₦airaland Forum

Conclusion

The author is not saying that ὁ Λόγος (the Word/Reason) is τὸν Θεόν (the deity).


Instead, the text indicates:ὁ Λόγος existed in the beginning and was in a close relationship with τὸν Θεόν (the deity), as shown by πρὸς τὸν Θεόν.

ὁ Λόγος possesses divine qualities or nature (Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος), but the anarthrous Θεὸς suggests it is "divine" rather than identical to the specific deity (τὸν Θεόν).
The repetition reinforces this relationship and distinction, emphasizing ὁ Λόγος’s divine status and its association with the deity without merging their identities.

In summary, the author portrays ὁ Λόγος as a distinct entity with divine attributes, existing alongside and in relation to τὸν Θεόν, not as the deity itself. Let me know if you’d like further clarification or a deeper dive into specific aspects!

Repetition and Structure:

The final clause (Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν) reiterates the relationship, emphasizing ὁ Λόγος’s distinct yet intimate connection with τὸν Θεόν. This repetition would be redundant if the author intended to equate them outright, as it would suffice to state their identity once.

Qualitative Θεὸς in Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος:

The anarthrous Θεὸς indicates that ὁ Λόγος possesses divine qualities or nature, not that it is identically τὸν Θεόν (the specific deity referenced earlier). In Greek grammar, an anarthrous predicate nominative before the verb (as here) typically describes the subject’s character or category rather than equating it with a definite entity. For example, saying "the Word was divine" is like saying a person "is kingly" (having the qualities of a king) rather than "is the king" (a specific king).

Does the Author Equate ὁ Λόγος with τὸν Θεόν?

Distinction Implied by πρὸς τὸν Θεόν: The use of πρὸς τὸν Θεόν in two clauses suggests ὁ Λόγος is a separate entity in relation to τὸν Θεόν. In Greek, πρὸς with the accusative implies being "with" or "facing" another entity, indicating distinction rather than identity. If the author meant ὁ Λόγος is τὸν Θεόν, this phrase would be unnecessary or phrased differently (e.g., equating them directly).

Analysis of Key Elements

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("In the beginning was the Word": This establishes that ὁ Λόγος (the Word/Reason) existed at the start. Λόγος can mean "word," "reason," or "principle" in philosophical Greek, and the definite article ὁ specifies a particular entity. (what AI means here is that the o article makes the word a person)

καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("and the Word was with the deity":The preposition πρὸς with the accusative τὸν Θεόν (the deity) indicates a relationship of proximity, association, or orientation, often translated as "with" or "toward." The definite article τὸν specifies a particular deity. This suggests ὁ Λόγος is distinct from τὸν Θεόν but closely related or in communion with it.

Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("the Word was divine":Here, Θεὸς lacks the definite article (anarthrous), which in Greek often conveys a qualitative sense rather than a definite identity. The word order (predicate Θεὸς before ἦν) emphasizes the quality or nature of ὁ Λόγος as "divine" or "having divine essence" rather than equating it directly with a specific deity (e.g., τὸν Θεόν). If the author intended to say ὁ Λόγος is identically τὸν Θεόν, we might expect ὁ Λόγος ἦν ὁ Θεός (with the definite article) or a different construction to indicate identity.

Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("This was in the beginning with the deity":Οὗτος (this) refers back to ὁ Λόγος, restating its existence "in the beginning" and its relationship "with the deity." This repetition reinforces the distinction between ὁ Λόγος and τὸν Θεόν while emphasizing their association.

Analysis of Key Elements

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("In the beginning was the Word": This establishes that ὁ Λόγος (the Word/Reason) existed at the start.

Λόγος can mean "word," "reason," or "principle" in philosophical Greek, and the definite article ὁ specifies a particular entity.


καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("and the Word was with the deity": The preposition πρὸς with the accusative τὸν Θεόν (the deity) indicates a relationship of proximity, association, or orientation, often translated as "with" or "toward." The definite article τὸν specifies a particular deity. This suggests ὁ Λόγος is distinct from τὸν Θεόν but closely related or in communion with it.


Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("the Word was divine": Here, Θεὸς lacks the definite article (anarthrous), which in Greek often conveys a qualitative sense rather than a definite identity. The word order (predicate Θεὸς before ἦν) emphasizes the quality or nature of ὁ Λόγος as "divine" or "having divine essence" rather than equating it directly with a specific deity (e.g., τὸν Θεόν). If the author intended to say ὁ Λόγος is identically τὸν Θεόν, we might expect ὁ Λόγος ἦν ὁ Θεός (with the definite article) or a different construction to indicate identity.


Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("This was in the beginning with the deity":Οὗτος (this) refers back to ὁ Λόγος, restating its existence "in the beginning" and its relationship "with the deity." This repetition reinforces the distinction between ὁ Λόγος and τὸν Θεόν while emphasizing their association.

So is the author saying that the logos is the deity?

To determine whether the author of the Greek text

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν is stating that ὁ Λόγος (the Word/Reason) is τὸν Θεόν (the deity), we’ll analyze the text strictly based on Greek syntax and vocabulary, avoiding religious context as requested. The focus is on whether the grammar and word choices equate ὁ Λόγος with τὸν Θεόν or describe a different relationship.

Conclusion

The repetition of "this was in the beginning with the deity" is not strictly necessary for conveying the basic meaning, as the earlier clauses already establish the Word’s existence and relationship with the deity. However, it serves important rhetorical, structural, and emphatic functions in Greek: It reinforces the key ideas of the Word’s primacy and divine connection.
It provides clarity by explicitly referring back to the Word with Οὗτος.
It creates a balanced, symmetrical structure typical of Greek literary style.

Without the repetition, the text would still be coherent, but it would lose some of its rhetorical force and stylistic elegance. If you’re aiming for a minimalist translation, you could omit the final clause, but retaining it aligns with the Greek text’s intent to emphasize and clarify. Let me know if you’d like a streamlined translation or further exploration!

Purpose of Repetition in Greek:

Emphasis:

Repetition is a common rhetorical device in ancient Greek to emphasize key points. By restating ἐν ἀρχῇ ... πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, the text reinforces the Word’s primordial existence and its relationship with the deity, ensuring these ideas are prominent.

Clarity and Structure: The repetition may serve to bookend the passage, creating a chiastic structure (A-B-B'-A'):

A: In the beginning was the Word.

B: The Word was with the deity.

B': The Word was divine.

A': This was in the beginning with the deity.


This structure emphasizes the connection between the Word’s existence, its divine nature, and its relationship with the deity.


Referential Cohesion: The pronoun Οὗτος (this) explicitly ties the final clause back to ὁ Λόγος, clarifying that the subject remains the same, avoiding ambiguity in a text where multiple entities (e.g., Θεός, Λόγος) are mentioned.

Rhetorical Rhythm: In Greek, repetition often enhances the rhythm or poetic quality of a text, making it more memorable or impactful, especially in oral delivery.



Necessity:

From a strictly linguistic perspective, the final clause (Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν) is not essential to convey the core information, as the first two clauses already establish the Word’s existence and relationship with the deity. However, its inclusion serves rhetorical and stylistic purposes: It reinforces the temporal setting ("in the beginning" and the relational aspect ("with the deity".

It ensures the reader or listener connects the divine nature of the Word (from Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος) BACK to its initial state and relationship.

In philosophical Greek texts, such repetition can underscore the permanence or foundational nature of a concept (here, the Word’s association with the deity).

So I wanted to ask a side question especially concerning verse 2, so I asked:

Is there any need for repeating "this was in the beginning with the deity"


The Greek text Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν contains the repetition of the phrase ἐν ἀρχῇ ... πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("in the beginning ... with the deity" in the first and last clauses.

To address whether this repetition is necessary, let’s analyze its role based purely on Greek syntax and vocabulary, avoiding religious context:


Analysis of the Repetition

Syntactic Structure:
The first clause, Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("In the beginning was the Word", establishes the temporal existence of ὁ Λόγος (the Word/Reason).

The second clause, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("and the Word was with the deity", describes the Word’s relationship to τὸν Θεόν (the deity).

The third clause, Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος ("the Word was divine", qualifies the nature of the Word as divine.

The final clause, Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν ("This was in the beginning with the deity", restates the first two ideas, with Οὗτος (this) referring back to ὁ Λόγος.

Explanation

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος: Establishes that the Word (Reason/Principle) existed at the start.

καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν: Indicates the Word was in a relationship or proximity to a specific deity.

Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος: The anarthrous Θεὸς suggests a qualitative description, so "divine" captures the Word’s possession of divine essence or nature, rather than identifying it as a specific deity.

Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν: Reinforces that this Word was in the beginning in relation to the deity, with Οὗτος referring back to ὁ Λόγος.

This translation avoids religious connotations, treating Λόγος as a philosophical concept (e.g., reason or principle, as in Stoic or Platonic thought) and Θεός as a deity or divine essence, consistent with classical Greek usage. Let me know if you need further analysis or a different focus!

To translate the Greek text Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος. Οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν purely based on Greek vocabulary and syntax, without invoking Christian theology, we’ll focus on the literal meanings of the words and their grammatical structure. Here’s the breakdown:

Ἐν ἀρχῇ (en archē): Prepositional phrase meaning "in the beginning" or "at the start." ἀρχή denotes the origin or initial point.

ἦν (ēn): Imperfect form of the verb "to be," meaning "was."

ὁ Λόγος (ho Logos): Λόγος means "word," "reason," "discourse," or "principle" in classical and philosophical Greek. The definite article ὁ indicates a specific "Word" or "Reason."

καὶ (kai): Conjunction meaning "and."

πρὸς τὸν Θεόν (pros ton Theon): πρὸς means "with," "toward," or "in relation to."

τὸν Θεόν (with the definite article) refers to a specific "god" or "deity."

Θεὸς (Theos): A noun meaning "god" or "deity." In the anarthrous construction (without the definite article) in Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος, it emphasizes a qualitative sense, such as "divine" or "of divine nature."

Οὗτος (Houtos): Demonstrative pronoun meaning "this" or "it," referring back to ὁ Λόγος.


Literal Translation Based on Syntax and Vocabulary
Combining these elements, the text translates to:

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the deity, the Word was divine. This was in the beginning with the deity."

Apostle John is said to have written 5 books, or 2 books and 3 letters, one book called the revelation of Jesus Christ and the other called the gospel of John.

Now some scholars claim there were inconsistent and added parts to the writings of John and I know some would like to use AI which may usually give commonly proclaimed Christianity theology that is recorded in it's database.

so I asked Grok this question:

okay please translate without using Christian theology, translate purely using Greek vocabulary and syntax: Ἐν archē ἦν ὁ Λόγος καὶ ὁΛόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, Θεὸς ἦν ὁΛόγος Οὗτος ἦν ἐνἀρχῇ πρὸςτὸν Θεόν

I don't know why Exodus 7:1 the elohim there is referred to as god in english translation when it could have clearly being translated as angel

like Psalm 8:5 the term elohim is translated as angels

Hebrews call angels physical beings that represent the one true God, calls them sons of God.

Moses being made an angel to pharaoh would have been a preferable translation of that verse

SeraphicWind:
Growing up many many years ago in Nigeria, I insulted the hell out of Oyedepo. I will not lie. I was quite young and naive then.

My favourite name for him back then was OLE-DEPO (GOD Forgive me though)

There was even some tribalism to it because I was worried as why a YORUBA MAN will be making that much money in Igboland through DECEPTION.

I will go online back then and query why normal human beings will give a percentage of their salary to someone who was doing far better than most of them.

I saw them as mad or mentally unstable people.

I was very young and naive. Quite understandably.

But here is the mystery.

I have grown up, travelled out of the country and settled down to a very good life.

Every month though, I change a part of my small salary and send to the Church of David Oyedepo. A sizeable amount of my small money for his mission works. Without him asking me for a dime.

Same thing I fought against vehemently both online and offline.

I have not met him before. I have not attended his church before.

I am not under any mental, spiritual or emotional manipulation. Trust me on this.

Who can explain this?

What happened to me?

"Who can explain this?" The best answer is God can

"What happened to you"? The best answer is you change a part of your small salary and send to the Church of David Oyedepo. A sizeable amount of my small money for his mission works. Without him asking you for a dime. Same thing you fought against vehemently both online and offline.

You are also not under any mental, spiritual or emotional manipulation. Of which you are certain and expect us to trust you on that. All this is what happened to you.

Boomark:
Is the screenshot now difficult to post? That's what I use to catch 666 people.

See example of your "ma laa Dy" and ment ha pobem.

You didn't start twisting today or maybe poor understanding is the problem. See the date. That's before you ever asked me any question. Did you answer the one I told you to ask yourself. You will soon be passing the answers to me if you don't run like you brother Ken4...

Screenshot 1
After reading from the challenge thread, you twisted my stance to mean the bolded. I was like why are people so 'wee keh di.' Poor understanding + medulla oblongata wereyrism. I have to start explaining to you what you read and didn't understand.

Screenshot 2
That is trinity destroyer. I hope you answered the question. You will soon present your answer to me.

Post the screenshot and brace yourself. I will answer your question and you MUST answer mine.

ah you are still replying to that Julia, I have blocked her since, can't be having a conversation with someone who doesn't read what she is responding to

Boomark:
Their belief and misinterpretation of the scripture is shameful. See here where he said it and I have asked him to clearly state the name of the person but he has refused to do that.

https://www.nairaland.com/8486945/bible-challenge-trinity-boomark-image123/6#136510501

When I say trinity doctrine is from the antichrist I know what am saying.

lol just read it, not surprised.

Image123 you say God has a God
Should it not be your god has two gods

Jashub:
I asked a question at the end of my previous post . Kindly answer that first . Thank you

If you know the question you should have shared it

Meanwhile did you answer my question, "did you read it?"

Wait did you even ever answer any of my questions.

Also, this is your previous post, "I made the correction on the verse . Secondly, you certainly did not read the prayer of Daniel; kindly read it and see that the context of his prayers were that of children inheriting the punishment of parents.
And for your information, Ezekiel , Jeremiah and Daniel were contemporaries." And there's no question here, at least you should know your previous post

Jashub:
I made the correction on the verse . Secondly, you certainly did not read the prayer of Daniel; kindly read it and see that the context of his prayers were that of children inheriting the punishment of parents.
And for your information, Ezekiel , Jeremiah and Daniel were contemporaries.

do you know the meaning of contemporaries, being alive when someone else is doesn't necessarily you their contemporary, while Jeremiah ministered those men, especially Daniel was but a boy.

It's not like this information is even needed or necessary, because God answered those words through Ezekiel that he isn't punishing those who repented from their ways and concerning your mention of Daniel words. The nation was destroyed by God, when God gave it back to them he enable them to be able to rebuild it.

Ask you, did God punish the children for the sins of their fathers? Did Daniel say that they the children who were exiled were innocent?did Daniel repent or not? Should that not be simple questions for you to answer. 😊

Truvelisback:
It is not about what many feels, it is the truth. Except your Bible is saying otherwise. Isaiah confirmed it.

oh I guess you want to quote that place that seems to say in some English interpretation bibles concerning the mighty God mentioned in Isaiah, a verse that someone no new testament author quoted.

Nevertheless the less that same verse as a different interpretation from the Jewish septuagint, maybe that's why the apostles never used it 🤷🏾‍♂️

Boomark:
Start by tell us who you say is God to God the Father.

Another version of trinity is that God the Father has a God. Wonders shall never end.

lol which version of Trinity is image123

I think the common one is that God is three persons, which obviously means God isn't a person and that's why they say things like God is the essence or a title that all three are.

So they have the Father who is God, the son who is also the same God, and the spirit who is as well God.

Some would even say well God made himself three persons, his first person is He as the Father, his second person/personality is Him as the son and his third is Him as the Holy Spirit and all three are still Him. And that's what makes him all powerful being able to be God but still not be a one person God at the same time.

Basically one has to believe this because God is all powerful and can do anything

femi4:
What are you really saying, I don't get your point. Can you be simple short and straight to the point

oh I did that before and you still didn't get that. So just leave it, one day maybe you would

Helinuse:
🤣🤣🤣

The same way Moses knew how Genesis chapter 1 and 2 came about, that is how John knew. Just imagine the type of question you are asking me.

Again, why don’t you listen to yourself.

I simply reiterated to you what the scripture says: “Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities; for we know not what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered..”

How come your own groanings are uttered, and by you as well? If you know how to do it, why will the Bible say you don’t know how to do it?

You see, the problem here is a case of “puffed up” by knowledge. Unfortunately, you see clearly the word of God, but as much as one popular “apostle” man of God somewhere has taught and support a motion, you have to fit everything you read, hear or come across within the narrow understanding of that idea. So I know very well that my words are simply bouncing against a hard wall 😃😃😃

The closest to the thing you GenZ folks refer to as “groanings” in the Bible is that of Hannah. And it never was “groanings.”

are you having a conversation with me, gohf, or someone else?
Who told you I am "a GenZ"?
Who told you that my "own groanings are uttered"?

Are you going to say it is God, like he revealed to Moses Genesis 1&2?
Who told you "I know how to do it"?
Do you not know how to use verses or do you think saying words like, "as much as one popular “apostle” man of God somewhere has taught and support a motion, you have to fit everything you read, hear or come across within the narrow understanding of that idea. So I know very well that my words are simply bouncing against a hard wall", validate what you are saying?

Do you know which "popular apostle man of God whose motion I am supporting"?

It's easy to label and accuse people, isn't it, so do us a question by telling us the truth by answering this obvious simple questions that you have known before typing out your response 😊

Jashub:
You have to have a balance view of all scripture to justify what you are saying. Take Jeremiah 5: 7 which says " Our fathers have sinned, and are not; and we have borne their iniquities.".

Also in Daniel chapter 9, we see Daniel praying for the children of Israel because of the sins their fathers committed against the Lord , which made them live in captivity .

Lastly, the devil operates on such principle because legally , it originated from God . For example , I have had the privilege of watching how some pagan priests have generational covenants with demons regarding their descendants, which in turn binds that lineage to generational affliction due to the covenant their fathers had with a demonic entity. Which is why as a Christian, it is good to pray and break every unknown yoke and sin which your fathers or ancestors may have committed against the Lord

look when people, for example me and elated177, ask you if you read something the answer is either yes or no, but it's obvious you didn't.


Even the Jeremiah 5:7; you quoted, listen and please read this time

Jer.5.1 "Go up and down the streets of Jerusalem, look around and consider, search through her squares. If you can find but one person who deals honestly and seeks the truth, I will forgive this city...

Jeremiah responded well Jer.5.4-5 I thought, "These are only the poor; they are foolish, for they do not know the way of the LORD, the requirements of their God. I will go and speak to their leaders. Surely they will know the LORD's ways and what God requires of them." But the leaders, too, had utterly rejected their God.

Okay now what about their children?
Jer.5.7 "Why should I forgive you? Your children have forsaken me and sworn by gods that are not gods. I supplied all their needs, yet they committed adultery and thronged to the houses of prostitutes.

So where did you get what you quoted, it was Jeremiah lamenting in Lamentation 5:7 it was probably because of the misunderstanding from this statement that made it a saying in Israel that God had to correct through Ezekiel.

It's just as how some say it's only blacks that are Jews because of lam. 5.10.

First off God those children were not innocent, they walked in the ways of their parents who were punished and harmed in various ways during that incident that befell Jerusalem.

Now many years after Daniel interceeds based on God's promise to Jeremiah concerning the length of the punishment. Even in the midst of that punishment God kept preserving His people, the remnant.

Look a person can be born in a punishment period but still be blessed by God for obeying Him. It's not like even though God punished the world and reduced our lifespan doesn't mean he doesn't bless those who repent, obey and follow Him

Daniel 9 is a prayer based on God's promise to bring them back after a period had passed.

Now Daniel was a prince like his three friends, would you say God was punishing them for what their father did, when we can clearly read that even in the situation their father's actions brought them to, God kept them and preserved them.

There is nothing legal about the devil who the bible refers to as lawless and false accuser.

Now your final point to break yokes and all that.

You realize God was punishing Judah and he gave a promise and it was the basis of that promise, God's word that Daniel prayed with to understand how God would bring them out.

What the devil does is illegal, listen Isa.54.17 no weapon forged against you will prevail, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and this is their vindication from me," declares the LORD. (NIV)

Another one
Isa.49.25 But the LORD says, "The captives of warriors will be released, and the plunder of tyrants will be retrieved. For I will fight those who fight you, and I will save your children.

But if God is the one punishing you, who will fight for you? who will deliver you out of God's hand and punishment?

Look the devil doesn't make people suffer because of what their forefather did, he isn't some agent of justice, he makes people suffer so they hate God or turn away from God.

If any of God's people thinks they are suffering because of what their parents did, it's because they are ignorant of what God's blessings can do. And honestly only a new genuine child of God is that ignorant as a new born infant.

Do you know what it means to be born again, in the spiritual realm your father is seen as God Almighty, the powers of your father's house are the powers of God's house.

The devil wants to continue tormenting some, so that they say, what is the point of repenting if God is still punishing me, or trick them back in some form of appeasement sacrifice

Jashub:
This lengthy write up does not change the fact that God still punished some of the descendants of Hezekiah for their father's transgressions. Secondly, what happened to the descendants of Gehazi, and why were they punished? Kindly tell us

did you read it?

Femi4 and the rest of you, listen carefully

Jesus said HOW you should pray

In secret, 1 Corinthians 14.2 no one hears what you are saying apart from God

Say Our Father who is in heaven, Rom.8.15 For you did not receive a spirit that makes you a slave again to fear, but you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him (by the Spirit) we cry, "Abba, Father."

How can you call God who is Spirit Father if you don't have His Spirit
Rom.8.16 For his Holy Spirit speaks to us deep in our hearts and tells us that we are God's children.

Hallowed be your name, Jesus said in John.4.24 For God is Spirit, so those who worship him must worship in spirit and in truth."

Thy kingdom come, thy will be done

God's kingdom, is it not in the Holy Spirit, Rom.14.17 For the Kingdom of God is not a matter of what we eat or drink, but of living a life of goodness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

Does praying in the spirit not seeking the will of God to be done, Romans 8:27

....

femi4:
We are not on the same page. Your comment does not relate to my post

is that not a question you just read me post to you?
Or is it too hard for you to answer?

AntiChristian:
Was he praying to himself or to another God?

Why does he need prayer? Why kiss the ground like Muslims?

lol you guys kiss the ground instead of kissing the son of God 🤣, is it the ground that will help you or is it because it is the ground that you all are going to

femi4:
When Jesus taught us how to pray...this method wasn't involve

Mt 6:5-9

When you pray, don’t be like the hypocrites. They love to stand in the synagogues and on the street corners and pray so people will ·see [notice] them.

I tell you the truth, they already have their full reward.

6 When you pray, you should go into your [private; inner] room and close the door and pray to your Father ·who cannot be seen [or who is in that secret place; or secretly; in private]. Your Father can see what is done in ·secret [private], and he will reward you.

7 “And when you pray, don’t be like ·those people who don’t know God [the pagans/Gentiles/heathen]. They ·continue saying things that mean nothing [babble; repeat empty phrases], thinking ·that God will hear them [L they will be heard; C the passive verb implies God as subject] because of their many words.

8 Don’t be like them, because your Father knows the things you need before you ask him.

9 So when you pray, you should pray like this:

Our father...

what prayer is more secret than this
1Cor.14.2 For anyone who speaks in a tongue does not speak to men but to God. Indeed, no one understands him; he utters mysteries with his spirit.

TenQ:
It isn't US or our Spirit that Prays with Groaning BUT the Holy Spirit.

I used to think like you before but read in context and you will see that
Whether we pray in our Understanding or with our spirits, it is the Holy Spirit that repackages the Prayers before God.

Rom 8:26-27:
"Likewise the Spirit also helps our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And he that searches the hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because he makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God."

there is nothing like for us in the Greek text, what's written is but he the (holy) Spirit makes intercession (interceeds) with unspeakable utterance(groanings/sighs)

Even if we don't understand clearly what Paul wrote here as his aim wasn't to speak concerning praying in the spirit,

1Cor.14.14 - For if I pray in tongues, my spirit is praying, but I don't understand what I am saying.
1Cor.14.15 - Well then, what shall I do? I will do both. I will pray in the spirit, and I will pray in words I understand. I will sing in the spirit, and I will sing in words I understand.


If you interpret praying in the spirit to mean the spirit praying

Then should we also interpret praying in our understanding as our understanding praying?

SeriouslySense:
I am not just repeating, I am having supernatural experiences too.

Or God seems to be telling me its soon.

There is one day, when i dreamed of a cloud coming to my window, and immediately i fell flat on the ground or i immediately prostrated flat, i was excited and scared, i began to pray for forgiveness and that God takes me. My eyes were already closed, and it began to get brighter and brighter, i felt i was in the cloud or in the sky, and i was feeling excited, but also i was sad, because I knew i may not meet Gods expectations, in telling people about Jesus.

But i was expecting to see heaven or God anytime, but i woke up , I wish i dreamed more but maybe its not for me to see, and i am happy for that.

I am not special, I was just looking for God.

This month i have like two experiences that tells me its soon.

to be fair your dream doesn't mean "it is soon" I mean apostle John saw more than these and it's been what 2 millenniums since

Maybe the purpose of the dream is for you and us who hear such to live on the reality of his return 😊

Jashub:
There is no record of whether the children of Gehazi walked with God , but the fact still remains that Elisha pronounced a curse of the descendants of Gehazi (and I believe that curse took effect ). The same also happened when the Lord sent a prophet to Hezekiah to pronounce how his unborn descendants would be eunuchs and slaves to Babylon all because he show them the articles of the Lord and his treasures

so you believe that Elisha's curse is greater than God's word and mercy? Even without evidence!

Now this is what is written as Israel history

Exod.20.5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me... Notice the clause of those who hate God

Now first generation the person that did wrong Hezekiah, God said SOME

2Kgs.20.18 Some of your own descendants will be taken away into exile. They will become eunuchs who will serve in the palace of Babylon's king."
2Kgs.20.21 When Hezekiah died, his son Manasseh became the next king.

Manasseh second generation, and what did he do


2Kgs.21.1 - 2
Manasseh was twelve years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem fifty-five years. His mother was Hephzibah. He did what was evil in the LORD's sight, imitating the detestable practices of the pagan nations whom the LORD had driven from the land ahead of the Israelites.

Here's a list
2Kgs.21.3 - He rebuilt the pagan shrines his father, Hezekiah, had destroyed. He constructed altars for Baal and set up an Asherah pole, just as King Ahab of Israel had done. He also bowed before all the forces of heaven and worshiped them.
2Kgs.21.4 - He even built pagan altars in the Temple of the LORD, the place where the LORD had said his name should be honored.
2Kgs.21.5 - He built these altars for all the forces of heaven in both courtyards of the LORD's Temple.
2Kgs.21.6 - Manasseh even sacrificed his own son in the fire. He practiced sorcery and divination, and he consulted with mediums and psychics. He did much that was evil in the LORD's sight, arousing his anger.
2Kgs.21.7 - Manasseh even took an Asherah pole he had made and set it up in the Temple, the very place where the LORD had told David and his son Solomon: "My name will be honored here forever in this Temple and in Jerusalem--the city I have chosen from among all the other tribes of Israel.
2Kgs.21.9 - But the people refused to listen, and Manasseh led them to do even more evil than the pagan nations whom the LORD had destroyed when the Israelites entered the land.
2Kgs.21.10 - Then the LORD said through his servants the prophets:
2Kgs.21.11 - "King Manasseh of Judah has done many detestable things. He is even more wicked than the Amorites, who lived in this land before Israel. He has led the people of Judah into idolatry.
2Kgs.21.12 - So this is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: I will bring such disaster on Jerusalem and Judah that the ears of those who hear about it will tingle with horror.
2Kgs.21.15 - For they have done great evil in my sight and have angered me ever since their ancestors came out of Egypt."
2Kgs.21.16 - Manasseh also murdered many innocent people until Jerusalem was filled from one end to the other with innocent blood. This was in addition to the sin that he caused the people of Judah to commit, leading them to do evil in the LORD's sight.
2Kgs.21.17 - The rest of the events in Manasseh's reign and all his deeds, including the sins he committed, are recorded in The Book of the History of the Kings of Judah.

God reaffirmed his punishment to the people of Israel who decided to follow the evil king, who next, Amon his son, third generation, what did he do

2Kgs.21.19 - Amon was twenty-two years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem two years. His mother was Meshullemeth, the daughter of Haruz from Jotbah.
2Kgs.21.20 - He did what was evil in the LORD's sight, just as his father, Manasseh, had done.
2Kgs.21.21 - He followed the example of his father, worshiping the same idols that his father had worshiped.
2Kgs.21.22 - He abandoned the LORD, the God of his ancestors, and he refused to follow the LORD's ways.

In all of this, it seems God was waiting, waiting for them to repent, anyway the people didn't repent and then came fourth generation Josiah, now the fullness of God's wrath should come down and wreck Judah but guess what. Josiah was different and nothing bad happened until he was killed and he was buried properly. Let's read it


2Kgs.23.25 - Never before had there been a king like Josiah, who turned to the LORD with all his heart and soul and strength, obeying all the laws of Moses. And there has never been a king like him since.
2Kgs.23.26 - Even so, the LORD's anger burned against Judah because of all the great evils of King Manasseh, and he did not hold back his fierce anger from them.
2Kgs.23.27 - For the LORD had said, "I will destroy Judah just as I have destroyed Israel. I will banish the people from my presence and reject my chosen city of Jerusalem and the Temple where my name was to be honored."

Notice God didn't say his anger was against Josiah, but against the people, well did they change after Josiah died.

Josiah pushed the punishment to the fifth generation

2Kgs.23.31 - Jehoahaz was twenty-three years old when he became king, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. His mother was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah from Libnah.
2Kgs.23.32 - He did what was evil in the LORD's sight, just as his ancestors had done.

It was Jehoahaz who rebelled against Babylon, went to war, lost and got dragged away, and all that happened recorded in 2 kings 24


God is not a liar