28 Sep 11
9 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsI can read and write Koine Greek, you cannot, that is why, you have stated according
Where are you getting this from? Be honest now, for I know you do not
know Koine Greek and there is no Greek word for "of" in that verse. The
Greek word that some translate as "of all" can also be translated "over all"
according to Koine Greek scholars.
to Greek scholars, because you dont know how to read and write Koine Greek and in
effect dont know what you are talking about. The term 'of all', comes from the Greek
word 'pases', 'of all' and is qualified in relation to the noun creation, of all, creation.
Now you will tell us, how 'of all', creation, suddenly translates as 'over all', for the Greek
text says nothing about 'over', anything. In fact, its dishonestly and erroneously
translated in the NIV as 'over', where no instance of 'over', exists in the Greek
text, why? because lying trinitarians have sought to introduce their dogma and bias
into scripture to support the idea that Christ is distinct from creation, rather than a part
of it. Again so you cannot twist these words, how do you translate the Greek text,
'pases', as 'over all', when it does not say 'over all'.
you may find a Greek rendering of the text here along with lexical definitions of the
individual words, not one of them makes a reference to the state of being 'over',
anything.
http://biblos.com/colossians/1-15.htm
28 Sep 11
6 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I am uninterested in that, will you please answer the question, does the verse state that Christ is part of, or not a part of creation, according to the Greek text.
I am uninterested in that, will you please answer the question, does the verse state that Christ is part of, or not a part of creation, according to the Greek text.
I did answer that. Christ as a man is definitely a part of the creation of God.
God CREATED Man - Gen 1:26,27. So if I did not believe that MAN is an item of the creation of God then I would not believe in the INCARNATION of God.
Some evangelicals are a bit afraid to state that Christ is also a part of creation. But if we believe that He became a man we HAVE to believe that He is a part of the creation.
So what do we have ? We have a Man who is the eternal uncreated God Who clothed Himself in His creation. This is why the word MINGLE is so useful. It is biblical from the book of Leviticus and it is discriptive.
When two or more things are joined together so that the components remain distinquishable in the combination, we say that the matters are MINGLED together.
Christ is the mingling of God and man. As the eternal and uncreated God He is not a creation. But as an incarnated MAN of flesh and blood and humanity, He is clothed with or joined to creation.
I do not fluently read NT Greek language. And I doubt that you do either. However, we have the helpful tools of word studies and lexicons and dictionaries. And I have no problem with any genitive case of in the Greek text of Colossians 1:18. - "the FIRSTBORN OF, OF, OF all creation".
No problem. Christ is God / Man.
Christ is Creator / creature.
Christ is the mingling together of Divinity and Humanity.
"For in Him all the fullness was pleased to dwell".
That was not one third of the fullness.
That was not 33.3333 % of the fullness.
That was "ALL the fullness was pleased to dwell" .
The Fullness was happy. The fullness was pleased.
Why are YOU displeased ?
"For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9)
That is not "one third" of the fulness.
That is "all the fulness".
28 Sep 11
6 edits
Originally posted by jaywillThankyou, we can now state, that according to the Greek text, Christ was a part ofI am uninterested in that, will you please answer the question, does the verse state that Christ is part of, or not a part of creation, according to the Greek text.
I did answer that. Christ as a [b] man is definitely a part of the creation of God.
God CREATED Man - Gen 1:26,27. So if I did not believe that MAN is an item /b]
That is not "one third" of the fulness.
That is "all the fulness".[/b]
creation, not distinct from it. Yet here you are stating that he is a part of creation, yet
uncreated, of which mere logic tells us that such a statement is complete nonsense.
How the meaning of terms change when a trinitarian tries to support his prejudices
of the nature of Christ borders on the ludicrous. To prove this we have in the verse the
compound term, prototokos, literally, from Greek words 'protos', first and 'tikto', 'bring
forth' and translated as firstborn. Now this is very interesting, for here is a reference
with regard to time, and may properly be translated as 'first in time'. Are you denying
that this is the case?
28 Sep 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieThe Word became flesh and tabernacled among us the Gospel of John states in John 1:14 should have told you that Christ is also a part of creation.
Thankyou, we can now state, that according to the Greek text, Christ was a part of
creation, not distinct from it. Yet here you are stating that he is a part of creation, yet
uncreated, of which mere logic tells us that such a statement is complete nonsense.
How the meaning of terms change when a trinitarian tries to support his predispositio ...[text shortened]... , and may properly be translated as first in time. Are you denying that this is the case?
28 Sep 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhat I said was the Greek word for "of" is not in that text. Neither is
I can read and write Koine Greek, you cannot, that is why, you have stated according
to Greek scholars, because you dont know how to read and write Koine Greek and in
effect dont know what you are talking about. The term 'of all', comes from the Greek
word 'pases', 'of all' and is qualified in relation to the noun creation, of all, creation.
...[text shortened]... te of being 'over',
anything.
http://biblos.com/colossians/1-15.htm
the Greek for "over". All I am saying that the Greek word that is
usually translated "of all" can also be translated "over all. It appears
that way in my copy of "The NKJV Greek English Interlinear New
Testament" Copyright 1994 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. and the translators
are Arthur L. Farstad, Zane C. Hodges, C. Michael Moss, Robert E. Picirilli,
and Wilbur N. Pickering.
The NKJV corrected many errors from the old KJV and it translates
Colossians 1:15
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
28 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillyes, but the term, 'egeneto', to be born (John 1:14), could signal a change of one
The Word became flesh and tabernacled among us the Gospel of John states in [b]John 1:14 should have told you that Christ is also a part of creation.[/b]
condition into another and may be used to demonstrrate that Christ changed from a
divine entity into a human, which is fine, but the term 'prototokos', is not so forgiving
and refers to a point in time.
28 Sep 11
6 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsno it cannot, you are talking pants, there is no mention of 'over' anything in the text, its
What I said was the Greek word for "of" is not in that text. Neither is
the Greek for "over". All I am saying that the Greek word that is
usually translated "of all" can also be translated "over all. It appears
that way in my copy of "The NKJV Greek English Interlinear New
Testament" Copyright 1994 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. and the translators
are Art ...[text shortened]... Colossians 1:15
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.
simply a poor excuse and scurrilous attempt to translate the Greek 'pases', 'of all', as
'over', because of your dogma. Perhaps you can tell the forum the actual Greek word
for 'over', and then tell them why its not in the verse but you are saying that it is. Its
both dishonest and reprehensible. In fact i suggest we do a comparison of the texts
and let the people know just to what extent trinitarains are willing to go to in order to
impose their bias on scripture, where none exists in the text.
What you have done is simply to compare translations, you cannot read Greek, you
dont know what you are talking about. Here is a simple definition, from the root,
pas – each, every; each "part(s) of a totality"
pas (each, every) means "all" in the sense of "each (every) part that applies." The
emphasis of the total picture then is on "one piece at a time." Translated as, all, the
whole, every kind of.
You will now tell the forumn , how you derive the definition, 'over all', from the
meaning of 'pases'. If you cannot, you will now tell us why your translators have
translated it, as 'over all', when none exists in the Greek text.
28 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI said a plainly as I could that neither "of" or "over" is in the text. But the
no it cannot, you are talking pants, there is no mention of 'over' anything in the text, its
simply a poor excuse and scurrilous attempt to translate the Greek 'pases', 'of all', as
'over', because of your dogma. Perhaps you can tell the forum the actual Greek word
for 'over', and then tell them why its not in the verse but you are saying that have
translated it, as 'over all', when none exists in the Greek text.
Greek word for "all" is in the text. Some translaters translate it as "of all"
and others "over all". It apparently is up to the translators. But I really
think you are being dishonest here.
P.S. Actually the Greek word is in the text in relation to "image of God and
the Invisiblity of God" but not there in relation to the "firstborn (of)(over) all
creation."
28 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobie
yes, but the term, 'egeneto', to be born (John 1:14), could signal a change of one
condition into another and may be used to demonstrrate that Christ changed from a
divine entity into a human, which is fine, but the term 'prototokos', is not so forgiving
and refers to a point in time.
yes, but the term, 'egeneto', to be born (John 1:14), could signal a change of one
condition into another and may be used to demonstrrate that Christ changed from a divine entity into a human, which is fine, but the term 'prototokos', is not so forgiving and refers to a point in time.
"Besides Me there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5)
Could you list the names of the Gods that are besides Jehovah ?
" I am Jehovah who makes all things, Who alone stretches out the heavens, Who spread out the earth (Who was with Me?) " (Isaiah 44:24)
List the other Gods who were with Jehovah in His creating ?
28 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillThis is really hard for you guys isn't it? Well it's not. Really, I'm not kidding!!!
yes, but the term, 'egeneto', to be born (John 1:14), could signal a change of one
condition into another and may be used to demonstrrate that Christ changed from a divine entity into a human, which is fine, but the term 'prototokos', is not so forgiving and refers to a point in time.
[b]"Besides Me there is no God" (Isaiah 45:5) [/ ?) " (Isaiah 44:24)
List the other Gods who were with Jehovah in His creating ?[/b]
But lets see if we can make this as easy as possible.
1) Jehovah is God Almighty and has always been existing as spoken of by the Bible.
2) No other Gods existed besides Jehovah because no one else existed besides him before he created Jesus.
3) Jehovah made the plans for creating all that we see on earth and in heaven.
4) The first thing he himself created was his "Only Begotten Son, Jesus."
5) Now all that we see both in heaven and on earth were created by Jehovah with his son Jesus being involved with his Father in this work.
As hard as you guys make this...it isn't. It's really that clear and simple.
PS. The bible speaks of many God's. Satan is even referred to as a god. Jesus is referred to as a god but was never referred to as Almighty God as only Jehovah is. And Jesus was never referred to as a god in the Bible before he assended back to heaven.
29 Sep 11
Originally posted by galveston751) Yah is the mighty God and the almighty God spoken of in the Holy Bible.
This is really hard for you guys isn't it? Well it's not. Really, I'm not kidding!!!
But lets see if we can make this as easy as possible.
1) Jehovah is God Almighty and has always been existing as spoken of by the Bible.
2) No other Gods existed besides Jehovah because no one else existed besides him before he created Jesus.
3) Jehovah made ...[text shortened]... And Jesus was never referred to as a god in the Bible before he assended back to heaven.
2) Yah is one God, consisting of three persons, the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit. There is no other God.
3) Yah created the heavens and the earth and all living things.
4) Yahshua was begotten of God the Father, not created.
5) All things were created by the Son, with cooperation and help from the
Father and the Holy Spirit.
Isn't that simple.
29 Sep 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsNo it's ridiculous.... Not even close to being in the Bible and completly made up. No scriptures at all to back this theory up.
1) Yah is the mighty God and the almighty God spoken of in the Holy Bible.
2) Yah is one God, consisting of three persons, the Father, the Son, and
the Holy Spirit. There is no other God.
3) Yah created the heavens and the earth and all living things.
4) Yahshua was begotten of God the Father, not created.
5) All things were created by the Son, with cooperation and help from the
Father and the Holy Spirit.
Isn't that simple.
So prove me wrong....
PS..So all the outside resourses that the WTS uses means nothing to you it seems. It also appears your stubborn enough to die for you man made doctrines that anyone can see thru as being of pagan and man mage origins. So very sad to see any humans so stuck in these traps set by Satan.
29 Sep 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI wasn't using a straw man. I think it's more (as is now evident) a case of me not understand what you were claiming.
You are trying to argue against a position that i do not profess, its termed a straw man argument. The scripture is quite clear, we are to pray for the Fathers name to be
sanctified. Why there should be any confusion, i cannot say?
You're reading something into the Scriptures that isn't implicitly there. You mean like,
and yet He never instructed us not to do that very thing. Ironic.
I still don't understand it.
You seem to now be arguing that Jesus told us to pray that the Father's name be sanctified, and that you don't understand why everyone is confused by your claim.
Well, it's because that claim IS confusing. Why would we pray to God that we sanctify His name? No prayer necessary, we just sanctify it. There. Done. Set apart as Holy. We've already done that, why pray for it?