Posts by Blotty

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

What you deem as "leftist" (or whatever other term) is common behaviour and is logically required - why?, because people lie all the time (especially on the internet) I could make a claim right now, I guarantee at least five people would ask me for a source..

Why do trinitarians in their written books provide sources?

you failing to provide [scholarly] sources makes your claims not only suspicious at best (since it isn't articulated in the text, no thats not hypocritical - you can stop being misleading now) but also with no "expert backing" they fall flat.
debating theology is useless, theology is merely what one believes - but what does the text say? the text will win every time.
I could believe the angels to be God if I wanted too, or Joseph to be Jesus (they have 10+ things in common)

Now I know what you'll say about the Witnesses, however whether you accept it or not - most of their beliefs are hinted at in the text.

The only one which isn't, which you are also very misleading on, is what they call "the gentile times" - HOWEVER notice what other religions have done?
The name is in the Hebrew text - you yourself admit this, yet most religions DO NOT put the name in their OT scriptures why? you cant say it had no relevance in that time. Edwin Palmer wrote a letter (that is public) on why the NIV didn't include the name - and what is the reason you may ask? money..

your meme about 2+2 =4 is off point as when has anyone ever denied that? if they have they are stupid.

On top of all of that, you are so obviously theologically motivated its not even funny..
else explain

- the long posts (which people have asked you stop)
- the use of terms (or concepts) that the bible doesn't even define

- the citing of publications that are not reflective of what the society believes at all

- unwilling to have "scholarly" discussions

Your either a troll or theologically motivated, simple as that

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

Blotty

Punkofnice

I did not specify where the quote is from.. for reasons that should be self evident - if the person would like to reveal themselves they are welcome too.
As for the smoking or eating shrooms part... idk, you can ask them, when/ if they reveal themselves... (I will verify if they do)

However - I will not do it due to Potential (emphasis on potential) unwanted attention or harrasment of said individual.
I ask people for sources, I say when they are being an idiot - However I will NEVER "shame" someone by making a thread with a quote of theirs and a name, I wouldn't want it done to me so I refuse to do it myself to them (Matthew 7:12, I believe this can be taken in multiple senses)

philosopher-teacher Confucius (551-479 B.C.E.) said: “What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.” (while I disagree with philosophy in general, for reasons that are apparent - this quote is a principle I live by)

35

Is WT Teachig on Hell Biblical?

by Sea Breeze in

i guess you could say jesus was the first christian, since he was the christ.

and as the first christian, jesus spoke more about hell that any other biblical figure.

but, he is also the figure that said that he didn't come to condemn the world, but to save it.

Blotty

Ill note Eccl 10:19 should be taken in its context, not in the misleading way its being addressed here...- The OT contradicts this in many places if this were true

it hasn't occurred that a lot of the things mentioned as "evidence" are actually just Greek and Hebrew idiom - for "everything you have"

for examples in the following scripture it uses soul in the sense of a dead body (Bible hub) Num 6:6 - How can a soul be dead? simple an idiom, we use "soul" in the sense of a person "poor soul"

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/poor-soul

https://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/poor+souls

(Just 2 dictionaries of many)

John 1:1 - Koine & Modern Greek Comparison

by Wonderment in

have you ever wondered why john 1.1 reads somewhat differently in koine and modern greek?

i will briefly address this question for the curious ones.

below you will find three greek readings, one from the nt greek text, followed by two modern greek versions: the nwt-2017 edition, and the other by spyros filos (wikipedia: a revision of the vamvas translation of the bible into the modern vernacular (demotic greek) by spyros (spiros) filos (σπύρος φίλος) was first published in 1994. this translation is used in the greek evangelical church and is also recognized by the orthodox church.

Blotty

illustrates a point I made in a paper I wrote about languages evolving

In modern Greek (I'm better in koine) is there any difference in placing Theos before or after the verb? since modern has a form of an indefinite article.

11

Greek and antecedents (draft)

by Blotty in

natural antecedents (essay) + meanings to certain words.

i posted about 5 months ago a study done by daniel wallace called “greek grammar and the holy spirit” (see: source), which i have cited numerous times since – which focuses heavily on greek antecedents.

ending), and she (fem.

Blotty

Petr
I love that xD

DO you have any suggestions of what i could add to my paper? since you do actaul scholarship rather than theogocialy motivated BS

11

Greek and antecedents (draft)

by Blotty in

natural antecedents (essay) + meanings to certain words.

i posted about 5 months ago a study done by daniel wallace called “greek grammar and the holy spirit” (see: source), which i have cited numerous times since – which focuses heavily on greek antecedents.

ending), and she (fem.

Blotty

Sea breeze

Must I point out Gods own nation fell into idolatry - your point about spiritism is void

you are entitled to your opinion - however there would be many who disagree

Too say Mr Foster is "Heretical" is exactly the same as me calling any trinitarian "Heretical" its no use to anybody and infact is more a reflection of you than anyone else..

If you actually bother to look at Mr Fosters blog though a witness he does give trinitarian opinions view and says some may be correct, you are judging a book by its cover.

11

Greek and antecedents (draft)

by Blotty in

natural antecedents (essay) + meanings to certain words.

i posted about 5 months ago a study done by daniel wallace called “greek grammar and the holy spirit” (see: source), which i have cited numerous times since – which focuses heavily on greek antecedents.

ending), and she (fem.

Blotty

The nearest antesedent isn't nessacarily the correct one/ ekeinos refers back to paraklete not pneuma

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

Blotty

aqwsed12345

are you capable of reading? I asked for scholarly contributions not theologically motivated rubbish..

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

Blotty

Question for trinitarians: in what sense could the Father be considered "begotten"? If the Logos was begotten, and if this does not make him "less eternal" than the Father, then what is the difference? What event took place that constituted the Logos "begotten," and not the Father?

21

What does this even mean?

by Blotty in

"the son is born of the father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense.

the son is derived from the father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of his essence.

so, the birth of the son is an intellectual activity of god.".

Blotty

"The Son is born of the Father by generation, but generation should not be understood in the everyday sense. The Son is derived from the Father through pure spiritual generation, through the unlimited sharing of His essence. So, the birth of the Son is an intellectual activity of God."

What does this even mean?

sounds like pure garbage to me

Where is this defined in the bible?

if the bible writers thought this was a thing they could have defined it (come up with as many excuses as you like)

Can this be put in simpler terms (by someone who is not the original writer)?

harder question: How early can this language be traced back too? 2nd century?

(scholarly contributions appreciated, rather than theologically motivated garbage)