The Triune God in Revelation 4&5

Originally posted by roigam
I can admit a mistake, can you?

Are you going to admit your mistake over the translation of "EN ARCHE EN HO LOGOS, KAI HO LOGOS EN PROS TON THEON, KAI THEOS EN HO LOGOS"?

Originally posted by roigam

I would be very caareful about who you let in.
Satan has also been known to put his spirit in people.

He will be stripped out, stripped away, stripped off, nullified.

When I tell you that you should call on the Lord Jesus and receive Him into you as the Savior God, that feeling of disdain to do so ... contains the very fear of Satan in it, that he will be stripped OUT of your being.

I say this to any person reading these posts about Jesus the Lord.
Mixed with your dread to draw back from letting Christ be Lord is hidden Satan dread of KNOWING the Spirit of Jesus will eventually eliminate Satan's hold on you.


You should give the Devil a migraine headache by going against that sense of dead, throwing open your soul and praying -

" Lord Jesus, my Lord and my God, I receive you right now as my Lord and Savior. Cleanse me totally of all my sins in your precious prevailing redemption."

It is not a matter of JUST your personal salvation. It is a matter of hastening "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven."

Do you want to be an expert ON the kingdom as according to knowledge?
Or do you want to be one BRINGING in the kingdom by expanding Christ's Lordship into your life ?

The Bible says we must put on the new personality.

No it doesn't really. It says to put on the NEW MAN. "New personality" is a loose translation paraphrase intended to "help" you understand.

You should get the Recovery Version of the New Testament free of charge at "Bibles For America" .

www.biblesforamerica.org
You need a better translation to see it is "put on the new man" not put on the new personality. The Head of the new man is Christ who became a "life giving Spirit to be able to enter into our human spirit.

" The last Adam [Christ,] became a life giving Spirit " (1 Cor .15:45)

The HEAD of the old man was Adam who became a living soul.
The HEAD of the new man is the last Adam - Christ, also called "the second man".


The old man is the man alienated from God and joined to Satan God's enemy. The new man is indwelt with the life of God and we put the new man on through transformation.

Originally posted by FMF
Are you going to admit your mistake over the translation of "EN ARCHE EN HO LOGOS, KAI HO LOGOS EN PROS TON THEON, KAI THEOS EN HO LOGOS"?

Sorry, I don't speak whatever language that is.
Another Scripture which applies to Jesus in his prehuman life that you might consider is:

(Proverbs 8:30, 31) Then I was beside him as a master worker. I was the one he was especially fond of day by day; I rejoiced before him all the time; 31 I rejoiced over his habitable earth, And I was especially fond of the sons of men.

This uses the word "beside" him referring to Jesus showing he is separate from our Creator, the Father. What a privelege he had in working alongside Jehovah and being used by Jehovah to create all things.
Jehovah worked "by means of him" as it says:

(Colossians 1:16) because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him.

btw I did not see a response to the point about differentiating the two groups.

bye for now.

Originally posted by roigam
Sorry, I don't speak whatever language that is.
Another Scripture which applies to Jesus in his prehuman life that you might consider is:

(Proverbs 8:30, 31) Then I was beside him as a master worker. I was the one he was especially fond of day by day; I rejoiced before him all the time; 31 I rejoiced over his habitable earth, And I was especially fond of ...[text shortened]... and for him.

btw I did not see a response to the point about differentiating the two groups.

You suggested that your preferred translation of "EN ARCHE EN HO LOGOS, KAI HO LOGOS EN PROS TON THEON, KAI THEOS EN HO LOGOS" is "accepted by most Bible scholars as the best translation available".

This is a falsehood, and a blatant one. Are you going to address this issue?

When you have made a claim about how the translation you prefer "is accepted by most Bible scholars" - when this is clearly untrue - you cannot seek to defend your stance (or evade responsibility for the lack of veracity in what you are claiming) by then saying "I don't speak whatever language that is".

The evidence that the translation of that verse from the Bible that you prefer is accepted by most Bible scholars, and that you are peddling a falsehood, is freely available in English - which, I presume, is your mother tongue.

Originally posted by roigam
Sorry, I don't speak whatever language that is.

I mistyped the closing sentence of my last post.

The evidence that the translation of that verse from the Bible that you prefer is NOT accepted by most Bible scholars, and that you are peddling a falsehood, is freely available in English - never mind what languages you can or can't speak

Excuse me but this [John 1:1 stating that "the Word was ...with... God and the Word was a god"] has been translated just that way in several other Bible. The NWT used master texts for it's translations. A master text is accepted by most Bible scholars as the best translation available

This is false.

See:
http://www.letusreason.org/jw38.htm
http://biblehub.com/john/1-1.htm

Now the Lamb is the only one found qualified to take the scroll of God's economy, unlock the seals and open it. Don't you have TWO _________s then ?

" And I saw in the right hand of Him who sits upon the throne a scroll, written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals.

And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the scroll and to break its seals?

And no one in heaven nor on the earth nor under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, And I wept much because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it." (Rev. 5:1-4)

If actually no one in all the universe was found worthy to open the scroll of God's will, we would all have to weep. Then the whole universe would be a locked secret - a unsolvable mystery forever.

John's weeping seems to imply that John had been purposely praying to find out what the future of the church, Israel, and the world would be. He was then the last surviving of the twelve original apostles. He was old. He knew he was about to pass on. He was terribly burdened to find out what the future of the struggling church and the wayward Israel would be, let alone the destiny of the world.

I think John was like the New Testament Daniel. Daniel also fasted and prayed that God would reveal to him the unknown things of His will for His people.

Originally posted by FMF
You suggested that your preferred translation of "EN ARCHE EN HO LOGOS, KAI HO LOGOS EN PROS TON THEON, KAI THEOS EN HO LOGOS" is "accepted by most Bible scholars as the best translation available".

This is a falsehood, and a blatant one. Are you going to address this issue?

When you have made a claim about how the translation you prefer "is accepted by ...[text shortened]... peddling a falsehood, is freely available in English - which, I presume, is your mother tongue.

I don't speak Koine Greek. do you?
What I said was not specific to that phrase which I assume is John 1:1.
It was speaking of the translation of the whole Bible, the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures as being from master texts that are accepted by most scholars.
I grant you some may differ with that translation but what texts are they using?
Is English your mother tongue?

If it is how do you understand Pr 8:30?
These are Jesus' (in his prehuman life) own words.
(Proverbs 8:30) Then I was... beside... him as a master worker. I was the one he was especially fond of day by day; I rejoiced... before... him all the time;
If Jesus was beside him and before him its obvious Jesus was a separate individual.

Originally posted by roigam
What I said was not specific to that phrase which I assume is John 1:1.

In that case, people would be forgiven for concluding that you were being deceitful in a calculating kind of way because John 1:1 was specifically what you were being asked about.

You claimed John 1:1 should be translated as "the Word was with God and the Word was a god." When I asked you about the specific translation of this verse, which is found only in the JW version of the Bible, you answered "Excuse me but this has been translated just that way in several other Bible" which, of course - and as you surely know - is an outright falsehood.

Originally posted by roigam
I don't speak Koine Greek. do you?
What I said was not specific to that phrase which I assume is John 1:1.
It was speaking of the translation of the whole Bible, the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures as being from master texts that are accepted by most scholars.
I grant you some may differ with that translation but what texts are they using?
Is English your ...[text shortened]... l the time;
If Jesus was beside him and before him its obvious Jesus was a separate individual.

Proverbs 8:22 speaks poetically about Wisdom. And some expositors say it refers to Christ.

Notice that Wisdom says God possessed Wisdom -

"Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of His way, Before His works of old."

When did God not possess Wisdom ?
If God at any time in eternity did not possess Wisdom how did God have the Wisdom to create Wisdom ?

If Proverbs 8 contains allusions to the Logos or the Word that was with God it certainly was God. God was never without the Wisdom of God.

Originally posted by roigam
I don't speak Koine Greek. do you?
What I said was not specific to that phrase which I assume is John 1:1.
It was speaking of the translation of the whole Bible, the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures as being from master texts that are accepted by most scholars.
I grant you some may differ with that translation but what texts are they using?
Is English your ...[text shortened]... l the time;
If Jesus was beside him and before him its obvious Jesus was a separate individual.

Difficult to be beside someone and be them at the same time, isn't it, Difficult for the Word to be with God and be God at the same time, isn't it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Difficult to be beside someone and be them at the same time, isn't it, Difficult for the Word to be with God and be God at the same time, isn't it.

Well that's what it says in the Bible; well in all the Bibles except the JW one 😉

Originally posted by FMF
I mistyped the closing sentence of my last post.

The evidence that the translation of that verse from the Bible that you prefer is [b]NOT accepted by most Bible scholars, and that you are peddling a falsehood, is freely available in English - never mind what languages you can or can't speak

Excuse me but this [John 1:1 stating that "the Word ...[text shortened]...
This is false.

See:
http://www.letusreason.org/jw38.htm
http://biblehub.com/john/1-1.htm

What is it about the Greek text that you cited and the New World translation rendering of that text that you disagree with or find objectionable.

Originally posted by divegeester
Well that's what it says in the Bible; well in all the Bibles except the JW one 😉

Actually thats a falsehood, Darby and other's have recognised the Greek idiom and translated it accordingly. I personally dont think you have the necessary knowledge to know what an accurate translation is to be honest your Biblical knowledge being scant to non existent at best. Infact lets put you to the test. What exactly is it about the New world translation rendering that you find disagrees with the Greek text.