Day:  0.43
  • Reputation:   1,307
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  09/01/2002
  • Status:  Offline

14 hours ago, TrevorL said:

Greetings again Adstar,

 

Well done, you have given an accurate explanation despite the minor difficulty with the KJV. I did not know whether you would go to a dictionary to see whether the word church was an archaic word that also applied to pagan temples, or a different translation such as the RV has “robbers of churches”, but rather you seem to have worked out and corrected the KJV by the context. No I do not think that the town-clerk got the word wrong. By the way my KJV margin has “Gr. the temple keeper” instead of the KJV “a worshipper” in verse 35. In your estimation was this marginal note a part of the original translation and also thus inspired, or was this a later addition by an editor? Is "the temple keeper" the correct translation, thus following the original inspired text? The RV has temple-keeper as the translation. Are they wrong? 

 

Also do you use a copy of the original 1611 KJV, or a later edition where they changed the spelling and some pronunciation marks? Would you prefer Tyndale’s translation “Congregation” which helps to distinguish between a church building and the members of those believers who have been called out of the world by the gospel message? In many countries the established church is very much in league with the state, and is thus not separate from the world as the word Ekklesia implies. By the way it has been claimed that up to 80% of the KJV is based upon Tyndale's translation, but the KJV translators never acknowledged him because the established Church of England persecuted and killed Tyndale. The Church of England had conflict with non-conformists for many years, so I view the KJV as the official Bible of the established church, often in conflict with the faithful remnant. Nevertheless the KJV is an excellent God given Bible as are the many other Bible versions after this. Only the original Bible was inspired. All translations show some errors including the KJV and German and Italian Bibles.

 

Kind regards

Trevor

So again you do not recognize any Bibles as being Holy.. Therefore you do not believe in a Bible as the inspired  word of God that can be trusted in as a guide for your faith.. Therefore your religion will be anything you think it should be.. Therefore there is no common standard anyone can use to challenge anything you teach or affirm as being the will of God,..

So again any discussion with you is pointless because you cannot be made to stand corrected by any Bible... Because you declare that all Bibles today have errors..

No fruitful fellowship can be had with you..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...