ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Live On Earth Forever

Will man live on earth forever as opposed to living in heaven?

Join Our Free Singles and Take The Heaven & Hell Bible Quiz
 ---1st_cliff on 3/4/13
     Helpful Blog Vote (3)

Post a New Blog



'would there be a need to quote a rule when you were discussing why 2 Peter 1:1 declared Christ YHWH?'- Christianet's Vatican representative.

The Roman Catholic Church desperately want their first pope 'declare Christ YHWH (God)'. The Vatican could have twisted 2Thess.1:12 but this verse was written by the apostle Paul. What better way than to twist what Peter wrote at 2Pe.1:1. Force the deception on their unsuspecting flock and push the idea the first pope- Peter- declares Jesus 'God'.

But they forgot that 2Thess.1:12 (and other verses) which are construted exactly the same do not promote the false trinity teaching that Jesus is the same as God.

Marc is a mouthpiece for the apostates sitting in the Vatican.
---David8318 on 3/17/13


"[Not] allowed to read other literature" Marc

Well that must be challenging for Witnesses, young and old, attending schools around the world studying history, science, etc., using just their Watchtowers while others use the curriculum texts books.

Prove your ill-informed (and bizarre) accusation or we will file it under "fail", along with your other false claims.

Some of the most impressive libraries I have seen are in JW homes, with exhaustive collections of books on language, science, religion, etc., far beyond what has been published by JWs. Many JWs are authors.

A personal (JW) friend is a Hebrew teacher on the University level. It must be difficult for him to do so using just his WT.
---scott on 3/17/13


Scott, You are an apostate from the Baptist church, does the stove call the kettle black?
I know you're not "allowed" to read Leonard and Marjorie Cretien's book but if you did you might just learn something of the Societie's actions! They were there at Bethel! as was Raymond Franz!
---1st_cliff on 3/17/13


Scott: What Church Father [etc] ever referred to..such a rule before [Sharp]?

Ancient Greek is a dead language. When I studied at university 20 y.a. I learned new meanings etc still being discovered because there's no definitive ancient text from that world (btw, there isn't much left from that world!). That's why there are reams of literature and academic papers arguing what one word's significance is in, say, Plato's Republic.

But I guess you'd never understand Scott because (i) JWs aren't allowed to read other literature (ii) you never studied Greek at university.

If you were writing and speaking Greek 2000 years ago, would there be a need to quote a rule when you were discussing why 2 Peter 1:1 declared Christ YHWH?
---Marc on 3/17/13


1Pe1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
1Pe1:4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,
Where is it reserved?

1Th4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
Where does the Lord abide forever?

2Co5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
Where is my building?
---trey on 3/16/13




"Scott's inverted commas around 'rule' implies Sharp invented Greek." Marc

Wow. Invented Greek...really? Koine Greek, alone, predates Christ by 300-400 years...invented by Sharp? Seriously?

Marc may be hitting the Chianti a little early in the day here.

The quotation marks around "rule" do not "imply that Sharp invented Greek", (glug, glug, glug), but rather...that he invented a "rule".

And he did.

Did it exist before Sharp came up with it? What Church Father, Greek scholar or early apologist ever referred to or cited such a rule before him?
---scott on 3/16/13


"I was there...breaking up families...blah, blah, blah"- 1st_cliff

Is an apostate like 1st_cliff a credible source of information?

"Apostates and New Religious Movements"- Bryan R. Wilson, Ph.D:

"Neither the objective sociological researcher nor the court of law can readily regard the apostate as a creditable or reliable source of evidence. He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to both his previous religious commitment and affiliations, the suspicion must arise that he acts from a personal motivation to vindicate himself and to regain his self-esteem...

Continued
---scott on 3/16/13


"Blah, blah, blah"- 1st_cliff (2)

"...by showing himself to have been first a victim but subsequently to have become a redeemed crusader. As various instances have indicated, he is likely to be suggestible and ready to enlarge or embellish his grievances to satisfy that species of journalist whose interest is more in sensational copy than in a objective statement of the truth."

Wilson, University of Oxford, 1926 - 2004, Emeritus Professor at All Souls College.

I can't recall sharing the grim details of my life as a Baptist, fraught with horrendous hypocrisy and prison-worthy abuse while the collection plate passed under our noses as many as three times during one service.

Who believes me?
---scott on 3/16/13


Scott: "Sharp developed his "rule" to ESTABLISH Christ's divinity." [Scott's inverted commas around 'rule' implies Sharp invented Greek.]

Prove it! Scott quoted Wallace: "[Sharp's] strong belief in Christ's deity led him to study Scriptures in the original to DEFEND more ably that precious truth." Scott, paraphrasing/interpreting' Wallace, first uses 'establish' (i.e. originally no proof, then created it) but Wallace said Sharp first knew from Scripture Christ's deity but researched the Greek to DEFEND it.
Next Scott adds 'defend' as though the words are synonymous: Sharp isn't "objective [because] his "rule" [arose from] his desire to establish (or defend) the deity of Christ."
---Marc on 3/16/13


Scott: "Not to mention Sharp himself who specifically developed his so-called "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ in the bible."

Sharp didn't develop the rule to "establish" Christ's divinity but to defend an ALREADY established truth. This is what Wallace, whom you paraphrased from Wiki, actually said.

To repeat my unanswered and awkward questions: Are you now saying Sharp just invented this grammar rule and lied? Are you claiming that Sharp's rule has no foundation in Koine Greek whatsoever, that there is no PATTERN at all, that the article-noun-kai-noun indicating only 1 referent is a delusion?
---Marc on 3/16/13




1 Thessalonians 4:16
For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Titus 2:13
Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ,

The Lord Jesus returns establishing Gods Kingdom on earth reigning as King of Kings Jeremiah 23:5 2 Peter 3:13 Rev 19:15-16 1 Timothy 6:15

Revelation 5:10
And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.

Revelation 17:18
And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

heaven is not promised or rewarded
---Follower_of_Christ on 3/16/13


'Scott has deceitfully changed "defend" in a qoute'- Warwick.

This is another Warwick lie. Everyone can see scott accurately quotes Wallace. Warwick is ranting like a proper pentecostal cultist C & MA fanatic.

I agree, the divinity of Christ is not an established fact. All unholy trinities are heretical, polytheist dogmas. Christendoms Hellenic trinity heresy is no different.

Trinitarians believe 'Lord' is Jesus' post resurrection name. So Acts 2:34, 'the Lord said to my Lord...' is proof of trinitarian polytheism! Trinitarians also believe God required another God to experience love in an eternity past- 1Jo.4:8.

The trinity is pernicious polytheism!
---David8318 on 3/16/13


"Changed "defend" in a qoute." (SIC) Warwick

Warwick and Marc, (Sons of blunder? Mark 3:17).

Sadly, I have no choice but to break out the highlighter = )

If Warwick would actually read the comments below he would see that on 3/14/13, in response to Marc's hypocritical jab regarding Winer, I wrote:

"And you quote Bowman...

...Not to mention Sharp himself who specifically developed his so-called "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ in the bible.

Hardly an objective endeavor wouldn't you say?"


These are my own words. Mine. Me.

"Defend" is Wallace's word...2 posts later.
---scott on 3/16/13


Warwick, I was there at the assembly eagerly awaiting the release of the 1st NWT of the Christian Greek Scriptures (NT)The NWT was not published all at once,but as it was translated.
We were told that it was translated by 18 bible scholars and I believed it.
Later I discovered that there was not one "accredited" bible scholar in the group!
Reading other translations (NIV etc) I also find bias in the direction of the translator's personal beliefs!
The publisher of Thayer's Greek English Lexicon warn people that he was Unitarian and did not believe the trinity!
---1st_cliff on 3/16/13


I wrote today of JW deceit and right there in front of us is Scott ever willing to display JW deceit. Because of his zealous need to defend the indefensible Scott has deceitfully changed "defend" in a qoute, to the much more acceptable (to Scott) "establish", such perfidy. The word establish refers to the beginning of something while defend is totally different, meaning to defend something which already exists. The writer is therefore saying he is learning more so as to better defend what he already knows, not to "establish" anything.

When anyone defends the truth they do not have to descend to such base subterfuge.
---Warwick on 3/16/13


Warwick, You are absollutly right about the organization breaking up families, they have utterly destroyed mine!

Having said that,strangely enough, some of their doctrines are true.(for this you assume I'm still one of them)
Catholic doctrine Trinity,literal hell fire etc. you subscribe to but you of course deny being Catholic...same thing,Warwick!
---1st_cliff on 3/15/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


"No, straw man"- Marc

You raised the issue of Sharp's honesty then argued against it. Classic Strawman.

"You substituted the word 'establish 'for 'defend"- Marc

You do understand what the word "substitute" means right?

Read the posts again.The word "establish" is mine and was clearly not attributed to anyone else. So how exactly was anything "substituted"?

Only after you embarrassed yourself by smugly asking for "facts" did I post Wallace's comments and, of course, I never attributed my words to him or his to me so your claim of substituting words is another obvious strawman.

The topic is...still...objectivity.
---scott on 3/15/13


No, straw man, Scott, but straight to the heart of the matter: you substituted the word 'establish 'for 'defend' with respect to Sharp's address of Christ's diety. The word 'defend' obviously is relevant only after something has already been established. This clearly evinces another case of JW dishonesty.

Hey, Scott: lower your head - there's something around your ankles.
---Marc on 3/15/13


From experience I know the Watchtower organization is an evasive, deceitful cult which breaks up families for no good reason. It claims to be God's mouthpiece, He who does not change, but they say He does. For example it once labelled organ transplants "cannibalism" Milton G Henschel US presiding officer of the JW's, (one of seven international directors, those who elect the president) July 1968. How many people died because of this evil? But apparently God changed His mind as the JW president said transplants were not cannibaliam in 1980! What next, will God change His mind on Adultery or murder?

Understanding the JW's are evil, deceitful and wont to change God's mind for Him we should disregard whatever they write.
---Warwick on 3/15/13


Marc's "strawman"-

Marc says that I cited Winer (actually, Ezra Abbot cited him...not me). But highlighting his hypocrisy, I pointed out that Marc himself sited Bowman, a vocal anti-Unitarian. (Silence).

Additionally I pointed out that Sharp himself could hardly be objective if his studies and his "rule" were motivated by his desire to establish (or defend) the deity of Christ.

Smugly, Marc asks for "facts" to which I happily oblige.

Caught with his theological pants down Marc now presents a classic "strawman" argument, suggesting that I questioned Sharp's honesty and then argues against something that I never suggested.

The topic is "objectivity."
---scott on 3/15/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


1Cliff, Your right, man's imaginations run wild, that's what I've been trying to you. You never speak from the Spirit, so your imaginations run wild. You say,
"You know there are people who firmly believe they can talk to dead people? Imagination"
They can, it does not mean the dead talk back to them.
God says,
"These things we also speak, not in words which man's wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor. 2:13,14) I speak of spiritual things, and you belief they are foolishness.
---Mark_V. on 3/15/13


"Sharp developed his "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ." scott

Daniel Wallace wrote, "As he studied the Scriptures in the original, he noticed a certain pattern, namely, when the construction article-noun-[kai]-noun involved personal nouns...they always referred to the same person..."

So, are you now saying Sharp just invented this grammar rule and lied? Are you claiming that the above rule has no foundation in Koine Greek whatsoever, that there is no PATTERN at all, that the article-noun-kai-noun is a delusion?

Cut-and-paste Scott the slave, dishonest as ever, once again perversely serves his Watchtower Brooklyn masters.
---Marc on 3/15/13


Wallace wrote: "[Sharps] strong belief in Christs deity led him to study the Scriptures in the original in order to defend more ably that precious truth"

Scott, due to his inherent dishonesty, replaces Wallace's "defend" with "establish", thereby subtly making Sharp out to be basically dishonest.

Sharp already knew from Scripture that Jesus was YHWH but studied the original languages of the Bible to better defend his case. Scott sees this as dishonest. Go figure who really is the dishonest man.
---Marc on 3/15/13


"Sharp developed his "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ." scott

"Like to show us some facts for this?" Marc

Will Daniel Wallace do?

"His strong belief in Christs deity led him to study the Scriptures in the original in order to defend more ably that precious truth...As he studied the Scriptures in the original, he noticed a certain pattern, namely, when the construction article-noun-[kai]-noun involved personal nouns...they always referred to the same person..."

Daniel B. Wallace, (1983). The Semantic Range of the Article-Noun-Kai-Noun Plural Construction in the New Testament". Grace Theological Journal 4 (1): 61. Retrieved 2008-12-19.
---scott on 3/14/13


Send a Free Valentine's Day Ecard


Scott: "Not to mention Sharp himself who specifically developed his so-called "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ in the bible."

Like to show us some facts for this?

BTW, as is well known, JWs loves to cut just enough to seem like someone is supporting the Watchtower's heresy, and then paste it up to fool themselves and anyone else who can't be bothered to check the original document. The JW's tendentious editing of The Catholic Encyclopedia is a perfect example of this deceit.
---Marc on 3/14/13


"I see you quote Winer, a famous anti-Trinitarian." Marc

And you quote Bowman, a famous anti-Unitarian.

Not to mention Sharp himself who specifically developed his so-called "rule" to establish the divinity of Christ in the bible.

Hardly an objective endeavor wouldn't you say?
---scott on 3/14/13


Scott,

I see you quote Winer, a famous anti-Trinitarian.
---Marc on 3/13/13


Mark V, There's no limit to man's imagination,just look at tecknology today even though we are mere earthlings.We don't live in space because we're humans and earth is our home that God made for us.The food,the air we breathe ,all designed by God for us humans.
To imagine somehow that you're a spiriit being is self delusion by an over active imagination!
God and angels are spirit beings and you are not one of those!
You know there are people who firmly believe they can talk to dead people? Imagination!
---1st_cliff on 3/14/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


1Cliff, it is impossible to give you a complete answer to the questions in 125 limit words. Second, it is also impossible for you to understand this in the Spirit, because your questions an answers are all in the flesh, since God is Spirit. I speak of God working in the Spirit, you cannot see that. you come back with something the flesh can see. So to you it will always be a cliche because you are thinking from man's point of view who doesn't belief in spiritual matters. That is why no one can make sense to you. If I had time and space I would explain it to you and give you proof, but even then you would not believe it because God is Spirit and you don't understand those things, at least not now.
---Mark_V. on 3/13/13


"I believe these men were better acquainted with ancient Greek than you..." micha9344

I'm sure that your are correct.

However, you quote these men (who lived long after the inspired bible writers were dead and gone), as if you were quoting scripture.

Do you believe that these men were inspired of God as were the writers of the bible?
---scott on 3/12/13


"Athanasius, Hippolytus- micha9344

"I know that after I [Paul] leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and...

...distort the truth ...

...in order to draw away disciples after them." Acts 20:29, 30, NIV
---scott on 3/12/13


Mark V, These are hackneyed cliche's, with no meaning
IE Describe how His humanity died but not Him!
**when Jesus answered the Father** Obviously two persons here, explain!(soliloquy?)
Col.2.9 How does this indicate more than one person? It doesn't!
You're shadow boxing Mark!
---1st_cliff on 3/12/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


Revelation 11:15 "... The kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever."

per Lord Jesus (Rev 11:15) he states he reigns on earth forever (and ever) if there were any doubt Zechariah 14

So yes man (once resurrected to eternal life) will reign on earth with the Lord Jesus because there are no scriptures that state man will reign in heaven, or any scriptures stating Lord Jesus will reign in heaven.
---Follower_of_Christ on 3/12/13


"...Now, as our Lord Jesus Christ, who is also God, was prophesied of under the figure of a lion..."-Hippolytus [a.d. 170-236]
How old is your copy of the scriptures scott? These men may have read the originals. How about you?
I believe these men were better acquainted with ancient Greek than you as well.
---micha9344 on 3/12/13


"Athanasius (298-373 AD")- micha9344

And which book of the bible did Athanasius write? It seems to be missing from my copy.

How many years after the last inspired bible book was written, (John's Gospel) did Athanasius write these uninspired words?
---scott on 3/12/13


1Cliff, a child can understand things better then you can. He knows that Jesus while in His ministry was human. His humanity died, not His Divine nature. When Jesus answered the Father, He was answering in His humanity.
The trick of all cults is to attack Jesus in His humanity to reject that He was also God in His Divine nature. But Jesus not only was man, but as God He had all the attributes of God because He was God. Every attribute ascribed to Christ present a clear revelation that in Him "the whole fulness of Deity dwells bodily" (Col. 2:9). And every attribute related to Deity ascribed to the Father or the Holy Spirit can also be attributed to Christ.
---Mark_V. on 3/12/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


Such falderal, God is "immortal" Jesus died.No one, not even God, can die and live at the same time!
John.3.16 says Jesus was "sent" by the Father,nothing about the Father doing it Himself. What does "GAVE" His only begotten Son mean?(gave Himself? get real)
Even a child can understand this simple principle!
Doctors of Divinity cannot explain the hodge-podge of Trinity gobbledy gook!
---1st_cliff on 3/11/13


"Behold the Virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is being interpreted God with us But what does that mean, if not that God has come in the Flesh? While the Apostolic tradition teaches in the words of blessed Peter, Forasmuch then as Christ suffered for us in the Flesh, and in what Paul writes, Looking for the blessed hope and appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a people for His own possession, and zealous of good works How then has He given Himself, if He had not worn flesh?"-Athanasius (298-373 AD)
---micha9344 on 3/11/13


Sharp's Rule and "Typical evasive ignorance"- Marc

Titus 2:13:

NRSV- "The manifestation of our great God and Saviour (or of the great God and our Savior), Jesus Christ." Footnote

TEV- "when the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ (or the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ) will appear." Footnote


The translators of the NRSV and TEV draw attention to appropriate alternative renderings in their footnotes in spite of Sharp's rule.

Why?

Will these translations be dismissed by Marc (along with the KJV and ASV) as inaccurate and outdated?
---scott on 3/10/13


mark why share "heavenly places" and insist it states heaven?? Eph. 2:4-7

NOTICE what Ephesians 2:4-7 does not say: it does not say heaven, Gods throne, or "in" heaven, truth is the entire chapter of Ephesians 2 has nothing (absolutely nothing) to do with heaven

scripture notes heavenly places only 4 times and not once is "heavenly places" described or alluded to as the PLACE OF heaven

another ADDITION to the Word of God! take heed to Gods warning to not add to his Holy Word! when you do spiritual understanding may be revealed until then you are lost in your fables this is why God said to believe every Word written, and warned to not ADD to his Word
---Follower_of_Christ on 3/10/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


Ezra Abbot on Titus 2:13- (1)

The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel and Other Critical Essays, pp. 439-457.

"Take an example from the New Testament. In Matt. xxi. 12 we read that Jesus 'cast out all those that were selling and buying in the temple, [tous polountas kai agoazontas]'. No one can reasonably suppose that the same persons are here described as both selling and buying...

...here it is safely left to the intelligence of the reader to distinguish them. In the case before us [Tit 2:13], the omission of the article before [soteros] seems to me to present no difficulty,- not because [soteros] is made sufficiently definite by the addition of [hemon] (Winer)...

Continued-
---scott on 3/10/13


E. Abbot - Titus 2:13- (2)

"since God as well as Christ [are] called "our Saviour," [he doxa tou megalou Theou kai soteros hemon], standing alone, would most naturally be understood of one subject, namely, God, the Father, but the addition of [Iesou Khristou to soteros hemon] changes the case entirely, restricting the [soteros hemon] to a person or being who, according to Paul's habitual use of language, is distinguished from the person or being whom he designates as [ho Theos], so that there was no need of the repetition of the article to prevent ambiguity...

...the simple addition of [Iesou Khristou to kyriou] makes the reference to the two distinct subjects clear without the insertion of the article."
---scott on 3/10/13


1st Cliff, Re: man and angels. The Bible does not specify that angels were created in GOD's Image. But, we must know what that Image of GOD is. One aspect of GOD's Image is that HE is Three Persons-in-ONE. The human family is, also, at least three-persons-in-one family unit. The angels do not marry and produce families. But, man is "lower" than the angels for they do not have the powers and might that angels were created with. In this way, man is of GOD's Image and still classified as being "lower" than the angels, while not diminishing Who GOD is.
---Gordon on 3/10/13


As concerning the man that honors and respects the LORD "His soul shall dwell at ease, and his seed shall inherit the earth. For evildoers shall be cut off: but those that wait upon the LORD, they shall inherit the earth." Again those "blessed of him shall inherit the earth, and [they that be] cursed of him shall be cut off. Blessed are the meek, For they shall inherit the earth." And as for the overcomer Father "hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth." The New Jerusalem comes down out of heaven to the saints on earth. Refs.Psa 25:12,13>Psa 37:9>Psa 37:22>Mat 5:5>Rev 5:10>Rev 21:2,10>Rev 20:8.9
---joseph on 3/10/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


Peter, you say,

"The only question, Mark V, is that Eph 2:4-7 only says 'sitting', not also 'living', and it is also in the present...... not for the future"

Of course it is the present. From the moment a person is born of God, he is seating together with the Lord forever. He is spiritually baptized into One Body in Christ. This is a spiritual life of all born of the Spirit. We are present with the Lord spiritually. The reason we can worship Him in spirit and Truth. One day we will be completely together at the ressurection when we receive our glorified bodies.
---Mark_V. on 3/10/13


Peter,

I'm not quite sure what your point is. You'll have to write out the Greek.
---Marc on 3/10/13


Scott and Marc: Having checked the oldest Greek copy I have (it is marked as a 10th century one), the translation is certainly 2 Peter 1:1- "of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." - the Greek most certainly says OUR Saviour, and the same applies to 2 Peter 1:11
---Peter on 3/9/13


In all the NT Biblical references, the term Heaven, as in Lk24:51 and Eph 2:4-7, always just means 'the sky or of the skies'.

The only question, Mark V, is that Eph 2:4-7 only says 'sitting', not also 'living', and it is also in the present...... not for the future

So when we talk of living the Heaven, we just really mean not living on earth.

But rev 21, it seems that new new city will be on the new earth, and I take it the saved will live in there
---Peter on 3/9/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Lead Generation


Follower, you now say:

"There is no biblical account of man living in heaven."

Lets look at the biblical account about us who are made spiritually life by God's grace,
"But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved, "and raised us (believers) up together, "and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus," that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus." (Eph. 2:4-7).
---Mark_V. on 3/9/13


Mark V, From your posts it appears that English is not your strong suit,since you have difficulty in comprehension.Especially biblical English!
**not because we understand everything written in it**
Obviously! You only understand what your "religious mentors" tell you what to believe!

Are you afraid to think for yourself??
---1st_cliff on 3/9/13


Scott,

No, I accuse them of a previous faulty translation. Today the NEW American Standard and the NEW KJ translate 2 Peter 1:1 as "our God and saviour, Jesus Christ", thus conforming to Sharp's rule.

As you know, both Bibles have always been Trinitarian, but because you neither read Greek nor are honest, you've twisted what the older translators were attempting to communicate. The Watchtower has a clear heretical agenda and latches onto anything and as a result ignores what scholars recognise: "The Granville Sharp rule undoubtedly applies to this construction, thereby referring both titles ("God" and "Saviour") to Jesus Christ." (Wright, B., 'Jesus as THEOS')
---Marc on 3/9/13


"EXACTLY the same grammatical form...theological bias."- Marc


The American Standard Version-

2 Peter 1:1- "of our God and [the] Saviour Jesus Christ."

2 Pet 1:11- "of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."


The King James Version-

2 Peter 1:1- "of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ."

2 Pet 1:11- "of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ."


Marc apparently accuses the ASV and KJV translators of "theological bias" as well.
---scott on 3/9/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Mortgages


There is no biblical account of man living in heaven.

It's interesting how many believe the prophecy of the messiah (Jesus) and his first coming, death, and resurrection as described in OT, yet are taught to reject the prophecy of the Lord Jesus Christ and his second coming to return and reign on earth Zechariah 14

Acts 3:19-21
"... times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.
---Follower_of_Christ on 3/9/13


1Cliff, you want to muddy the name of the Lord just like all heretics. Comparing man to God and man lower the angels, supposing God is lower then angels if man is in the image of God. Then you answer with,
"Anyone with half a brain knows God is not lower than His creation."
If you have half a brain, you would not be comparing your own thoughts to what is written already in Scripture. You have questioned half of the Word of God not been true for some reason or another. We belief in the Word of God because we have faith in His Word. Not because we understand everything written in it. You on the other hand have no faith in His Word so you play games with what is written.
---Mark_V. on 3/9/13


David/Scott,

1.tou kuriou hemon kai soteros Yesou Kristou (2 Peter 1:11, KIT) = of the Lord of us and of saviour Jesus Christ

According to Sharp's rule and the Watchtower, the Lord and saviour refer to Jesus.

2.tou theou hemon kai soteros Yesou Kristou (2 Peter 1:1, KIT) = of the God of us and of saviour Jesus Christ

According to Sharp's rule, but NOT to the Watchtower, the God and saviour refer to Jesus.

Both 1 and 2 have EXACTLY the same grammatical form, but because of their theological bias the Watchtower disregards the grammar and lies about God's Word.
---Marc on 3/8/13


Mark V, Wiggle?? No ,just trying to explain what you muddied up with your self righeous attitude!
Anyone with half a brain knows God is not lower than His creation.
Man is "lower" but the statement was made that man was the "highest" creation, but scripture says NO ! Angels are "higher"
Sorry I don't have crayons and puppets to explain this to you!
---1st_cliff on 3/8/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Personal Loans


Gordon, please don't show your ignorance. You say now:
"Well, Mark V, you just told Cliff that mankind was "like God in that he could reason, and had intellect, WILL, and emotion.." So, mankind DOES have a will after all, huh?"
Don't you understand anything? What is wrong with you Gordon. When did I say man did not have a will? NEVER. I said man's will is not free. Hello? "NO FREE WILL". You are still complaining from the other blog, that you don't believe in election, because God doesn't have the right to choose you to salvation. Tell Him you want to have that right yourself, because somehow you deserve that right. Tell Him you have a will that is free and see what happens.
---Mark_V. on 3/8/13


1Cliff, you now try to wiggle out of the statement you made. You now say,

"SO if man is created in God's image and lower than angels, what does that make angels????"

What that statement does is, it makes God lower then angels if man is in the image of God and man is lower then angels.
Don't try to cover you mocking. Repent Cliff. Or face the consequences.
---Mark_V. on 3/8/13


This is a classic example of how things get twisted:
Gordon said that man was the highest form of God's creation the ONLY ones created in God's image.Yet I only said that scripture says man was created a little lower than angels!
SO if man is created in God's image and lower than angels, what does that make angels????
They obviously are also in God's image...wow!
Grow up Mark!
---1st_cliff on 3/7/13


Well, Mark V, you just told Cliff that mankind was "like God in that he could reason, and had intellect, WILL, and emotion.." So, mankind DOES have a will after all, huh? Truly, GOD is the ultimate Free-Will Being, and HE created mankind with free-will, patterned after HIMSELF. With this will, man can choose between Obedience to GOD or Sin, Life and Death, Eternal Life and Eternal Damnation. GOD forces nothing upon anyone. Nor does HE create anyone to be "Holy" and "Saved". GOD created Adam to be pure and innocent in his original state, and yet, Adam STILL SINNED. GOD warned Adam not to eat from the Forbidden Fruit, yet Adam CHOSE TO EAT FROM IT ANYWAY, reaping the consequences of both spiritual and physical Death.
---Gordon on 3/7/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Auto Insurance


God made man a little lower than the angels but God has always been. God is deity and man is not. neither are angels. no one can show where God is "created" a little lower than the angels.
---shira4368 on 3/7/13


1st_cliff: //Man is ... God's image and a little lower than angels .. mean God would also be lower than angels// Can you equate your image to yourself?
---Adetunji on 3/7/13


1Cliff, you sound like the Ant-Christ with your words. I can understand people not believing in God. They don't go around making a mockery of God. They just don't belief. But you instead speak nonesense and call it reason. If we are in the image of God then God is lower then angels you say. You turned a passage to mock God.
We were not made to look like Him since He is Spirit and has no body. Man is a living being capable of embodying God's communicable attributes (Rom. 8:29: Col. 3:10: James 3:9). In his rational life, he was like God in that he could reason and had intellect, will, and emotion. In the moral sense, he was like God because he was good and sinless when God created man. Instead of mocking God, you should ask for forgiveness.
---Mark_V. on 3/7/13


Gordon, This is where reasoning takes place.
IE . Man is made in God's image and a little lower than angels would mean God would also be lower than angels, so that cannot be.
Now what conclusion can you draw?
---1st_cliff on 3/6/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Holidays


Gordon
Mat_22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage,
but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Isn't this saying we will be like them.
And if we are in the Image of God, well?

Rom_12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith.

1Co_4:6 that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
Peace
---TheSeg on 3/6/13


Since the earth is going to be destroyed by fire and made new, what would be the purpose for renewal if man will only be in heaven?

What is the purpose of all the planets in the universe if man is only going to populate earth? Why does man think about traveling into space and populating the planets out there? Men may have their reasons but isn't the desire to do so from God?
---jan4378 on 3/6/13


1st_cliff: What we know from the Holy Bible is that, (1) this present earth shall be destroyed, burnt away by fire. Nobody will be able to hide in it! (2) After judgement, God promised to create a new earth and bring people from heaven to occupy it.
---Adetunji on 3/6/13


1st Cliff, Because the Bible does not say that angels were created in GOD's Image. That's why. The Bible only states that mankind was created in the Image of GOD. Of course, SATAN would want us to believe that angels were created in GOD's Image since he was THE angel that wanted to BE "GOD". smf.
---Gordon on 3/6/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Health Insurance


You can live on earth if you want, but my Lord has promised:

John14:2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

2Co5:1 For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

Did you catch the word ETERNAL or how about the words "in the heavens." That's where I'll be.
---trey on 3/5/13


"Although mankind is not the "center of the Universe", we ARE the highest form of GOD's Creation" 1stCliff

You sure that God holds man in that regard of what you have just described? Last I checked, Scripture declared,

"All nations before Him are as nothing, and they are counted to Him less than nothing, and vanity." Isaiah 40:17

"And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and He doeth according to His will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest thou?" Daniel 4:35

"Highest" you say? How about "NOTHING"!
---christan on 3/5/13


Gordon, **we are the ONLY created beings that were created in God's image**
Consider= Man is a little lower than angels, angels are also created beings ,why do you believe that they were not created in His image also?
---1st_cliff on 3/5/13


1st Cliff, Although mankind is not the "center of the Universe", we ARE the highest form of GOD's Creation, and that is because we are the ONLY created beings that were created in GOD's Image, as per GENESIS 1.
---Gordon on 3/5/13


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Dating


Scripture says The world (of pre flood) was destroyed. We're still living on it.
The present world, that also is slated to be destroyed, does not necessarily mean this planet!
The vegitation, water,atmosphere, rotation distance from the sun etc.. was all designed for habitation.This will not be altered!
Isaiah says "they will build houses and inhabit them, plant food sourses and eat them...this is earth! You need to get off this "I'm going to heaven"kick, Only Kings and Priests will go!
look it up!
Why believe satan's lie "you will be like gods" (living in heaven?) Be Meek!
---1st_cliff on 3/4/13


Will man live on earth forever as opposed to living in heaven?
---1st_cliff on 3/4/13

YES

Psalms 37:11 But the meek shall inherit the earth,

Matthew 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away, and there was no more sea.

Revelation 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
---francis on 3/4/13


God shall create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind. As the new heavens and the new earth shall remain before so shall your seed and your name remain.
---Steveng on 3/4/13


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.