Results 1 - 20 of 23
|
||||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Author: Tara022 Ordered by Verse |
||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Do animals have souls? | Eccl 3:21 | Tara022 | 129885 | ||
Hi Country Girl, Confussion comes when we read or hear non-Biblical based ideas. The Bible clearly tells us what the soul is. Ge 2:7 "Man can to be a living soul". Man is a soul. Nothing is said about his "having" a soul. Don't you agree that if we have "believed" something that conflics with what the Bible says, then we would be confussed until atleast we re-evaluate our thinking. Notice what the Bible says: We notice that the initial occurrences of nephesh (Hebrew word for soul) are found at Genesis 1:20-23. On the fifth creative “day” God said: “‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls nephesh and let flying creatures fly over the earth . . . ’ And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul nephesh that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind.” Similarly on the sixth creative “day” nephesh is applied to the “domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth” as “living souls.”—Ge 1:24. Precisely the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, nephesh chaiyah (living soul), is applied to Adam, when, after God formed man out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, “the man came to be a living soul.” (Ge 2:7) As you say, man was distinct from the animal creation, but that distinction was not because he was a nephesh (soul) and they were not, nor because man wasn't to be offered as a sacrifice. Rather, the record shows that it was because man alone was created “in God’s image.” (Ge 1:26, 27) He was created with moral qualities like those of God, with power and wisdom far superior to the animals; hence he could have in subjection all the lower forms of creature life. (Ge 1:26, 28) Man’s organism was more complex, as well as more versatile, than that of the animals. (Compare 1Co 15:39.) Likewise, Adam had, but lost, the prospect of eternal life; this is never stated with regard to the creatures lower than man.—Ge 2:15-17; 3:22-24. After man’s creation, God’s instruction to him again used the term nephesh with regard to the animal creation, “everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul [literally, in which there is living soul (nephesh).” (Ge 1:30) Other examples of animals being so designated are found at Genesis 2:19; 9:10-16; Leviticus 11:10, 46; 24:18; Numbers 31:28; Ezekiel 47:9. Notably, the Christian Greek Scriptures coincide in applying the Greek psykhe to animals, as at Revelation 8:9; 16:3, where it is used of creatures in the sea. The Bible clearly shows that nephesh and psykhe are used to designate the animal creation lower than man. The same terms apply to man. email me if you have any question on this at tara015015@yahoo.com |
||||||
2 | Do animals have souls? | Eccl 3:21 | Tara022 | 129886 | ||
Hi WalkingTalkingBible, This is Tara. I wrote Country Girl about animals being souls and thought I would send it to you also. Confussion comes when we read or hear non-Biblical based ideas. The Bible clearly tells us what the soul is. Ge 2:7 "Man can to be a living soul". Man is a soul. Nothing is said about his "having" a soul. Don't you agree that if we have "believed" something that conflics with what the Bible says, then we would be confussed until atleast we re-evaluate our thinking. Notice what the Bible says: We notice that the initial occurrences of nephesh (Hebrew word for soul) are found at Genesis 1:20-23. On the fifth creative “day” God said: “‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls nephesh and let flying creatures fly over the earth . . . ’ And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul nephesh that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind.” Similarly on the sixth creative “day” nephesh is applied to the “domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth” as “living souls.”—Ge 1:24. Precisely the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, nephesh chaiyah (living soul), is applied to Adam, when, after God formed man out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, “the man came to be a living soul.” (Ge 2:7) As you say, man was distinct from the animal creation, but that distinction was not because he was a nephesh (soul) and they were not, nor because man wasn't to be offered as a sacrifice. Rather, the record shows that it was because man alone was created “in God’s image.” (Ge 1:26, 27) He was created with moral qualities like those of God, with power and wisdom far superior to the animals; hence he could have in subjection all the lower forms of creature life. (Ge 1:26, 28) Man’s organism was more complex, as well as more versatile, than that of the animals. (Compare 1Co 15:39.) Likewise, Adam had, but lost, the prospect of eternal life; this is never stated with regard to the creatures lower than man.—Ge 2:15-17; 3:22-24. After man’s creation, God’s instruction to him again used the term nephesh with regard to the animal creation, “everything moving upon the earth in which there is life as a soul [literally, in which there is living soul (nephesh).” (Ge 1:30) Other examples of animals being so designated are found at Genesis 2:19; 9:10-16; Leviticus 11:10, 46; 24:18; Numbers 31:28; Ezekiel 47:9. Notably, the Christian Greek Scriptures coincide in applying the Greek psykhe to animals, as at Revelation 8:9; 16:3, where it is used of creatures in the sea. The Bible clearly shows that nephesh and psykhe are used to designate the animal creation lower than man. The same terms apply to man. email me if you have any question on this at tara015015@yahoo.com |
||||||
3 | Do animals have souls? | Eccl 3:21 | Tara022 | 129987 | ||
Hi Country Girl, I think we're both correct on this issue. Only man (mankind) was made in God's image, not the animals. There is no indication from my Bible studies that animals will be resurrected either. Only man possess the four main attributes of God, showing he was made in God's image; Love, Wisdom, Power, and Justice. Interestingly though, you and I probably differ on an issue that began in the garden of Eden when Satan the devil told the woman Eve that she would Not die if she ate of the forbidden tree. He assured her further by telling her that she would become like God, know good and bad. These are profound statements made by Satan and have influenced mankind's thinking no less today than then. Taking into consideration what the soul (you with your personality, body, and the actuating force to be alive that comes from God or spirit) and Satan's statement that "you will not die", most religions, have and still do teach that man (soul) does not die. This was Satan's first lie! We must reject the lie if we expect to have God's smile of approval don't you agree? Throughout the Scriptures we are shown that the soul (you yourself Ge. 2:7) dies, but it's the spirit that returns to God. Ecclesiastes 12:7, reads: “The dust returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit itself returns to the true God who gave it.” At Ecclesiastes 12:1-7 the effects of old age and death are portrayed in poetic language. After death, the body eventually decomposes and again becomes a part of the dust of the earth. The “spirit,” on the other hand, “returns to the true God.” So man’s death is linked with the spirit’s returning to God, this indicating that man’s life in some way depends upon that spirit. How, then, does this invisible, impersonal force or spirit return to God? Does it return to his literal presence in heaven? The way in which the Bible uses the word “return” does not require that we, in each case, think of an actual movement from one place to another. For instance, unfaithful Israelites were told: “‘Return to me, and I will return to you,’ at Malachi 3:7 Obviously this did not mean that the Israelites were to leave the earth and come into the very presence of God. Nor did it mean that God would leave his position in the heavens and begin dwelling on earth with the Israelites. Rather, Israel’s “returning” to their God Jehovah meant a turning around from a wrong course and again conforming to God’s righteous way. And Jehovah’s “returning” to Israel meant his turning favorable attention to his people once again. In both cases the return involved an attitude, not a literal movement from one geographical location to another. That the return of something does not require actual movement might be illustrated by what happens in a transferal of a business or a property from the control of one party to another. For example, in a certain country the control of the railroads might be shifted from the hands of private enterprise to those of the government. When such a transferal takes place, the railroad equipment and even all the records may remain where they are. It is the authority over them that changes hands. So it is in the case of the spirit or life-force. At death no actual movement from the earth to the heavenly realm need occur for it to ‘return to God.’ But the gift or grant of existence as an intelligent creature, as enjoyed once by the dead person, now reverts to God. That which is needed to animate the person, namely, the spirit or life-force, is in God’s hands. (Psalm 31:5) Into your hand I entrust my spirit. You have redeemed me, O Jehovah the God of truth. (Luke 23:46) And Jesus called with a loud voice and said: “Father, into your hands I entrust my spirit.” When he had said this, he expired. The Bible says much much more on the subject of soul and spirit and I'm so thankful for it's clear understanding. Tara |
||||||
4 | Do animals have souls? | Eccl 3:21 | Tara022 | 130009 | ||
Hi Country Girl, I merely assumed wrong, then. Great. So many people tell me that the soul and spirit are one and the same. And as I showed, it's the spirit that never dies. It's the spirit that returns to God. And since our soul is us as humans or animals, well, we die and animals die, clear and simple; the soul dies. Ezk 18:4 Have a nice day Tara Tara |
||||||
5 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130227 | ||
Hi Noveta, I do not ridiculte the apostle Paul. He clearly says, "one God, the Father". So the Son (Jesus) can't be the one God that we are to worship (the Father) nor the God to pray to (since we pray to the Father through the Son, Jesus). The Scripture is exactly right, don't listen to Tim or the others that twist the scriptures and try to say that the Bible says that we should worship Jesus as our Almighty Creator and Father. If the Bible (and it does) refer to certain men as mighty ones (gods) or angels as mighty (gods) or Jesus as mighty (thos/elohim) then I believe it. We must not take away the honor due our heavenly Father, Jehovah, Jesus' God. Remember, many times Jesus says, "my God". We honor or worship Jesus in a relative sense, as he truly is, the mighty Son of God, through whom all the universe was created, and whom alone is called God's only-begotten Son. Jesus constantly tells us to worship the Father, again and again! Jesus cannot get any clearer when he says at Matt. 4:10, "Then Jesus said to him: “Go away, Satan! For it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’” I believe Jesus over what's spread in so-called Christian religions. I wonder too why most trinitarian Bible versions today translate "theon" without the definite article as "a god" in Acts 28:6 but in John 1:1 they choose to make it appear Jesus is Almighty God by translating it as "God" eventhough there's no definite article preceding the "theos" in question! After all, the verse tells us that the Word was with God. So the context tells us that the Word is "a god". Otherwise the translation is "out of context". The same Greek construction is found in Acts 28:6 as is in John 1:1, thus the New World Translation is consistant, accurate, and scholarly. Notice what these Greek scholars translate John 1:1 as: 1808 “and the word was a god” The New Testament, in An Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London. 1864 “and a god was the Word” The Emphatic Diaglott (J21, interlinear reading), by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London. 1935 “and the Word was divine” The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed, Chicago. 1950 “and the Word was a god” New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures, Brooklyn. 1975 “and a god (or, of a divine Das Evangelium nach kind) was the Word” Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz,Göttingen, Germany. 1978 “and godlike sort was Das Evangelium nach the Logos” Johannes,by Johannes Schneider,Berlin. 1979 “and a god was the Logos” Das Evangelium nach Johannes,by Jürgen Becker, Würzburg, Germany. These translations use such words as “a god,” “divine” or “godlike” because the Greek word (theos) is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb and is not preceded by the definite article and is (please note) contrasted with the articular theos (ho theos). Yes, the Word is contrasted with the God, otherwise John would have had the definite article preceding both theos's. This is clear and simple, so don't believe twisted trinitarian explainations. |
||||||
6 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130232 | ||
Tim, Your line of reasoning is illogical and certainly non Biblical. Example: John 8:12 Jesus is the Light of the world. Matthew 5:14 Disciples are the light of the world. So, the disciples must be Jesus. If I reasoned like your reasonings then that satement would be true! The Bible tells us that there's only One True Almighty God whose name alone is Jehovah. (He causes to become) Jesus is Not that one. He is Almighty God's only- begotten god. Read what the Bible tells us. It says at John 1:18 that that is the case! The Bible tells us there are indeed lesser mighty ones, men, angels, and it does call them god(s)(elohim). Ps. 82:1-7 and Ps 8:5. Yet, Jehovah is called Elohim and Jesus is called elohim. Well, do I then reason that angels are Jehovah? No. Jesus is Jehovah? No. Why Tim, do the scriptures again and again have verses such as Revelation 1:1, A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him." ?? Are we logical or not? Also, Jude 1:1, "Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ, but a brother of James, to the called ones who are loved in relationship with God [the] Father and preserved for Jesus Christ." Clearnly we have here shown to us that there's Jesus and his Father who's THE God. 1 John 4:9, "God sent forth his only-begotten Son". It doesn't say the Father but THE God sent Jesus. So Jesus can't be THE God! Tim, what do we do with all the verses that use the phrase where Jesus is speaking, "my God". Yes who ever heard of Jehovah saying "my God". Never, but Jesus does many times. Romans 1:7,8 Paul says, "May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ. 8 First of all, I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of YOU, because YOUR faith is talked about throughout the whole world". Yes, the Bible teaches that there is only one true Almighty God, (as Jehovah himself says when he says besides me there is no God) and it says there's God's Son. John 17:3 says, "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." Here we have made clear for us that there's Almighty God Jehovah and there's the one he sent to the earth, his Son Jesus Christ. These few verses speak for themselves, they are not twisted, in any way, and I believe the Bible for what it says, and not "men". Believe the Bible when it says there is no God apart from me (Jehovah). There is no Almighty God but the Father. If you declare that his Son is Almighty God too, then what do we do with Is 45:21? Tara |
||||||
7 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130269 | ||
Tim, I never said nor implied that if simply the Greek definite article were lacking before theos then it should be translated "a god". If it were only that simple! No, I am saying that the renderings of the Greek scholars of the Bible versions I listed agree with the grammatical construction of John 1:1 where we find two occurrences of the Greek noun theos. The first occurance refers to almighty God, with whom the Word was—“and the Word logos was with God (a form of theos).” Remember that we cannot take words out of context! This first theos is preceded by a form of the Greek definite article ho. The noun theos with the definite article ho in front of it points to a distinct identity, in this case almighty God—“and the Word was with (the) God.” But in the latter part of John 1:1, such translations that I listed, render the second theos (a predicate noun) as “divine” or “a god” instead of “God” because the second theos is a singular predicate noun occurring before the verb "and" without the definite article ho. In this verse, such a sentence construction points to a characteristic or quality of the subject. It highlights the nature of the Word, that he was “divine,” “a god,” but not the almighty God. This is in harmony with the many scriptures that show that “the Word” was God’s spokesman, sent to earth by God, and again context taken into consideration. Just as the John 1:18 verse states: “No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god [the Son created in heaven by almighty God] who is in the bosom position with the Father is the one that has [come to earth as the man Jesus and] explained him [almighty God].” There are many other Bible verses where those who translate from the Greek into another language insert the article “a” before the predicate noun although there is no article in the Greek text. This insertion of the article in the translation brings out the characteristic or quality of the noun. For example, at Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King James Version says, “they supposed it had been a spirit” (phantasma). The New World Translation more correctly renders the phrase, “They thought: ‘It is an apparition!’” In the same way, the correct translation of John 1:1 shows that the Word was not “God,” but “a god.” Two similar examples are found at John chapter 8, verse 44. There Jesus, speaking of the Devil, says: “That one was a manslayer when he began . . . He is a liar and the father of the lie.” Similar to John 1:1, in the original Greek the predicate noun in both these expressions (“manslayer,” “liar”) precedes the verb and and note I said "and" has no definite article. In each case, a quality or characteristic of the Devil is being described and in many modern language translations, it is necessary to insert the indefinite article (“a”) in order to convey this. Thus, the King James Version renders these expressions, “He was a murderer . . . he is a liar and the father of it.” Other examples can be seen at Mark 11:32; John 4:19; 6:70; 9:17; 10:1, 13, 21; 12:6. Tara |
||||||
8 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130275 | ||
Hello BradK, May I ask you a question? What explaination have you to the Greek scholars' translation of John 1:1 of the list I provided? Mine is only the beginning of present day scholars' poofs of their unbiased accuracy. Surely they had their reasons since their translation was unpopular. Have you not recognized the inconsistancy of translation of Acts 28:6 with that of John 1:1? You mention inconsistancies found in the NWT. Could you list some for me? Also, could you please show me where I am in error in the posts I just made? I believe I just let the Scriptures speak for themselves. Let's not add nor take away, which is "good" don't you agree? Thanks. Tara |
||||||
9 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130287 | ||
Hello BradK, You seem upset? Sorry if I upset you. You ask me some important questions. The first point though. 1). Concerning the definite article was responded to and if you read it you'll see how Tim was in error. This is simple translation, nothing hard about it so long as we stay unbiased. Point 2) I take it you believe in the Trinity doctrine. That's fine. But then you say “it would be polytheism" to translate John 1:1 as many do, “a god” or "divine". Let me show you how ridiculous that is, nothing personal but nonetheless ridiculous. I believe the Bible clearly denies the trinity. This Trinity means a triune or three-in-one God. Correct? That means a God in three Persons, namely, “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost.” Since this is said to be, not three Gods, but merely “one God in three Persons,” then the term God must mean the Trinity; and the Trinity and God must be interchangeable terms. On this basis let us quote John 1:1, 2 and use the equivalent term for God, and let us see how it reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the Trinity, and the Word was the Trinity. The same was in the beginning with the Trinity.” But how could such a thing be? If the Word was himself a Person and he was with the Trinity, then there would be four Persons. But the Word is said by the trinitarians to be the Second Person of the Trinity, namely, “God the Son.” But even then, how could John say that the Word, as God the Son, was the Trinity made up of three Persons? How could one Person be three? However, let the trinitarians say that in John 1:1 God means just the First Person of the Trinity, namely, “God the Father,” and so the Word was with God the Father in the beginning. On the basis of this definition of God, how could it be said that the Word, who they say is “God the Son,” is “God the Father”? And where does their “God the Holy Ghost” enter into the picture? If God is a Trinity, was not the Word with “God the Holy Ghost” as well as with “God the Father” in the beginning? Suppose, now, they say that, in John 1:1, 2, God means the other two Persons of the Trinity, so that in the beginning the Word was with God the Father and God the Holy Ghost. In this case we come to this difficulty, namely, that, by being God, the Word was God the Father and God the Holy Ghost, the other two Persons of the Trinity. Thus the Word, or “God the Son,” the Second Person of the Trinity, is said to be also the First Person and the Third Person of the Trinity. It does not solve the difficulty to say that the Word was the same as God the Father and was equal to God the Father but still was not God the Father. If this were so, it must follow that the Word was the same as God the Holy Ghost and was equal to God the Holy Ghost but still was not God the Holy Ghost. And yet the trinitarians teach that the God of John 1:1, 2 is only one God, not three Gods! So is the Word only one-third of God? Since we cannot scientifically calculate that 1 God (the Father) plus 1 God (the Son) plus 1 God (the Holy Ghost) equals 1 God, then we must calculate that 1/3 God (the Father) plus 1/3 God (the Son) plus 1/3 God (the Holy Ghost) equals 3/3 God, or 1 God. Furthermore, we would have to conclude that the term “God” in John 1:1, 2 changes its personality, or that “God” changes his personality in one sentence. Does he? Any trying to reason out the Trinity teaching leads to confusion of mind. So the Trinity teaching confuses the meaning of John 1:1, 2; it does not simplify it or make it clear or easily understandable. Certainly the matter was not confused in the mind of the apostle John when he wrote those words in the common Greek of nineteen centuries ago for international Christian readers. As John opened up his life account of Jesus Christ he was in no confusion of mind as to who the Word or Logos was and as to who God was. |
||||||
10 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130288 | ||
Yes! Country Girl, that's exactly what I've been saying. You got it correct. Yes, Jesus Christ is the provision for salvation, he is the only-begotten Son of God Almighty. Thank you. Tara |
||||||
11 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130294 | ||
Hello Tim, You might find it interesting that Marshall’s interlinear translation reads: “In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with — God, and God was the Word.” Note that ho “the” appears before “God” in the final clause of this verse. You may be saying that the problem, is word order. In 1933 Greek scholar E. C. Colwell published an article entitled “A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament.” In it he wrote: “A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. . . . A predicate nominative which precedes the verb cannot be translated as an indefinite or a ‘qualitative’ noun solely because of the absence of the article; if the context suggests that the predicate is definite, it should be translated as a definite noun in spite of the absence of the article.” At John 1:1 the anarthrous predicate noun the·os´ does precede the verb, the Greek word order being literally: “God [predicate] was [verb] the Word [subject].” Concerning this verse Colwell concluded: “The opening verse of John’s Gospel contains one of the many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun.” Thus some scholars claim that the only really correct way to translate this clause is: “And the Word was God.” Do these statements of Colwell prove that “a god” is a mistranslation at John 1:1? Perhaps Tim, you noticed this scholar’s wording that an anarthrous predicate noun that precedes the verb should be understood as definite “if the context suggests” that. Further along in his argument Colwell stressed that the predicate is indefinite in this position “only when the context demands it.” Nowhere did he state that all anarthrous predicate nouns that precede the verb in Greek are definite nouns. Not any inviolable rule of grammar, but “context” must guide the translator in such cases. The Greek text of the Christian Scriptures has many examples of this type of predicate noun where other translators into English have added the indefinite article “a.” Consider, for example, Marshall’s interlinear translation of the following verses: “Says to him the woman: Sir, I perceive that a prophet [predicate] art [verb] thou [subject].” (John 4:19) “Said therefore to him—Pilate: Not really a king [predicate] art [verb] thou [subject]? Answered—Jesus: Thou sayest that a king [predicate] I am [verb, with subject included].”—John 18:37. Did you notice the expressions “a prophet,” “a king” (twice)? These are anarthrous predicate nouns that precede the verb in Greek. But the translator rendered them with the indefinite article “a.” There are numerous examples of this in English versions of the Bible. For further illustration consider the following from the Gospel of John in The New English Bible: “A devil” (6:70); “a slave” (8:34); “a murderer . . . a liar” (8:44); “a thief” (10:1); “a hireling” (10:13); “a relation” (18:26). Alfred Marshall explains why he used the indefinite article in his interlinear translation of all the verses mentioned in the two previous paragraphs, and in many more: “The use of it in translation is a matter of individual judgement. . . . We have inserted ‘a’ or ‘an’ as a matter of course where it seems called for.” Of course, neither Colwell (as noted above) nor Marshall felt that an “a” before “god” at John 1:1 was called for. But this was not because of any inflexible rule of grammar. It was “individual judgement,” which scholars and translators have a right to express. The New World Bible Translation Committee expressed a different judgment in this place by the translation “a god.” |
||||||
12 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130318 | ||
Thank you Tim. I'm glad we agree on this. Thus my theology, based on my understanding of scripture as a whole "demands" an indifinite article as did those other Bible versions I listed. How many gods are there? Fact is Jehovah calls angels gods, and certain men gods. In that sentance replace the word "gods" with "mighty ones" and you get the picture that's in my mind. Yet, he says there is only one mighty one. Yes, only One that's really really mighty, the Creator, the Almighty that should be worshipped as our Almighty Creator. We both know that Jesus too is mighty, Is.9:6. Thus Jehovah must be understood to mean these other "mighty ones" are "mighty ones" indeed but in a relative sense, not Almighty Gods. I've shown you that scripture (Jehovah) indeed calls angels and certain men gods, so they can't be false gods. They just aren't worshipped as the Almighty God. If they were then they would be "false gods" as idols are. If Satan is worshipped as a god then he's a false god. He is still a god but a false god. 2 Cor 4:4 calls him a god. So he is "a god". What kind of god? a false god, one that should not be worshipped as the Almighty God. My Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Son of the Almighty is honored and worshipped as just that, nothing less and nothing more. If I did, I would be making him a false god. And he himself tells me at Matt 4:10, ", ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’ So, should I do what Jesus tells me to do? Tara |
||||||
13 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130320 | ||
Yes I've been baptized in the name of the father and the son and the holy spirit as a public declaration of my dedication to my God and Father Jehovah and for forgiveness of my sins through the merits of my Saviour Jesus Christ. Have you? Tara |
||||||
14 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130321 | ||
Okay, Angel. I've never really wanted to dialogue with you because you appeared to be too blunt and unreasonable and just chalked anyone else that didn't agree with you off. But I'll study "scripture" and only a few at a time, please. And through email. Mine again is tara015015@yahoo.com Let me tell you one thing though, I don't respect mere assertions, nor mistranslations. Okay? Tara |
||||||
15 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130372 | ||
Hello Tim, As you know, NIV translates elohim at Is. 9:6 "And he (Jesus) will be called ... Mighty God". Why are you telling me that that isn't true when you know that elohim is in English "Mighty God"? Your assertions to basic Bible truths are merely assertions. I'm not evading any question. I quoted for example 2 Cor. 4:4 where Jehovah calls Satan "the god of this system of things". So is Satan an evil god (mighty one) or not? Bible commentaries and lexicons alike say what I've been telling you, that there are other gods, that the words elohim and theos are used in the Bible again and again for angels and men. I'm not evading that. Tara |
||||||
16 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130373 | ||
Hello Angel, Thank you Angel for your kindness shown in words of Scriptural comfort. Tara |
||||||
17 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130374 | ||
Hello Country Girl, I was being "all inclusive" verses crafty. I think of crafty in a negative sense. In this post of yours, I agree with every single word as truth. I was baptized at 13 too, and the verses used in our baptismal talk are the very same ones you have here! Tara |
||||||
18 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130383 | ||
Hi Country Girl, Let me say one thing though to make this even clearer. I can't say what you believe in your heart but I can say what I believe. Jesus is my Lord and Savior. Out of unimaginable LOVE his Father, who is Almighty God Jehovah sent his beloved Son to die for our sins. It must have deeply hurt his Father tremendously to see his Son experience the shame and torture he went throush for us though undeserved. Now that Jesus is in heaven along side his Father he now reigns as King of all the universe, subject to no one but his Father. What a great privelege we have and Jesus has for such a loving arrangement for eternity. Tara |
||||||
19 | One God, One Jesus Christ | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130605 | ||
Hello Mary, Thank you. I noticed but I wonder if you or very many of those that read this discussion realize the impact of it all? Tim does not address the Biblical evidence presented. Deut. 10:17 is another place where Jehovah shows us that he himself calls (uses the phrase elohim for god) others (Jesus, men, angels) gods. I'm sure you understand it, sinse it's really not difficult at all. Regardless, I'm convinced that there's only one Jehovah, only one Almighty God and that Jesus can't be Almighty God too because he's the Son. I'm also convinced that holding ones that show these Bible truths in derision is contemptable to Jehovah God. Thank you again for writting Tara |
||||||
20 | Still waiting.... | 1 Cor 8:5 | Tara022 | 130714 | ||
Hello Tim, You still haven’t answered my questions. 1) Explain the Bible’s use of theos for Satan as found in 2 Cor. 4:4. Is Satan an evil god or not? In view of Deut. 10:17 you say there are no other “gods”. Do you likewise say there are not other “lords”? You write, “However, in Isaiah, Jehovah several times denies that there are any other gods but Him. I have asked you several times, but you have refused to answer: Was Jehovah wrong? Did He lie?” I have answered this question. No, Jehovah was not wrong. He did not lie. On the other hand expressions such as is found in Deut.10:17; Ex 18:11; 2 Chr. 2:5; Ps 97:9 Dan 2:47 and Dan 11:36 “And the king will actually do according to his own will, and he will exalt himself and magnify himself above every god; and against the God of gods” show us that there are others in the Bible that Jehovah references as gods. As already noted at Psalm 8:5, the angels are referred to as elohim, as is confirmed by Paul’s quotation of the passage at Hebrews 2:6-8. These texts must be reconciled with the one in Isaiah 43:10. Interestingly, Jesus Christ Son of God is never referred to as “God of gods”, yet Jehovah is many times. As, already stated numerous times there is only One Almighty God that is to be worshipped as the Almighty God and Creator and Father of Jesus the Son of God. |
||||||
Result pages: [ 1 2 ] Next > Last [2] >> |