Jesus Christ is NOT God.

[katerinah1947]

Katerinah,

Yes, I have done the research. I have studied this subject for years. I have studied the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment, the Trinity, the Kingdom of God, etc. I have studied the Scriptures in depth to see if what the churches teach today is true and I have found that much of it isn't true. I have studied some of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, doctrines of the Reformation etc. I have found that much of what is taught is not what the Scriptures teach. It is also not what was believed by the early Christian.

Hi,
And you are still missing the point.
LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

 

[Righttruth]

But the Word isn't the Father. This has been the discussion through the thread. The Word is God in essence. When John said the word is God He means in essence or substance. When He says the Word was with God He is using the word God for a title for the Father. This is how it was understood in the beginning of the faith

Yes, the Word isn't the Father. In John 1:1 the Greek words 'God' are different. Therefore, it is appropriate to translate that as 'in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was divine'.

 

[Der Alte]

Hi,
Yes thanks for the much needed clarification. Maybe I should have responded sooner, but I hoped they were not being sacrilegious, so I said nothing. That now, feels like quite an error on my part.
Thank-you, for putting me in my place, and letting others know, this truth about God.
LOVE and love,
...Mary Katherine., .... .

I apologize for any misunderstanding, I was not correcting you but the person who was ridiculing your experience. I had a series of 'fleece" experiences some years ago, my first. Alone in my room praying I believed I had received a revelation from God. Still alone I silently prayed "Father if I understand this correctly send me someone I can lead to the Lord." The first person I met the next morning walked up to me and said, "How would you like to lead someone to the Lord?"

 

[katerinah1947]

I apologize for any misunderstanding, I was not correcting you but the person who was ridiculing your experience. I had a series of 'fleece" experiences some years ago, my first. Alone in my room praying I believed I had received a revelation from God. Still alone I silently prayed "Father if I understand this correctly send me someone I can lead to the Lord." The first person I met the next morning walked up to me and said, "How would you like to lead someone to the Lord?"

Hi,
Please know that I was correcting me. I thought maybe God just sent you in to remind me of what I should have already done. Although now, maybe I was supposed to hear this from you.
Wow. And the thanks have to go to God for this. Does anyone who doesn't want to believe in things like this not being real, can you still positively say, that these kinds of things, do not happen to some of us?
You can, but I don't know how.
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

P.S.
I have sent off your experiences to friends, who do know this kind of thing is real.
LOVE and love,
...Katie., .... .

 

[Butch5]

Hi,
And you are still missing the point.
LOVE,
...Katie., .... .

I'm not missing the point, I'm trying to be respectful.

 

[Butch5]

Yes, the Word isn't the Father. In John 1:1 the Greek words 'God' are different. Therefore, it is appropriate to translate that as 'in the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God and the Word was divine'.

I agree. What does that have to do with the Son being begotten before time?

 

[katerinah1947]

I'm not missing the point, I'm trying to be respectful.

Hi,
Quite gentlemanly. I understand. Oh by the way. Thanks.
LOVE,
...Mary Katherine., .... .

 

[ChetSinger]

Hi Chet,

Yes, I am familiar with the Grandville Sharp rule. What I'm not sure of is the word "ego" after the word "Thou."

Butch, I'm not following you. Are you objecting to the NET scholars' translations of Tit 2:13 and 1 Pet 1:1?

 

[Butch5]

Butch, I'm not following you. Are you objecting to the NET scholars' translations of Tit 2:13 and 1 Pet 1:1?

I'm referring to 2 Peter 1:1. I'm not necessarily objecting to it just curious about the word "ego."

 

[Butch5]

Hi,
Quite gentlemanly. I understand. Oh by the way. Thanks.
LOVE,
...Mary Katherine., .... .

You're welcome!

 

[Righttruth]

I agree. What does that have to do with the Son being begotten before time?

My thinking is that the Word preceded the Son.

 

[TheBarrd]

God is not in the Genie or Santa Claus business. You don't get three wishes, rub a magic lamp and instantly receive a Mercedes Benz or a color TV.

No night on the town? He won't prove that He loves me, and buy the next round?
Oh, Lord...won't you buy me a Mercedes Benz????

 

[OldShepherd]

N.Y.

 

[katerinah1947]

Katerinah,

Yes, I have done the research. I have studied this subject for years. I have studied the doctrine of Eternal Conscious Torment, the Trinity, the Kingdom of God, etc. I have studied the Scriptures in depth to see if what the churches teach today is true and I have found that much of it isn't true. I have studied some of the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, doctrines of the Reformation etc. I have found that much of what is taught is not what the Scriptures teach. It is also not what was believed by the early Christian.

Hi,
Are you a researcher of many years, that now has been proven by others to make few if any errors?
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

 

[ChetSinger]

I'm referring to 2 Peter 1:1. I'm not necessarily objecting to it just curious about the word "ego."

Sorry, but I'm still not with you. I don't see the word "ego" in the NET translation or footnote.

 

[Butch5]

My thinking is that the Word preceded the Son.

From what John says it seems they are one and the same.

 

[Butch5]

Sorry, but I'm still not with you. I don't see the word "ego" in the NET translation or footnote.

BGT 2 Peter 1:1 Συμεὼν Πέτρος δοῦλος καὶ ἀπόστολος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῖς ἰσότιμον ἡμῖν λαχοῦσιν πίστιν ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, (2Pe 1:1 BGT)

The Granville sharp rule is, Definite article/noun/ kai (and)/ noun. Both nouns pertain to the same person. In the above passage we have "ego" between the first noun and the word kai (and). I wondering if that affects the translation. Does change the Granville sharp rule?

 

[Butch5]

Hi,
Are you a researcher of many years, that now has been proven by others to make few if any errors?
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

I am a part of a group that does in depth study of the Scriptures. The group takes the doctrines of the church and traces them back through time to find their origin. Those that can be traced all the way back to the apostles are kept, those that cannot are rejected. However, all of the doctrines must be in agreement with the Scriptures, if they aren't they go.

 

[katerinah1947]

I am a part of a group that does in depth study of the Scriptures. The group takes the doctrines of the church and traces them back through time to find their origin. Those that can be traced all the way back to the apostles are kept, those that cannot are rejected. However, all of the doctrines must be in agreement with the Scriptures, if they aren't they go.

Hi,
Can you stand alone on your own work, with proofs, and not be shown to be wrong, except rarely?
What I did, was my own research on my own, and it was presented when I had proofs.
You may be right, but so far, it is not clear. To trace statements back to the Apostles, sounds like it is much too narrow a look at The Bible and God. It may not be, but it sounds like it is replete with possible flaws.
The reason I bring up even this, is for you to say you are part of a group, might mean you are taking their work as factual, and you are not doing all of the work yourself to understand each an every point, nor trying to prove each and ever point fallacious on some valid ground or another.
It sounds like you and those people are just looking at a guess, a theory, which say this: "If something is in print, and The Apostles said it, then it must be perfect." Assuming you collect all of that data, and assuming you are correct in that all of that was said by The Apostles, you are still left with interpreting what they said, not only into your native language, but into your pesoanal use of that language.
Once done, all you have done, and all the group has done, must be presented to the world, and then if thy agree with you, honestly, then you have something, or you might have something that is true.
Is your work completed and sent to the world for review? Are you presenting to us that information? Are the people in your group proven, to be knowledgeable and skilled enough to do that work in the first place?
If that is all true, you and your group will be famous. If any of it is false and you do not find that error first, others will.
Here, others disagree with now your groups findings. Are you presenting your groups findings correctly? If so fine.
I have seen God. I am told it is provable. Yet, what I have seen disagrees with your groups findings. Othes have similar, but totally Biblical positions. There are others out there like me, who are mentioned at least in the Book of Acts. I wonder if thier personal one on one contacts with God, agree with your groups work, as mine does not.
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

 

[Butch5]

Hi,
Can you stand alone on your own work, with proofs, and not be shown to be wrong, except rarely?
What I did, was my own research on my own, and it was presented when I had proofs.
You may be right, but so far, it is not clear. To trace statements back to the Apostles, sounds like it is much too narrow a look at The Bible and God. It may not be, but it sounds like it is replete with possible flaws.
The reason I bring up even this, is for you to say you are part of a group, might mean you are taking their work as factual, and you are not doing all of the work yourself to understand each an every point, nor trying to prove each and ever point fallacious on some valid ground or another.
It sounds like you and those people are just looking at a guess, a theory, which say this: "If something is in print, and The Apostles said it, then it must be perfect." Assuming you collect all of that data, and assuming you are correct in that all of that was said by The Apostles, you are still left with interpreting what they said, not only into your native language, but into your pesoanal use of that language.
Once done, all you have done, and all the group has done, must be presented to the world, and then if thy agree with you, honestly, then you have something, or you might have something that is true.
Is your work completed and sent to the world for review? Are you presenting to us that information? Are the people in your group proven, to be knowledgeable and skilled enough to do that work in the first place?
If that is all true, you and your group will be famous. If any of it is false and you do not find that error first, others will.
Here, others disagree with now your groups findings. Are you presenting your groups findings correctly? If so fine.
I have seen God. I am told it is provable. Yet, what I have seen disagrees with your groups findings. Othes have similar, but totally Biblical positions. There are others out there like me, who are mentioned at least in the Book of Acts. I wonder if thier personal one on one contacts with God, agree with your groups work, as mine does not.
LOVE,
...Katherina., .... .

The work doesn't have to be accepted by the world. There is much error among Christians today. That can be seen in the fact that there are over 19,000 different sects and denominations in Protestant Christianity alone. It can also be seen in the changes that have taken place over the centuries. The Scriptures haven't changed but the beliefs of Christians have. That indicates error. I know what I believe is correct when I find harmony. When my doctrine is in harmony with the Scriptures I know it is correct.