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

How To Worship God

How does one worship God - not Jesus, but God - in the spirit?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Praise & Worship Quiz
 ---Steveng on 1/8/17
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Post a New Blog



//'Ego eimi'//- MarkEaton.

The Trinitarian claim that 'ego eimi' is another form of God's name. This is absurd trinitarian nonsense.

Are we also to believe Gabriel identified himself as Jehovah at Luke 1:19 when he said, 'I am (ego eimi) Gabriel'?

At Luke 22:33, when Peter said to Jesus, 'I am (ego eimi) prepared to go to prison with you and to death', was Peter saying to Jesus, 'Jehovah is prepared to go to prison with you and to death'? By using 'ego eimi' was Peter also claiming to be Jehovah?

At Mt.26:25, Judas literally said, 'Not I am (ego eimi) Lord?' Are we to believe this really meant Judas was claiming to be Jehovah and Jehovah was going to betray Jesus?
---David8318 on 1/21/17


//You are avoiding the question//- MarkEaton.

MarkEaton is too impotent to understand the answer and scriptural reasons given. Look at John 1:1 again:

'kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos'

'and the Word was with the God, and god was the Word'.

If at John 1:1 'kai theos en ho logos' [and god was the Word], stood on its own, then there would be grounds for assuming that 'the Word was God'. But that statement is NOT on its own.

John has already stated 'kai ho logos en pros to theon' [and the Word was with the God]. John could not have been saying the Word is the God he is with.

Unless of course you are a lying MarkEaton trinitarian who doesn't care what the Bible says.
---David8318 on 1/21/17


//Now you wish to reason?//- MarkEaton.

You mean you're not going to run away?

I notice MarkE maintains his cloak of secrecy. Obviously he is ashamed of the trinitarian outfit he belongs to. All trinitarian groups are cloaked with secrecy.

//The only construction available to John was what is being translated by everyone//- MarkEaton.

No, not everyone. Only trinitarians abuse the sentence structure and the context of John 1:1. The Word is "with" God. John does not then state the Word is the God he is "with". Using 'theos' without the definite article after having just identified the Word as being "with the God" [pros ton theon], means the Word is not God but "a god".
---David8318 on 1/20/17


david8318,

You are avoiding the question I am asking you about Jn 1:2, 6, 12, 13.

If what you are saying is true, the Lord Jesus Christ is a God in verse 1, but in vs 2, 6, 12, and 13 the Lord Jesus Christ is God.

You see, which is it and even your own translation isstating this.
---john9346 on 1/20/17


david8318 states, "I think we agree that Isaiah saw Jehovah in vision at Isaiah 6:1-8."

Yes, we do agree now the next question is when John quote Isa 6:1-5 who does John identifies this person in Jn 12:41, "+ 41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him."

Sir, who does John saythisperson is??

Also, Isa 6:1-5isn't prophetic when Isaiah is describing to us who he saw.
---john9346 on 1/20/17




david8318:

"Does john9346 believe Jehovah "sent himself"?"

YHWH/Jehovah (the Father) sent YHWH/Jehovah sent (the son)

"Who does john9346 believe was sent by Jehovah in Isaiah chapter 6? Jehovah or Isaiah?"

That is not John in 12:41 point in "Quoting." Isa 6:1-5 his point is who Isaiah saw.

"Who does john9346 believe was sent in the apostle John's day? Jehovah or Jesus?"
YHWH/Jehovah (the Son) the Lord Jesus Christ.

Good questions my friend...
---john9346 on 1/20/17


//You do do not apply your single article rule when the same construction occurs... Why?//- MarkEaton.

Context MarkEaton, context!

No one is saying that when 'theos' or 'theon' appear without the definite article that they should always be translated as "a god". Context should always be taken into consideration.

In John 1:1, the Word is "with the God" [pros ton theon]. Many translators not just JW's recognise that in the context of being "with the God" [ton theon] the apostle John does not then go on to say that the Word is the God he is "with".

Thus the use of the indefinite 'theos' in contrast to 'ton theon', the God the Word is "with".
---David8318 on 1/20/17


And yet his pagan trinity translators refuse to include God's name anywhere in their OT translations
---David8318 on 1/20/17

Again you lie and misdirect.

It is your NWT bible that inserted the Divine Name into the NEW TESTAMENT without a single manuscript containing it.

The NWT also misrepresents 'Ego eimi' repeated over and over in John's Gospel. Everyone in the world know this is the "I AM" in both the LXX and New Testament. Even the Jews knew it because when Jesus said it they gathered stones to throw at Him.

Yet, your NWT translates it as "I have been" in John and something completely different in the OT.

Forever promoting the lie and false teaching of Charles Taze Russell.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/20/17


//you cannot show ONE Greek NT manuscript that has the Divine Name in it//- MarkEaton.

MarkEaton cannot show ONE original Greek NT manuscript that does not have the Divine Name in it!

Jesus said in prayer to God, 'I have manifested thy name' (Jo.17:6, KJV). MarkEaton and trinitarians at large over the centuries have systematically removed God's name in complete ignorance of what Jesus accomplished.

And anyway, MarkEaton's complaint about the NT is laughably hypocritical because the Divine name's appearance in OT manuscripts is without question. And yet his pagan trinity translators refuse to include God's name anywhere in their OT translations not because it isn't there, but for false doctrinal reasons.
---David8318 on 1/20/17


"How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him." Acts 10:38

Questions:

Did Jesus anoint himself with the Holy Spirit and power?

How would God BE WITH Jesus if Jesus is God himself?

And what about Jesus saying he couldn't do anything himself, but God working through him?
---Steveng on 1/19/17




Rather than reason...
---David8318 on 1/19/17

Now you wish to reason?

You do do not apply your single article rule when the same construction occurs in the first part of John 1:1, John 1:4, or John 1:6. Why?

There being no definite article in the phrase "and the Word was God" does not mean an indefinite article must be added.

As you have posted, if John had included the definite article in that phrase, it would have meant that only the Logos was God.

John could have used the Greek word "tis" to mean that the Logos was a different God. But John did not.

The only construction available to John was what is being translated by everyone except the NWT.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/19/17


The NWT is not clothed in secrecy
---David8318 on 1/18/17

Again you lie.

Please tell us again:

Who were the translators and what were their credentials?
The translation experience of the translators?
The manuscripts, scrolls, documents used for the Hebrew and Greek Text?
How long did the translation take?
What were the translation goals of the NWT?
What were the translation principles used with the NWT?

Your New Watch Tower bible has no honesty, no integrity, is as biased translation. It is of no value academically or for personal study.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/19/17


There's no pleasure in beating one's head against a brick wall...
---StrongAxe on 1/19/17

Thank you.

We have not agreed on several subjects in these blogs, but you certainly understand my reactions and my motivations.

My choice is to try to get people to understand how much a loving God we have. I try to have people consider if their Christian group or religious sect that does not promote liberty in Christ or a grace-based understanding of God, is correct based upon God's revealed character in the Scriptures.

But your post is correct. I will desist blogging with people when I sense that the person is never going to see what I perceive to be the truth. Some people get that, some do not.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/19/17


//the other person just cannot see reason//- Strongaxe.

My point exactly.

I've given plenty reasons why many, not just JW's translate John 1:1 the way they do- ie. "a god". I accept you disagree with this.

The reason being is that the two occurrences of 'theos' at Jo.1:1 are different in that only one has the definite article. And the Word is "with" that one.

The Word is not "the God". The Word is "with the God" [pros ton theon]. The Word is "a god" [theos en ho logos]. The same principle is used at Acts 28:6 where people thought Paul was "a god".

Rather than reason on the matter, MarkEaton screams "liar" and storms off in a huff.
---David8318 on 1/19/17


David8318:

Some stop arguing when they realize that no matter how reasoned their arguments, the other person just cannot see reason. There's no pleasure in beating one's head against a brick wall. Even God stopped trying to reason with Israel after a while, and left them to their own devices.

The vast majority of Christians on this site (and everywhere else) are trinitarians. They aren't debating you. This isn't because they agree with you, but rather because they disagree with you but think it's pointless to argue.

You still haven't explained why NWT inserts "other" in Colossians 1:16 5 times for no grammatical reason - only to not contradict JW "Jesus is a created being" theology.
---StrongAxe on 1/19/17


(Mark 13:32) But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

David8318
For me, I see many verses, like the one above, which support trinity teachings. Help me to understand your position as to why you don't believe in it by answering the following questions concerning the above verse.

If God the "Father", and Jesus the "Son", are one and the same, wouldn't the Son know the day too?
If they are one and the same, how is it possible the Son wouldn't know the day?
---David on 1/19/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


bested in debates ... MarkEaton.

I've torn MarkEaton apart on a number of occasions.

I've ripped his ideology apart so much MarkEaton has thrown his toys out of his pram and run with his tail between his legs. He cannot argue against the truth of how John 1:1 is written so the only pathetic tactic he has left in his bag is to lie about the NWT. What a squalid little man MarkEaton is.

The only person clothed in secrecy is MarkEaton who hides which pagan trinitarian outfit he belongs to.

The NWT is not clothed in secrecy. Its available online and distributed worldwide in over 110 languages. And yes, the NWT does remove the pagan assault trinitarians have brought on God's word.
---David8318 on 1/18/17


Adonai or kyrios [Lord] are not suitable substitutes
---David8318 on 1/17/17

But, you cannot show ONE Greek NT manuscript that has the Divine Name in it.

Yet, your Watch Tower decided to go ahead and replace some of the uses of kyrios and Adonai with the Divine Name.

However to do this, Watch Tower did NOT use the authentic Greek manuscripts of the NT, but Hebrew translations of the Greek manuscripts.

Translations that your own NWT preface stated were "uninspired".

Even after all that, passages like Philippians 2:9-10 retained kyrios when the reference Hebrew translation had the Divine name in them.

Your Watch Tower is deceitful, biased, and prejudiced in its translation.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/18/17


//The Jerusalem Bible... does use "Yahweh"//- Strongaxe.

Yes you're right it does in some cases, but not in every place where the Hebrew tetragrammaton YHWH appears.

Even the original KJV used "JEHOVAH" in 7 places most noteably Psalm 83:18. Newer versions of the KJV have removed 'Jehovah' altogether.

Most modern trinitarian versions omit God's name completely. Can Trinitarian translators be called "scholars" if they knowingly mis-translate God's name for biased doctrinal reasons?

The use of "other" at Col.1:16 is in full harmony with the context and the Greek. Even without [other], it still reads all things were created "through" Jesus.
---David8318 on 1/18/17


It seems many of you are debating over worldly translations and semantics. You use concordances and religious dictionaries to prove you're right. Your concordances and dictionaries are written by man using their worldly knowledge. That's why concordances and dictionaries among themselves don't even concur. Are not christians suppose to have one mind? Is Christ divided?

Why not use the Holy Spirit to guide you into truth or do you not believe even the Holy spirit has the truth?
---Steveng on 1/18/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


Adonai or kyrios [Lord] are not suitable substitutes for YHWH.
---David8318 on 1/17/17

This is what I think happened to form the New Watch Tower bible, and your process being clothed in secrecy cannot prove me wrong.

A bunch of Watch Tower fellows got together because they did not have a Bible that proved their theology. They were always bested in debates by Trinitarians with their KJV. What was needed was a Bible that did not show the deity of Jesus, one that used the Tetragrammaton when referring to the Father, and mis-translated all the so-called "proof" verses for the Trinity. They decided to take a current version, make the above changes, and publish it as a completely new "translation".
---Mark_Eaton on 1/18/17


\\Adonai or kyrios [Lord] are not suitable substitutes for YHWH.

Yet the New Testament writers seemed to believe it was, e.g. when they quoted the Old Testament.\\

So does the LXX, which set the precedent.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 1/18/17


David8318:

You wrote: Why does MarkEaton's trinitarian Bibles omit using God's name either Yahweh or Jehovah?

The Jerusalem Bible, a Catholic (and therefore triniatarian) translation, does use "Yahweh".

Adonai or kyrios [Lord] are not suitable substitutes for YHWH.

Yet the New Testament writers seemed to believe it was, e.g. when they quoted the Old Testament.

The NWT does not support any of MarkEaton's scriptural lies and deceit.

On the other hand, it DOES include several dishonest doctrine-mandated interpolations that are in no way implied by the grammar, like adding [other] four times in Colossians 1:16 "... by means of him all [other] things were created ..."
---StrongAxe on 1/18/17


//translated by unlearned, untaught, cultist translators with a predetermined bias//

MarkEaton is really referring to his trinitarian mis-translations.

Where does the word "trinity" appear in the Bible?

Where does it say "God the Son"?

Where does it say "God the holy spirit"?

Why does MarkEaton's trinitarian Bibles omit using God's name either Yahweh or Jehovah? Adonai or kyrios [Lord] are not suitable substitutes for YHWH. MarkEaton's "scholars" remove God's name because of their cult trinitarian bias.

The NWT does not support any of MarkEaton's scriptural lies and deceit.
---David8318 on 1/17/17


Send a Free New Year Ecard


//the NWT is careful//
---David8318 on 1/17/17

Please tell us about the validity of your NWT:

Who were the translators and what were their credentials?
The translation experience of the translators?
The manuscripts, scrolls, documents used for the Hebrew and Greek Text?
How long did the translation take?
What were the translation goals of the NWT?
What were the translation principles used with the NWT?

Clothed in secrecy, your NWT was translated by unlearned, untaught, cultist translators with a predetermined bias.

Your NWT lacks honesty and integrity.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/17/17


//Explain, the word, (God) is translated as a god in John 1:1//- John9346 (1/16/17).

It's a trinitarian tactic to confuse by deceit and subterfuge. Trinitarian john9346 feigns ignorance with how John 1:1 is written. I'll say it again but slower this time:

The Greek word 'theos' appears twice in different forms at John 1:1. Each occurrence is different. One has the definite article, one does not.

'kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos'

'and the Word was with the God, and god was the Word'.

The Word is "with the God" [pros ton theon]. Note the def.article 'ton'.

The Word was "a god" [theos en ho logos]. Note no def.article with 'theos'.
---David8318 on 1/17/17


//For my eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of armies himself!//-john9346 quoting Isaiah 6:5.

Isaiah saw a vision of God, not that he physically saw God on his throne. Does john9346 believe that God literally sits on a "lofty and elevated" throne?

Note God asks, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for us?"- Isaiah 6:8.

Who is God referring to in the "us" of his question? Another God, or perhaps another part of God maybe?

Obviously there is another important individual "with" Jehovah. John identifies who is "with" God at John 1:1, the pre-human Jesus or the Word of God.

Isaiah certainly didn't see a 3 headed trinitarian 'god'.
---David8318 on 1/17/17


Bruce M. Metzger on NWT
---David8318 on 1/17/17

Again you lie.

Bruce Metzger said on the NWT: "It must be stated quite frankly that, if the Jehovahs Witnesses take this translation seriously, they are polytheists. As a matter of solid fact, however, such a rendering is a frightful mistranslation"

Charles Francis Potter left his Unitarian ministry behind and declared "I had given up my fast dwindling belief in the deity of Jesus and the doctrine of the Trinity," he wrote. "Now, fifteen years later, I was leaving not only Christianity, but Theism as well."

Even your often quoted A.T. Robertson and Julius Mantely wrote letters of retraction and asked that you stop quoting them.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/17/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


//the NWT is careful//- MarkEaton.

MarkEaton laughably quotes the rabid trinitarian Ken Baumgarten. Was that pulled from Wikipedia?

How about these ones regarding the NWT:

Edgar J. Goodspeed, translator of the New Testament wrote: "[I am] much pleased with the free, frank and vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound serious learning, as I can testify".

American Bible Society board member Bruce M. Metzger on NWT: "on the whole, one gains a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators."

Theologian Charles Francis Potter: "[NWT] have certainly rendered the best manuscript texts, both Greek and Hebrew, with scholarly ability and acumen."
---David8318 on 1/17/17


the NWT is careful in...
---David8318 on 1/17/17

Again you lie and use falsehood to promote your cult.

The translations I work from have thousands of years of experience using thousands of Greek and Hebrew scholars.

What the NWT pedigree? Cloaked in secrecy the world will never know.

NWT has been described as "the theological biases of the translators have caused them to violate their own stated philosophy of translation and the rules of Koine Greek grammar and exegesis, resulting in a treatment of the original text that can be objectively determined to be erroneous, and the NWT must therefore be deemed untrustworthy as either an academic or devotional resource."
---Mark_Eaton on 1/17/17


//who is John identifying that person to be??//- John9346.

John9346 please type a little bit more carefully as your posts are not making any sense... as does the trinity doctrine.

I think we agree that Isaiah saw Jehovah in vision at Isaiah 6:1-8. The whole thrust of Is.6:1-8 is, 'who will go for Jehovah?' Isaiah answers and says 'Here I am, send me!'

John understands that Jesus is "sent" by Jehovah and therefore applies the prophetic reference found at Isaiah 6:1-8 to Jesus.

Does john9346 believe Jehovah "sent himself"?

Who does john9346 believe was sent by Jehovah in Isaiah chapter 6? Jehovah or Isaiah?

Who does john9346 believe was sent in the apostle John's day? Jehovah or Jesus?
---David8318 on 1/17/17


David8318 said, "What did Isaiah see? I have no doubt something very similar- the pre-human Jesus standing at Jehovah's right hand!

Sir, Isaiah tells you who he saw, "I saw Jehovah sitting on a lofty and elevated throne,+ and the skirts of his robe filled the temple." Isa 6:1(NWT)

"Then I said: Woe to me!" Isa 6:4 (NWT)


I am as good as dead,*

For I am a man of unclean lips,

And I live among a people of unclean lips,+

For my eyes have seen the King, Jehovah of armies himself! (NWT)

---john9346 on 1/16/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Software



david8318 states, "John also says in the context of chapter 12 that Jesus is the one Jehovah "sent"- 12:44,45. Jesus says at 12:49, "the Father who sent me"."

Appreciate that you are sticking with the context.

Now that we just read that Isaiah in 6:1-5 identified that it was YHWH/Jehovah is who he saw when John in 12:41 speaks of Isa 6:1-5 who is John identifying that person to be??
---john9346 on 1/16/17


David8318,


Explain, the word, (God) is translated as a god in John 1:1 and 18 in NWT, but the same word is rendered as (God) in verses 2, 6, 12, and 13 in the same context in the NWT??

You do know who John is speaking about he is still talking about "Him." in 2, 6, 12, and 13.

John theapostle is not a confused man the Lord jesus is his subject in these verses.
---john9346 on 1/16/17


Hebrews 1:8-11 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. and, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thine hands: They shall perish, but thou remainest, and they all shall wax old as doth a garment,

Jesus said you must be Born Again.
---Samuelbb7 on 1/16/17


//there are two gods//- MarkEaton.

Continually repeating error as does MarkE doesn't make the error right. Its still wrong!

There is only one God at Jo.1:1, and the Word is with that God. Unlike your false trinitarian versions, the NWT is careful in identifying the fact that it's only the God the Word is with that has the definite article.

When applied to the Word, the NWT realises that 'theos' does not have the def.article. Thus when an anarthrous predicate precedes the verb, the noun ['theos'] describes the Word as "a god". It doesn't identify the Word as the God he is with or even as another "God".

Its you who have 2 Gods: the Word is "God" and is also "with God".
---David8318 on 1/17/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


How does one worship God?

Steven
Interesting question.

For me (John 14:21) sums it up. It's through obedience to the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ. Which is what gives us the right to call him Lord (Luke 6:46). We make Jesus the Lord of our lives, and God the Father treats us like one of his own.

The way to the Father is....through the Son.
---David on 1/17/17


//Sir, 2 questions//- John9346.

And yet you ask 3 ambiguous questions that have no bearing on what John is discussing. Why don't you just come out and say what you believe rather than beat about the bush.

John has already said the pre-human Jesus (the Word) is "with" God from the beginning- John 1:1.

John also says in the context of chapter 12 that Jesus is the one Jehovah "sent"- 12:44,45. Jesus says at 12:49, "the Father who sent me".

Even Stephen at Acts 7:56 just before he died saw Jesus "standing at God's right hand".

What did Isaiah see? I have no doubt something very similar- the pre-human Jesus standing at Jehovah's right hand!
---David8318 on 1/16/17


Truth is, the Word is not God. The Word is with God.
---David8318 on 1/14/17

Again you lie and change the subject.

The subject is how your false NWT version renders John 1:1.

It is your NWT that says the Word was a God, meaning there are two gods present in the sentence, one greater and one lesser.

This is polytheism.

It is the Trinitarian version that keeps to one God when it says the Word was God, meaning the Same God-like attributes, the same essence of God, the same being of God, but not the same person.

Not two Gods, but one God in two distinct persons.

But now you disagree with your own NWT.

So, are you saying with the rest of the world that your NWT is incorrect?
---Mark_Eaton on 1/16/17


Again, if Jesus were God, then he would know when he would return. But no one knows the day or the hour when all is fulfilled - not man, not the angels, not the Son (that is, Jesus), only God the Father. Many other verses in context showing Jesus is not God that cannot be interpreted any other way, spiritually or worldly.
---Steveng on 1/15/17 And again,

And again, Sir, you are confusing the Lord Jesus's 2-natures and trying to make them be in conflict with each other which "Scripture." harmonizes the 2-natures of the Lord Jesus Christ they are not in conflict witheach other...
---john9346 on 1/15/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Eating Disorders


Yes, the Jehovah Witness take this position too - that Jesus is not God. Certainly, the Father is greater than the Son and the Son wills to please the Father. Unlike Satan who coveted the seat of God, Jesus did not consider equality with God something to be grasped. The way the Bible is written, I favor his Divinity.
---mike4879 on 1/15/17


Again, if Jesus were God, then he would know when he would return. But no one knows the day or the hour when all is fulfilled - not man, not the angels, not the Son (that is, Jesus), only God the Father. Many other verses in context showing Jesus is not God that cannot be interpreted any other way, spiritually or worldly.
---Steveng on 1/15/17


david8318 states, "Notice how john9346 is unable to pursue his trinitarian idea that John chapter 1 proves Jesus is YHWH. The only contradiction is if you believe the Word is "God". Then you contradict what John states at 1:18."

First,the contradiction is when one reads further in John it is apparent that the Lord Jesus is (Yhwh, Jehovah)

You see, John entire letter is addressing the Deity of Christ.
---john9346 on 1/15/17


David8318,


Explain, the word, (God) is translated as a god in John 1:1 and 18 in NWT, but the same word is rendered as (God) in verses 2, 6, 12, and 13 in the same context in the NWT??

You do know who John is speaking about he is still talking about "Him." in 2, 6, 12, and 13.
---john9346 on 1/15/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


david8318 states, "Jesus is not being compared with Jehovah... but with ISAIAH!"

But John disagrees with you, "Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him."

Sir, 2 questions:

1. Who did Isaiah (certainly not himself) say he saw go back to Isa 6:1-5?

2. Who is John telling us Isaiah saw in this verse??

3. Who is the context talking about Jn 12:39-42?
---john9346 on 1/15/17


David8318:

You wrote: You are a polytheist... MarkEaton.

You speak of polytheists as if they are a bad thing. If you read carefully, Jesus himself proves God is one:

John 10:34-35:
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken,

In the OT, Israel is frequently told not to WORSHIP other gods - NOT that those gods don't exist.
---StrongAxe on 1/14/17


//If Jesus is a god then there are two gods//- MarkEaton.

Wrong! Its no good lying and twisting what the Bible says MarkEaton. Its perfectly clear what John 1:1 is saying. The 2 occurrences of 'theos' [god] at John 1:1 are completely different. It is a difference you and the trinitarian fraternity here insidiously want everyone here not to know about.

'kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos'

'and the Word was with the God, and god was the Word'

Trinitarians will say 'the Word was God'. But the Word is also "with" God. So trinitarians believe there are two "Gods". The Word and the God the Word is with! That's polytheism!
---David8318 on 1/14/17


Actually without the Trinity the words of Jesus and about him make no sense.

Isaiah 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Jeremiah 32:18 Thou shewest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD of hosts, is his name,

The letters LORD stand for Jehovah. So the Prince of Peace is Jehovah.

Jehovah is our only Savior. That means to be our Savior Jesus has to be Jehovah.

Agape
---Samuelbb7 on 1/14/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


//Isa 6:1-5//- John9346.

Notice how john9346 is unable to pursue his trinitarian idea that John chapter 1 proves Jesus is YHWH. The only contradiction is if you believe the Word is "God". Then you contradict what John states at 1:18.

At Isaiah chapter 6, again john9346 misunderstands John's application. Jesus is not being compared with Jehovah... but with ISAIAH! Jehovah asks "who will go for us?" Initially it is Isaiah who says, "Here I am, send me!" (6:8)

But Jesus' witnessing activity for Jehovah was greater, and when Jesus was baptized, John understood Jesus was in effect answering (as did Isaiah), "Here I am, send me!"

Jesus is not Jehovah. Jesus is the greater Isaiah.
---David8318 on 1/14/17


The Word was written upon men's hearts (in the beginning).

The Word became stone (the Ten Commandments written on stone).

The Word became flesh (Jesus).

The hebrew language is very poetic of which today's man can only interpret these things as literal. It's full of similes and other metaphors. The Word became flesh simply means that all of God's word was given to a man named "Jesus." God will judge the world through a man He has appointed furnishing proof by raising him from the dead. Acts 17.

IF Jesus were God, then he would know when he would return. But no one knows the day or the hour when all is fulfilled - not man, not the angels, not Jesus, only the Father.
---Steveng on 1/13/17


You are a polytheist... MarkEaton.

MarkEaton's rendering of John 1:1 reveals his true pagan polytheist bent. MarkE and the trinitarian fraternity at large will say:

'and the Word was with God, and the Word was God'.

Note the preposition with. When you're with someone, there is always more than one of you.

So in MarkEaton's weird trinitarian belief, John 1:1 states that the Word is with God, and additionally that the Word is "God".

Two "Gods" WITH eachother. This is trinitarian polytheism.

Truth is, the Word is not God. The Word is with God. MarkEaton is the true pagan polytheist and too scared to discuss.
---David8318 on 1/14/17


//
Steveng, I must ask if you are Jehovah Witness, SDA, Mormon, or Catholic.

Please give an answer!
---Rob on 1/12/17
//

I can assure you that he is not SDA, because he denies the deity of Christ as the only begotten (not created) of the Father and a full member of the triune Godhead (aka, the Trinity).

I would guess JW.


---Jerry6593 on 1/14/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


Here you go david8318,

"Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory, and he spoke about him." Jn 12:41(NWT)

This is a Direct Statement from Isa 6:1-5 where John identifies the Lord Jesus as "Yhwh, Jehovah." to "The Lord Jesus Christ."
---john9346 on 1/13/17


"Proper worship includes NOT calling The Lord a SON OF man (HE IS THE FATHER'S SON)." "THE FATHER'S SON" referred to Himself, on numerous occasions, as the Son of Man. What point are you attempting to make?
---Josef on 1/13/17


Proper worship includes NOT calling The Lord a SON OF man (HE IS THE FATHER'S SON).

Each individual member of the group known as the "SONS OF MEN" is a "son of man'(that group built the Tower of BABEL.

GOD SAYS THAT HE IS not A "SON OF MAN"
Gen 11:5 the tower, which the sons of men had built.

Deu 32:8, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.

Num 23:19 God is not man,... or a son of man

Job 25:6 and the son of man, who is a worm!"

Job 35:8 and your righteousness a son of man.

Psa 146:3 in a son of man, in whom there is no help.

Isa 56:2 and the son of man who holds it fast, who keeps the sabbath,
---faithforfaith on 1/13/17


//when one reads further [John 1:1]//- John9346.

And where is this "contradiction"? John9346 obviously cannot fine it otherwise he would have included it in his post.

Maybe john9346 is thinking of John 1:18, which states:

"No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son".

Another nail in the coffin for the trinity believers. If Jesus was indeed "God", then either John is wrong when he said the above... or maybe Jesus is not God, and that John is correct in saying 'No one has seen God', and it's trinitarians who have got it all wrong.

I know which scenario I choose.

But whatever is your persuasion, John 1:1 does not say 'Jesus is God'.
---David8318 on 1/13/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


Liar... MarkEaton.

You said you were not going to address me anymore? You liar!

//Your translation does not apply the single definite article to God, but the Word because the Word is the subject of the sentence//- MarkEaton.

This garbled sentence is either a contradiction in terms or it highlights that MarkE simply does not know what he is talking about.

Again there are 2 occurrences of the Greek word theos at John 1:1. Only one has the definite article.

When applied to the subject [the Word], "theos" is anarthrous- ie. without the def.article [kai theos en ho logos]. Therefore, the Word is not the God it is with, but is described as 'a god' or 'godlike'.
---David8318 on 1/13/17


david8318 states, " But that is not what John is saying. The Word is described as a god or 'divine' [Goodspeed], but he is not the God he is with."

But the contradiction is when one reads further in John it is apparent that the Lord Jesus is (Yhwh, Jehovah)

Even the NWT affirm this to be true...
---john9346 on 1/13/17


But that is not what John is saying. The Word is described as a god or 'divine' [Goodspeed], but he is not the God he is with.
---David8318 on 1/13/17

Liar. Sir, you are being dishonest.

Lets look at your NWT translation of the verse:

NWT John 1:1 "In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god"

Your translation does not apply the single definite article to God, but the Word because the Word is the subject of the sentence.

You are a polytheist. If Jesus is a god then there are two gods, Jesus and God the Father.

You are a liar and I caution all here not to listen to you.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/13/17


//[Steveng] read the opening verses of john 1//- Cluny.

But read them without the distorted lens of pagan trinitarianism.

Look at the sentence structure in any Greek interlinear for John 1:1, you will see that there are 2 occurrences of the word theos [god], but both are different. Only one has the definite article.

'kai ho logos en pros ton theon, kai theos en ho logos'

'and the Word was with the God, and god was the Word'.

The Word was with or toward the God [pros ton theon]. Trinitarians erroneously say 'the Word was the God he is with'.

But that is not what John is saying. The Word is described as a god or 'divine' [Goodspeed], but he is not the God he is with.
---David8318 on 1/13/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


Rob:

You wrote: Steveng, I must ask if you are Jehovah Witness, SDA, Mormon, or Catholic.

Steveng is constantly railing how all denominations are man-made and corrupt. He would never do so if he were a member of any of the above groups. He also constantly rails at Cluny about how apostate the Catholic church is.
---StrongAxe on 1/12/17


Steveng, I must ask if you are Jehovah Witness, SDA, Mormon, or Catholic.

Please give an answer!
---Rob on 1/12/17


Steveg, get someone to read the opening verses of john 1 to you, and explain the big words of one syllable or more.

Note especially the words, "The Word was God," and "The Word was made flesh."

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/12/17


Does God have holes in his hands?
---Steveng on 1/11/17

When did you decide what God is and God can and cannot do?

Remember, the word "God" is a title, not a name. At best, His name is Yahweh, or something equivalent because we (humanity) have lost the original name to history.

But you continue to explain that Jesus is a man and therefore cannot be God.

But who was the father of Jesus? If you believe Jesus exists, then you must believe in His virgin birth. That is, unless you believe Scriptures lie.

Frogs begat frogs, man begats man, and God begats God.
---Mark_Eaton on 1/12/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Consolidation


Cluny wrote "BZATTT!!!!!
Wrong answer, but thank you for playing.
Jesus is not merely man, but is GOD INCARNATE."


Try reading the following verses in context:

Revelation 19:10
Acts 17:31

And, while you're at it:

John 4:21-30
John 20:15-18
John 20:24-29 Does God have holes in his hands? To prove Thomas is not referring to Jesus as "God," the Lord exhorts him by saying, "Because you have SEEN me have you believed? Jesus acknowledges Thomas' reaction as FAITH NOT AS WORSHIP.
---Steveng on 1/11/17


The "ETERNAL COVENANT" is the covenant that Jesus came to satisfy (this is not taught in the traditional teachings,...do you care to take a second look at what you are being asked to believe?).

ETERNAL God sent Jesus to be the ETERNAL sabbath (no more 24 hr. time period, this is ETERNITY). The divine ETERNAL Spirit has been provided through the coming of Jesus (when Jesus ascended (the Spirit had clearly not been "given" yet in John 7:39).

The "ETERNAL Spirit" of Hebrews is OUR teacher and will purify our conscience by teaching us to be peaceful and just.

Deu 33:27 The eternal God is your dwelling place,

(Jesus is the heifer verse 13).

All verses are from RSV.
---faithforfaith on 1/11/17


\\Jesus deserves to have our highest esteem as the man whom God appointed and made to be His right hand man.\\\

BZATTT!!!!!

Wrong answer, but thank you for playing.

Jesus is not merely man, but is GOD INCARNATE.

If you or your wordlly denominational "church" of Steveng doesn't believe this, then you are simply not a Christian. Period.

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/11/17


Jesus deserves to have our highest esteem as the man whom God appointed and made to be His right hand man.

As for semantics, there is a side array of possible greek words that can and are trasnlated as "worship," but these do not always imply direct adoration or worship of the Supreme God. Only the context of any given text determines if the term has or has not an application to worshipping God.
---Steveng on 1/10/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Refinancing


Moses chose to suffer for what God would provide/send as forgiveness...Therefore, JESUS is the FULL/completion of all that God has to offer humanity.

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily,

It is good to be concerned with what PROPER worship/honor is.

The Romans "KNEW God" (they had scriptures), but God did not ACCEPT their words or deeds.

Rom 1:21 for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him,


Heb 11:26 He considered abuse suffered for the Christ.....

Jesus is ALL/WHOLE God...IN FULL dispensation (in the age of time and the age of eternity, He is the ETERNAL sabbath of eternal God).
---faithforfaith on 1/10/17


My sentiments exactly, Bill!

Christ is baptized! In the Jordan!
---Cluny on 1/10/17


How to worship our Heavenly Father > Jesus says,

"that all should honor the Son just as they honor the Father," in John 5:23.

So, we worship our Heavenly Father by honoring Jesus "just as" we honor our Heavenly Father.

But there are people who have a Jesus whom they do not honor as they honor God. So, their Jesus is an inferior Jesus > "another Jesus" < see 2 Corinthians 11:2.
---Bill on 1/10/17


Worship

H7812
shaw-khaw'
- bow (self) down, crouch, fall down (flat), humbly beseech, do (make) obeisance, do reverence, make to stoop, worship.


G4352
pros-koo-neh'-o
From G4314 and probably a derivative of G2965 (meaning to kiss, like a dog licking his masters hand), to fawn or crouch to,


Jn 5:22 For the Father . . . hath committed all judgment unto the Son:
Jn 5:23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him.
---aservant on 1/9/17


Read These Insightful Articles About Franchises


This is yet another disingenuous blog topic. The very question is based on the unspoken assumption "Jesus is not God", something most people here would strongly disagree with.

Other topics with the same degree of dishonesty would be, "How can we convince our unbelieving neighbors that the earth is flat?" or "How should we rebuke fellow believers who follow pagan practices like Christmas?"
---StrongAxe on 1/9/17


ESPECIALLY as brethren, we are to be polite and patient with each other (some are content simply being scholars and rather continuously rationalize/justify their name calling and disrespect).....where is the Spirit?

Jesus says "I and the father are one".

He also says that He is COMPLETE and all encompassing "DEITY" (let us dispense with exclusive propriety and 'name brands'....NO FRILLS CREATOR anyone?....will your endure that?

Jhn 10:30 I and the Father are one."

Jhn 17:11 even as we are one.

Jesus said that He is the whole fulness of diety.


"FULNESS" means the COMPLETION of all that God has to offer humanity (ages of time AND age of ETERNITY (eternal life).
---faithforfaith on 1/9/17


The true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth. (John 4:23-24)
---mike4879 on 1/9/17


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