Hi 2ducklow,
[QUOTEthe jw bible's main error is substituteing jehovah for theos, and there are some other things , but genrerally it is very correct and literal. there are two directions bible translations are going, and I feel you are combinding the two. one is towards a more literal and faithfull reflection of the original texts, such as rotherham, asv, ylt, and surprisingly to me the american standard by the catholic church. the other direction is towards apostasy, such as making the bible gender neutral, calling god a she, etc.
you don't trust those who translate them , well the other side of that coin is do you give them the oportunity to be proven right or wrong? if they translate a verse different than the KJV do you examine the evidence to see if they are correct? or do you dismiss it cause the kjv says different.? why don't you apply the same standard to kjv scholars, and see if they are correct by examining the evidence? If you do you will find out the kjv is very often at odds with older manuscripts.
[/QUOTE]
Who says that the modern day bibles are a more "literal and faithful reflection of the original text?, the scholars? well I don't believe they don't have a religious agenda of their own. Who actually has these "original texts" are they available to anybody who is searching? Who is to say they are telling the truth even, when they say they are better translations. Why so many conflicting ideas amongst the translators? Bible study should be easy and beneficial, not on a par with a University assignment as some would have it be.
Of course the main problem with the jw bible to you, would be the subsituteing of Jehovah for theos, this makes it possible to prove that Jesus is God according to the jw bible. You say I am using an outdated bible, but you only look for translations that suit what you want to believe. Whenever they don't you label them incorrect translations. That is nonsensical.
did the word turn in to a clump of flesh? or did it turn into Jesus? Jesus is more than just flesh. flesh is the meaty part of a body.
The Word became flesh, just what the bible says. I understand this as He dwelt among us as a human, with like flesh. It is not that hard to understand, it is you that makes everything nonsensical trying to make sense of it. Now your saying I am interpreting it to mean the word became a clump of flesh????...A literal clump. Would you actually understand it better if it said flesh and bone and arteries and organs, etc............What do you think this "flesh" represents then?.
Well if you don't understand then you don't know. god does not have seed. he is a spirit and doesnt have male genetalia that he procreates with. he had to create a male seed. the human seed did not come from mary as you assert, because women do not have seed they have egggs. men have seed, what you are essentially asserting is that god's heavenly seed fertilized marys egg, thus jesus is the son of god and mary. but that would result in someone who would be half god and half man. Jesus is 100 percent body soul and human spirit man. if a horse causes a female donkey to conceive , the offspring is half horse and half donkey, it is called a mule.. the mule is not 100 percent horse and 100 percent donkey. there is no such t hing as 200 percent, except in hyperbolic statements perhaps
I agree with Timothy on this one. "And without controversy
great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory" 1 Tim 3:16
God manifest in the flesh seems like one of the mysteries of godliness to me. I am not for a moment going to try to understand what God deems to be a mystery.
the bible says god was in christ so everywheree jesus went he brought god with him, thus when jesus is around god is with us. your way you have several gods , jesus and god the father, who you call one god, which doesn;;t make sense, and since scripture is suppose to make sense, neh 8:8you have to be wrong.
It makes perfect sense to me, I never said that Jesus and the Father were two Gods but just one, Never. What I did say however, was that the Father is the one true God, and seeing as Jesus came forth from the Father, he too is God by virtue of his coming forth or birth. (And I am not talking about the human birth here) There is a difference, not that hard to understand though. Jesus has been exalted to equal with the Father, (Phil 2:6), that is not hard to understand either. We have one true God, the Father, and Jesus His Son, also God because He is His Son, just like my son is human, because he came forth from me and I am human. This doesn't however make my son the parent, only human. Not that hard to understand either. I am not wrong just because you say so.
God gives me words to speak and I am just a man. hasn't god ever given you words to speak?
Are you able to mediate between God and man the way Jesus does?. Are you our great High Priest?. The bible doesn't say there are many mediators between God and man, it say one, the man Christ Jesus. There were many prophets of old, did they mediate like Jesus?. Did any of them die for our sins?..........Could you die for our sins?...........it's a whole package deal with Jesus, not just speaking the words of the Father alone.
wrong, i just showed you that god gives me words to speak and I am a created human being.
even if you don't believe in modern day prophets , you at leasst believe in ot prophets whom, god gave words to speak, they were created human beings.
No, you didn't. If you can mediate like Jesus, well then yes you did, until you can, No you didn't.
do to, I gave the scriptural support jer. 31:32 everyone igonred it as usual.
Sorry, don't understand how the above scripture is talking about Mary's conception. Perhaps a typo.
you are trying to change what I said, which is that Jesus is the new created man into Jesus is just another man like us. he is not, he is the 2nd adam the new creation of god, he is not just another man. you're twisting my words and aren't being honest with what I said.
Sorry, that is what I thought you were saying. I too believe that Jesus is the second Adam. I believe He is also the Son of God as well, Adam wasn't, Adam was always completely human.
God had a human son not another god for a son. there is only one god and god doesn't procreate other gods,
I never said God had to procreate to form a Son. Limiting God to be bound by the laws of humanity takes away His creative attribute. You believe that He can create human seed to fertilize Mary's egg, but, you can't believe that He can form a divine Son from His own substance. Who says He can't?.
"Ye are my witnesses, saith the LORD, and my servant whom I have chosen: that ye may know and believe me, and understand that I am he:
before me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after me. 11. I, even I, am the LORD: and
beside me there is no Saviour" Isaiah 43:10-11
EASy god was speaking in Jesus saying he is the resurrection and the life. jesus said he that believes in me doesn't believe in me but in him that sent me because Jesuss is just saying what his father gives him to say, so if you believe the words of Jesus you are really believing the words of god. if jesus had chosen not to submit to god totally , and Jesus said things of his own accord, which he did not, then we would be believing in Jesus and not god. Jesus said he is the light of the world but he isn't god is the light of the world and Jesus is the lamp that that light shines through. rev. 21:23. Jesus said he is the resurrection but he isn't god is Jesus is a man and has no power to resurect anyone. only god can. but we aare resurrecvted because we believe in Jesus which is the same and only way we can beleive in god.
John 5:26 "For as the Father hath life in himself,
so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself"
This is the Father speaking through the Son to tell the disciples that He has given His Son life in himself. Life in oneself is an attribute of divinity. The Son does not rely on the Father for His life, like created beings do. This is how the Son can resurrect the righteous and the wicked at the resurrections. How else could Jesus declare that He was the resurrection and the life. That is not the Father saying that He is the resurrection and the life, that is the Father speaking through the Son declaring that the Son is the resurrection and the life. Remember, Jesus stated, noone comes to the Father, but by me.
The Son has the same attributes as the Father, these have all been given to Him. You want to make the Son of God, a human only.
God Bless
Harlin