Posts by SwedishChef

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Here is another passage which supports the Deity of Christ.

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
John 10:28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and my Father are one.

The sheep hear Jesus's voice and follow Him. Look in John 6:44. "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

Now in this passage, Jesus says "my sheep hear my voice and follow me", and in this verse it says that the Father is the one who draws them.
Also, Jesus says "no man can pluck them out of my hand." In the next verse it says that "no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand."
Now wait a minute, didn't Jesus say the sheeps were in His hand? But now they are in the Fathers hand.
Verse 30 explains this. "I and my Father are one." Giving himself equility with the Father.

John 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

This passage says Jesus is equal with God.

John 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

In this passage, Jesus says if you have seen him, you have seen the Father.
Now what does this mean?

Colossians 1:15 "Who is the image of the invisible God"
Now Jesus is the image of the invisible God, he is equal to God, He and His Father are one, and if you have seen Jesus, you have seen the Father.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the Jesus is in fact God.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Dakota, baptism is one that is very confusing to many people, because they don't know what it is. Baptism is not only a public statment of faith, but it is also a picture of what happens internally, to your soul.

Romans 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

This is what water baptism symbolizes.

Many times in the Bible, especially the book of Acts, baptism is referred to in the spiritual sense.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Now, surely water baptism does not save you, so surely this must be speaking of spiritual baptism, when someone becomes born again.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

The great commission still stands, Jesus gave the manner in which we are to baptize, which is in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Also, I think it is a cheap tactic to say that verses which do not support your view are "added" or "a mistranslation."

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

UnDisfellowshipped,
Ofcourse these passages can't mean what it says, that would mean Jesus is really God. ;-)

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

"Every eye shall see Him." Every eye; the eye of every living man, whoever he is. None will be able to prevent it. The voice of the trumpet, the brightness of the flame, shall direct all eyes to Him, shall fix all eyes upon Him. Be it ever so busy an eye, or ever so vain an eye, whatever employment, whatever amusement it had the moment before, will then no longer be able to employ it, or to amuse it. The eye will be lifted up to Christ, and will no more look down upon money, upon books, upon land, upon houses, upon gardens.
Your eyes and mine. O awesome thought! Blessed Jesus! May we not see Thee as through tears; may we not then tremble at the sight!
"And the Lord turned and looked upon Peter....And Peter went out and wept bitterly." So shall it be, but in a different sense, with sinners at the day of judgment. The eye of Jesus as their judge shall be fixed upon them, and the look shall awake their sleeping memories, and reveal their burdens of sin and shame--countless and cursed crimes, denials worse then Peter's, since life-long and unrepented of, scoffings at love that wooed them, and despising of mercy that called them--all these shall pierce their hearts as they behold the look of Jesus.
And they shall go out and flee from the presence of the Lord--go out never to return, flee even into the outer darkness, if so be they may hide them from that terrible gaze. And they shall weep bitterly--weep as they never wept before, burning, scalding tears, such as earth's sorrow never drew--weep never to be comforted, tears never to be wiped away. Their eyes shall be fountains of tears, not penitential and healing, but bitter and remorseful--tears of blood--tears that shall rend the heart in twain, and deluge the soul in fathomless woe.
--C.H. Spurgeon

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Now Gumby...surely someone as "scholarly" as yourself would know the difference between the Roman Catholic Church and the true Christians. The Catholic church has the bloody history. It's doctrines are easily proven false and its motiveS have been only to gain power and riches.
The true Christians, particularly the Baptist sect, has had no connection to the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, the true Christians were getting tortured and killed as well! The Bible itself condemns Rome and predicts the rise of the Roman Catholic Church (the mother of harlots).
Look it up if you don't believe me. The Foxes book of martyres is a good one.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Joseph, the Hebrew apparently has no word for a "lesser" god. And therefore, you must read in context. Fortunately for you, the translators already took context into account. For Bible teaching is that there is one God.
The Hebrew word "'elohiym" can be anything from a graven image to a prophet to Jehovah depending the context it is used in.

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
Now matter how you view it, Bible teaching is that you are not to call anyone God but God. Thomas did this. He called Jesus God. Jesus did not rebuke the statement but accepted it.

Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

We are not to worship any god but the Jehovah. There are several accounts in scripture where someone fell at someone elses feet and was immediately corrected.

Revelation 22:8 And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things.
9 Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God.

There are many many accounts in Scripture where Jesus is worshipped.

Jesus was worshipped by ... ... the wise men (Matthew 2:11) ... the disciples in the boat (Matthew 14:33) ... the women at the empty tomb (Matthew 28:10) ... the disciples at His ascension (Matthew 28:17) (Note in the Great Commission that the "name" of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is singular -- Matthew 28:19) ... the man born blind, who Jesus healed (John 9:38) ... all God's angels (Hebrews 1:6)
Not to mention in the Revelation the Lamb is praised and worshipped. Phillipians says "every knee shall bow" to Jesus.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

"However, Bruce M. Metzger wrote in his Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament: "No uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eigth or ninth century ... supports [theos]; all ancient versions presuppose [hos] or [ho]; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading [theos]." Today, most translations show their disagreement with the KJV by omitting any reference to "God" in this text. Today, most translations show their disagreement with the KJV by omitting any reference to "God" in this text."

Am I really supposed to believe that this passage of Scripture is a mistranslation just because you say it is? I'm sure there are many other scholars out there who say different. Yes, other translations omit the word God, but they weren't translated from the Textus Receptus. All the literal translations and then some say "God was manifest in the flesh."

"Revelation 1:8 - It is plain from simply reading this verse that the Father, not Jesus, is the Alpha and Omega and the Lord God Almighty. Jesus is never called the Lord God Almighty. How do you answer this, SwedishChef?"

I really have no idea where you got this from. From the first time I read this verse it was plain and clear that Jesus is talking. You know how? By reading it in context. Revelation 1:7 "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen." Who did they pierce? Jesus. Who is talking in the very next verse? Jesus. Verse 8: "I am Alpha and Omega..."

"Genesis 1:26 - Trinitarians and JWs say that God was speaking here to Christ. However, the Jews have long held that God was speaking to "all the army of the heavens standing by him, to his right and to his left." (1 Ki 22:19-22; Job 38:7)"

The OT word most frequently used for God is plural in form.
Genesis 11:7,8 "Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city."
Now the LORD was the one who scattered them, but he says "let US go down".

Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness:"
Now read this:
Genesis 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
It says man is made after the IMAGE OF GOD. It does not say the image of God and His angels.
Isaiah 6:8 Also I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, Whom shall I send, and who will go for US? Then said I, Here am I; send me.

"Matthew 28:19 - This verse simply mentions the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It says nothing about them being God or equal persons within the Godhead. How do you answer this, SwedishChef? Or, as in all the examples above, are you unable to give an answer?"

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:" Notice how it says "in the name", and not "names"? That is because they are equal.
Philippians 2:6 Who,[Jesus] being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

"1 John 5:7 - Up above, Navigator gave a fine explanation of why this verse is not found in all the better translations. Why do you choose to ignore something so vital to knowing the truth about God and Christ? How do you answer this, SwedishChef? Could it be you have no answer?"

Notify me on what the "better translations" are. The KJV is practically a perfect translation of the Textus Receptus. The other text...the Nessels, I believe, was actually found in the Vatican. (some say in a garbage can). In any case, I wouldn't trust anything that comes out of there.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

This has been a heated debate for many years. Highly respected scholars say John 1:1 translates "the Word was God", while other scholars say "a God".
This is the Strongs literal Bible version (with number references) of John 1:1. The Strongs Bible is a word for word literal tranlsation of the Bible.
|1722| In |9999| {the} |0746| beginning |2258| was |3588| the |3056| Word, |2532| and |3588| the |3056| Word |2258| was |4314| with |3588| - |2316| God, |2532| and |2316| deity |2258| was |3588| the |3056| Word.

As you can see, the greek word for God (the supreme being) is the same one which is ascribed to the Word. The word for "deity" and the word for "God" are the same word. Therefore, the Word is classified as the Supreme Being.
If the Word was meant to be classified as "a God", a different word would have been used; one that meant "god".

Dakota, if this guy your quoting is right, then why is it that every version out there says "the Word was God"?
ASV
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Bible in Basic English
John 1:1 From the first he was the Word, and the Word was in relation with God and was God.
Darby version

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Webster Bible

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Weymouth New Testament

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Youngs Literal

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

Russian
John 1:1 , , .

Dutch
John 1:1 In den beginne was het Woord, en het Woord was bij God, en het Woord was God.

French
John 1:1 Au commencement tait la Parole, et la Parole tait avec Dieu, et la Parole tait Dieu.

No Clue
John 1:1 Na potku bylo Slovo, a to Slovo bylo u Boha, a to Slovo byl Bh.
:-)

Sounds to me like your source is a rouge who wants to twist the simple message in John 1:1.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Joseph, you are very wrong. In fact, there is no possible way you could be more wrong. That capitol "g" makes all the difference.

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

SwedishChef

Herk, which posts should I have responded to?