Originally posted by robbie carrobieThat is because the Watchtower has instructed you not to read anything
So i can end up sitting in front of my pc telling others how to be a Christian when I
could be out helping others apply biblical principles in their life to better themselves,
no thanks, I choose life. If you keep bad mouthing the Witnesses as you are doing,
you will very soon find yourself on ignore, for i have GB away enabled. I dont mind ...[text shortened]... y serious risk of being GB awayed, its up to
you, either behave or you will simply be ignored.
critical of them. Right?
2 edits
-Removed-have you any remarks to make with regard to the text other than express your
dogma? i call on anyone , avalanche the cat, mike, googlefudge, wolfie, anyone
that knows anything about grammatical structure of English and they will tell you,'
that before Abraham was, i am', is simply not good English. You dont know the
difference, because you dont know anything about Greek, nor apparently English
grammar. All you can do is express your dogma, that is why, you have failed to
address the point, all you can do, is cite other translations. In fact, i would go as far
as to say, unless you study the grammatical construct of the Greek text, from which
the verse is taken, you cannot say anything in this regard, because you dont know
what you are talking about. That much is clear, and yet, here you are, talking in
more sensationalistic terms like, 'blind'. You have demonstrated the matte at hand
perfectly, i couldn't have done it without you. One dimensional, preconceived ideas,
as to the nature of Christ have no place in translation, nor does citing other
translations to support your dogma. either make reference to the Greek text or
publicly admit that you have not the faintest idea , why it is translated the way it is
and erroneously at that. Its not just a battle against dogma, but a battle against
ignorance that we are fighting.
edit: please dont waste your time replying to this. I have nothing to say to you.
3 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou and I could not say "before Abraham, I AM" nor could avalanche the cat
have you any remarks to make with regard to the text other than express your
dogma? i call on anyone , avalanche the cat, mike, googlefudge, wolfie, anyone
that knows anything about grammatical structure of English and they will tell you,'
that before Abraham was, i am', is simply not good English. You dont know the
difference, because you ing.
edit: please dont waste your time replying to this. I have nothing to say to you.
or googlefudge and be truthful and correct because we are not God. JW's
concede that the text could read, "I have been" indicating "preexistence
but not "I AM" that indicates "eternal existence" because of their dogma.
It has nothing to do with the correctness of the text or correct grammer, it
is pure dogma.
P.S. The correct translation of the Greek, "Ego eimi" to English is "I AM"
and not "I have been". (Eimi is the present active indicative form of the
verb "to be".)
3 edits
The matter of seeing who Jesus Christ is is according to God's revealing something to the person - a revelation. Unfortunately, intelligence will not assure that a mind will see the truth.
That was the case in the leading disciple Peter. It has been the case to every disciple of Jesus:
"And Simon Peter answered and said, You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.
And Jesus answeed and said to him, Blessed are you, Simon, Barjona, because flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in the heavens." (Matt. 16:16,17)
Flesh and blood, even flesh and blood with great debating skills cannot make the revelation shine into the heart of anyone. The Father has to reveal this. And if a person is not ready to receive it, I don't know what we can do except pray that they would receive mercy.
Oh, Watchtower and Bahai and others will be quick to say "We believe Jesus is the Son of God". But so often they mean something else from what the New Testament means.
In the case of Watchtower their "Jesus, Son of God" is the angel Michael, not eternal, created only, and with no everlasting kingdom. His redemption is not effectual. Working for the organization in Brooklyn is their trusted way of salvation.
This is the "flesh and blood" substitute they invented to replace their not seeing the revelation from the Father or not accepting it.
1 edit
-Removed-On our discussion of John 1:1 he argued that this was Greek not English
now on this verse he wants to go in reverse. The NWT translates the
Greek "ego eimi" as "I am" in all the other places in the gospel of John.
John 8:58 is the only exception. See John 4:26 for the first example.
They also try to obscure the connection between John 8:58 and Exodus
3:14 by translating it as "I shall prove to be" instead of "I AM" however,
the Septuagint has "ego eimi" in Exodus 3:14, proving their attempt to
deceive.
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsWe do not say it because its simply not correct English, its a nonsense, your translators
You and I could not say "before Abraham, I AM" nor could avalanche the cat
or googlefudge and be truthful and correct because we are not God. JW's
concede that the text could read, "I have been" indicating "preexistence
but not "I AM" that indicates "eternal existence" because of their dogma.
It has nothing to do with the correctness of the text or corr ave been". (Eimi is the present active indicative form of the
verb "to be".)
once again have demonstrated their dogma in trying to assign a value to the Greek
where none exists. Why do they not translate it according to the sense? because they
wish to assign some value to Jesus where none exists in the text. What Jesus states is
very simply Greek, its not hard to translate it properly, why therefore have your
translators not done so? The answer? a religious bias which seeks to impose itself on
scripture, that is why. Do you say 'RJH, I am', do you? no, why dont you? because its
incorrect , that is why. Why do your translators therefore not translate it correctly?
We all know the answer, bias in translation of trinitarian snakes!
2 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsyou are such an idiot of the gravest proportions and this proves that you have no idea
You and I could not say "before Abraham, I AM" nor could avalanche the cat
or googlefudge and be truthful and correct because we are not God. JW's
concede that the text could read, "I have been" indicating "preexistence
but not "I AM" that indicates "eternal existence" because of their dogma.
It has nothing to do with the correctness of the text or corr ave been". (Eimi is the present active indicative form of the
verb "to be".)
what you are talking about, John 8:58 has two verbs, ( am in the present tense) and
(came to be) in the past or aorist tense. why do you only mention one? shall i answer
that for you, because you, like your translators are a dishonest trinitarian snake.
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI know. But "came to be" refers the Abraham.
you are such an idiot of the gravest proportions and this proves that you have no idea
what you are talking about, John 8:58 has two verbs, ( am in the present tense) and
(came to be) in the past or aorist tense. why do you only mention one? shall i answer
that for you, because you, like your translators are a dishonest trinitarian snake.
It would be translated:
"Before Abraham "came to be", I AM.
P.S. Who is the idiot now, huh?