MuttleyLaff:
shadeyinka wetin you type, wey dey come hide up there, you even for don price and buy "you're banned" market sef. Sorry ooo.

PS: FOLY, I havent forgotten about you, my response is on the back burner half done. Will it across asap. Watch this space

Me wey dey use you rehearse. I am preparing a war with a church in my locality.

The last time, the evangelist said in a shaking voice I shouldn't ask questions that can lead believers astray. He is the one who came to my flat and invited me to worship in his church. I told to the overhead pastor I be keferi but they dragged me in.

I don know my weakness with your help. You go hear report on sunday.

MuttleyLaff:
Janosky,
1/ the word, your word(s) that comes forth out of your mouth are they lesser than you?
2/ Do they represent or not represent you. Is the word that comes out of your mouth any less potent compared with you not verbally saying anything, hmm?
3/ Do you utter the word for something to get done a few distance away, and get result, without you physically being present at the distant place?
4/ Your word, is it separate from the moniker Janosky, you?
5/ Janosky, what do you verbally express yourself with?
6/ Janosky, you talk and/or impart information in the form of what?

* MuttleyLaff, John1:1 'the Word' is NOT a mere verbal expression. Don't get it twisted.
Don't deceive yourself.

Please ,Read & digest the truth from this link below & receive SENSE...

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/08/biblical-facts-about-the-trinity-reno-omokri/

shadeyinka:



You are willing to distort even the rendering of your organisations translation so that you can replace "WITH" with "FACING TOWARDS"!??

Are you agreeing that your organisation made an error of translation because as far as I can see the difference is
1. The Word was God
And
2. The word was a god

NWT:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
2 This one was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
What has come into existence
4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light is shining in the darkness, but the darkness has not overpowered it.

Here is the interlinear for you to see again!

Find another argument!

*Greek Lexicon***
"
# WITH
πρὸς (pros)
Preposition
Strong's Greek 4314: To, towards, with. A
strengthened form of pro; a preposition of
direction; forward to, i.e. Toward."

Your fellow Trinitarian ,Ihedinobi3 have dealt with your FALSE CLAIMS.
@ John1 The Word is NOT "TOV THEON", every genuine Greek Scholar knows this.
Greek "theos"= a god.

Greek word for word ,NWT John1:1 is the koko. The korokoro Truth.



Your FAKE interlinear is not Greek word for word.....

Where is word for word of Greek "TOV" in your screenshot interlinear?

Please ,Read & digest the truth from this link
below & receive SENSE...
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/08/
biblical-facts-about-the-trinity-reno-
omokri/

Janosky:
* MuttleyLaff, John1:1 'the Word' is NOT a mere verbal expression. Don't get it twisted.
Don't deceive yourself.

Please ,Read & digest the truth from this link below & receive SENSE...

https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/08/biblical-facts-about-the-trinity-reno-omokri/

You must have mistaken me for another poster to be sign-posting me to that omokirikiri's article. It is not for me, sorry. Receive SENSE and share it instead with your trinitarian friends, lol.

MuttleyLaff:
Was it difficult to, accept and agree that, it is not hard or impossible for God, or for your sake, Allah, to simultaneously be in heaven and on earth at the same time?

I know its challenging for many and especially, a muslim brother like you, to understand, what is meant, when God, with the placeholder, says: I AM

''I AM that I AM'', ''I SHALL BE THAT I SHALL'' or ''I WILL BE THAT I BE'' are expressive phrases. It means, God will be what God needs to be. We find out what God was yesterday, we keep knowing Him every moment and day. God is new every morning, God is new tomorrow

That is why, God in Exodus 3:14, said to Moses:
"I AM WHO I AM.
This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you."

Essentially, the "I AM WHO I AM or I AM THAT I AM" in Exodus 3:14 above means, I will become whatsoever I may become. I'll be, I will become whatever it is necessary for Me, to be and/or Me to become.

God therefore and fyi Empiree, is, a "not-known-number" of person. God, therefore then, is, x-person and so God, in effect is, ∞-persons, as in, meaning, God is infinite or infinity.

God is someone without any bound, without limit, without an end. God is the first and the last, God oxymoronically has no beginning and no end. God is someone bigger and larger than any specified number, even three or trinity. This means, dont put God in a box.

Try and be original, stop copying and using lines, I've previously used on you. Do you think, if you had answered my question, I've got your time to be repeating questions. You didnt even responsibly answer the question. I overlooked your evasiveness and just in order to move on, managed your insincere and faithless answer

Janosky, I merely was letting you be aware of the similarities between what's in the Godhead and in man. I am sure you know about: "Let Us make man in Our image and likeness"

Janosky, where did you see or read me, say "the Word" is a mere verbal expression, hmm?. Dont get it twisted Janosky, the Word is a creative force. The Word has influence, the Word has weight. As a matter of fact, Psalm 138:2, even says, God has magnified His word above all His name. So nwanne Janosky, fyi, the Word is NOT a mere verbal expression, it is the name of God, related to a verb of action, that IS a verbal expression. The name of God is a verbal expression, this because and/or by the actions deeds and things God does.

Why did you not attempt to try and answer each one and all of those six questions erhn Janosky? C'mon, dont let six dead easy peasy lemon squeasy, harmless simple questions seem like too hard for you to answer, lol

Ihedinobi3:

Hello shadeyinka.

It's been a little bit.

Please excuse my coming in here. As you know, I don't share the Watchtower point of view, but it is good to be in the Truth even when those who oppose it agree with it in some way.
(1A)
The Greek in John 1:1 actually reads more like this: "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and enjoyed reciprocity with Him." That is, John did not exactly say that the Word was God. The reason for this was that John was trying to show that the Lord Jesus was God too, but that He was not the Father. It could be misunderstood if he said, "the Word was God" when he had just used "God" to identify the Father. As you probably know, the One most frequently identified as God in the Bible is the Father.

(1B)
So, while it is not at all wrong to translate John 1:1 to read "and the Word was God," since that is actually what John meant,

(*2)
It is also not wrong to translate it in any way that says that the Word was the same in nature as the Father.

Therefore, "facing toward," while quite ridiculous as a translation, does hold in it a kernel of truth in that it points to the literal translation of John 1:1,

(*3)
namely, that the Word enjoyed reciprocity with the Father from the beginning, because He was God too.

Mr Ihedinobi3 your (*1A) That is, John did not exactly say that the Word was God. "
CONTRADICTION of (1B)
So, while it is not at all wrong to translate John 1:1 to read "and the Word was God," since that is actually what John meant, "
You are struggling to hold tightly to the Trinity FRAUD .

(2).
Very Excellent.

(*3)
Where is the reciprocity in
(a) Matt 28:18
Then Jesus came
to them and said, “All authority in heaven
and on earth has been given to Me.


(b). John 5:26
The Father GRANTED LIFE to the Son

(c) Corinthians 15:27
For "God has put everything under His feet."
Now when it says that everything has been
put under Him, this clearly does not include
the One who put everything under Him.

( d) . Philippians 2:9
Therefore God exalted Him to the highest
place and gave Him the name above all
names,

e). Hebrews 1:2
But in these last days He has spoken to us
by His Son, whom He appointed heir of all
things, and through whom He made the
universe."

(*f) Psalm 110:1 (ASV)
Jehovah said to my lord :"Sit at my right hand, "
Yahweh gave his son ,Jesus whatever he ( Jesus) have,
What did Jesus Christ give his God & Father?

Janosky:

*Greek Lexicon***
"
# WITH
πρὸς (pros)
Preposition
Strong's Greek 4314: To, towards, with. A
strengthened form of pro; a preposition of
direction; forward to, i.e. Toward."

Your fellow Trinitarian ,Ihedinobi3 have dealt with your FALSE CLAIMS.
@ John1 The Word is NOT "TOV THEON", every genuine Greek Scholar knows this.
Greek "theos"= a god.

Greek word for word ,NWT John1:1 is the koko. The korokoro Truth.



Your FAKE interlinear is not Greek word for word.....

Where is word for word of Greek "TOV" in your screenshot interlinear?

Please ,Read & digest the truth from this link
below & receive SENSE...
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/08/
biblical-facts-about-the-trinity-reno-
omokri/

Hello.

It would be a gross mistake, even a misrepresentation to suggest that I disagree with Him or agree with you in any way. You are dead wrong in your position, and wherever you are right, it is either accidental or you are merely trying to use truth to send your lie farther. So, I am not in any way in agreement with you, nor will I discuss this again with you. You left an earlier conversation where you failed to demonstrate the truth of your position to try to hound me elsewhere and here on this forum. I'm not such a fool as to even pay attention to you.

As for the interlinear, it is correct, as far as I can see. See attached screenshot.

Ihedinobi3:

Hello shadeyinka.

It's been a little bit.

Please excuse my coming in here. As you know, I don't share the Watchtower point of view, but it is good to be in the Truth even when those who oppose it agree with it in some way.

The Greek in John 1:1 actually reads more like this: "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and enjoyed reciprocity with Him." That is, John did not exactly say that the Word was God. The reason for this was that John was trying to show that the Lord Jesus was God too, but that He was not the Father. It could be misunderstood if he said, "the Word was God" when he had just used "God" to identify the Father. As you probably know, the One most frequently identified as God in the Bible is the Father. This is because His Self-selected Role in the Plan of the Trinity for Creation was to be the representation of God to Creation. That is, He is the One in the Trinity with Whom we most clearly have to deal as God.

This is why the Scriptures say, for example, that no one has ever seen God (John 1:18; 1 John 4:12) or can see God and live (Exodus 33:20), although it also tells us that the seventy elders of Israel saw God and ate and drank (Exodus 24:9-11). This is not a contradiction. The Father is the One Whom the Scriptures were referring to in the first instance, but the Lord Jesus in one of His many pre-incarnate appearances was the One being referred to in the second.

So, while it is not at all wrong to translate John 1:1 to read "and the Word was God," since that is actually what John meant, it is also not wrong to translate it in any way that says that the Word was the same in nature as the Father.

Therefore, "facing toward," while quite ridiculous as a translation, does hold in it a kernel of truth in that it points to the literal translation of John 1:1, namely, that the Word enjoyed reciprocity with the Father from the beginning, because He was God too.

I received a ban for responding to your post.
Let me see if I can respond again

shadeyinka2:
I received a ban for responding to your post.
Let me see if I can respond again

Whose post? Just dont quote the offending post. Copy out into a new post whatever it is you are refencing or addressing, lol

@Ihedinobi3

I think the literal translation is

In (the) beginning was the Word
And the Word was with God
And God was the word

The word causing the problem for janosky was the word "with" πρὸς (pros) which was translated properly as "with".
The word "with" (pros/πρὸς) was as far a janosky was concerned should have been rendered as "facing towards" which even though is one of the shades of meanings of πρὸς, but meaningless in context. The NWT even correctly rendered it as WITH rather than FACING TOWARDS.

Therefore, every translator properly translate it as "with"

The Strongs Bible Concordance translate it to be

Strong's Concordance
pros:

Original Word: πρός
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pros
Phonetic Spelling: (pros)

Definition: advantageous for, at (denotes local proximity), toward (denotes motion toward a place)
Usage: to, towards, with.

HELPS Word-studies
4314 prós (a preposition) – properly, motion towards to "interface with" (literally, moving toward a goal or destination).

4314 /prós ("towards, with" indicates "extension toward a goal, with implied interaction or reciprocity, with "presumed contact and reaction".
4314 (prós) naturally suggests the cycle of initiation and response.

[4314 (prós) can mean "in view of," or "in light of, but never "against," except where the context indicates an active exchange (interface) done in opposition.]

So you can see why all translators use WITH including the watchtower organisation.

@Ihedinobi3
Trinity isn't as complex as we make it to be. Trinity is just a description what we as Christians observe about God.

We don't have any major problems about the attributes of God. The "confusion" we have is that even though God is ONE, yet we see three personalities having the nature or attributes of God. And these personalities are
1. The Father
2. The Word (Son)
3. The Holy Spirit.

The Word that became Flesh is the one we call Jesus.

A question we can ask ourselves is: does any other being exist who has the major attributes of God?

In the Physical, do you know that some particles exist that have a nature of Duality? They are both particle and wave. (This is like a contradiction because a particle have properties completely different from a wave). How much more the complexity of God.

Humans are exactly like that.
You are a physical being (correct)
Yet
You are a spiritual being (also correct)

Both have different personalities YET the same person. This is because even before resurrection, you are alive with your personality intact while your body is in the grave. You can't say your body isn't you at the same time, you can't claim that your spirit isn't you.

You'll notice that Lazarus and the rich man were alive (even though their bodies were in the grave) and especially the rich man's soul/spirit took responsibility over what his body did here while on earth.

The Father WILLS (DECIDES)
The Word COMMANDS
The Spirit IMPLEMENTS

This is why there was nothing made that was made without the WORD. You can't separate the Father from the Word neither can one separate the Word from the Spirit as they are three DIMENSIONS of the same GOD

Janosky:

*Greek Lexicon***
"
# WITH
πρὸς (pros)
Preposition
Strong's Greek 4314: To, towards, with. A
strengthened form of pro; a preposition of
direction; forward to, i.e. Toward."

Your fellow Trinitarian ,Ihedinobi3 have dealt with your FALSE CLAIMS.
@ John1 The Word is NOT "TOV THEON", every genuine Greek Scholar knows this.
Greek "theos"= a god.

Greek word for word ,NWT John1:1 is the koko. The korokoro Truth.



Your FAKE interlinear is not Greek word for word.....

Where is word for word of Greek "TOV" in your screenshot interlinear?

Please ,Read & digest the truth from this link
below & receive SENSE...
https://www.vanguardngr.com/2019/08/
biblical-facts-about-the-trinity-reno-
omokri/

Shadeyinka was banned for no just cause!

See the highlights in RED
1. Can you please explain why the NWT used the translation WITH rather than TOWARDS in the scripture in question?
2. Are you aware that the Greek does not Use a determiner "a" before a noun?
How did you insert the determiner "a" before "god"?

If you can be sincere except you accept that the NWT is wrong with their translation: be my guest.

FYI: the interlinear was correct. If you have another variation, paste the screenshot!

MuttleyLaff:
Whose post? Just dont quote the offending post. Copy out into a new post whatever it is you are refencing or addressing, lol

I've done that..but without the quotes.
Shalom

*

shadeyinka2:

Shadeyinka was banned for no just cause!

See the highlights in RED
1. Can you please explain why the NWT used the translation WITH rather than TOWARDS in the scripture in question?
!

shadeyinka2:


The word causing the problem for janosky was the word "with" πρὸς (pros) which was translated properly as "with".
The word "with" (pros/πρὸς) was as far a janosky was concerned should have been rendered as "facing towards" which even though is one of the shades of meanings of πρὸς, but meaningless in context. The NWT even correctly rendered it as WITH rather than FACING TOWARDS.

Therefore, every translator properly translate it as "with"

The Strongs Bible Concordance translate it to be

Strong's Concordance
[i]pros:

Original Word: πρός
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pros
Phonetic Spelling: (pros)

Definition: advantageous for, at (denotes local proximity), toward (denotes motion toward a place)
Usage: to, towards, with.

So you can see why all translators use WITH including the watchtower organisation.

Greek word "with" πρὸς (pros) .
Greek With= Towards.
In other words, "The word was with tov theon (the God)".
OR
"The word was facing towards tov theon (the God".
Proof: the Word & the God are 2 different beings. The Father is not the son.
Shadeyinka claims 1: "The Word is God himself!", FALSE.

Claims 2 :" facing towards" which even though is one of the shades of meanings of πρὸς, but meaningless in context.". BIG LIE.
Shadeyinka is LYING.

*

shadeyinka2:

Shadeyinka was banned for no just cause!

See the highlights in RED

2. Are you aware that the Greek does not Use a determiner "a" before a noun?
How did you insert the determiner "a" before "god"?

If you can be sincere except you accept that the NWT is wrong with their translation: be my guest.
*(2B)
FYI: the interlinear was correct. If you have another variation, paste the screenshot!

The NWT is not wrong.
The determiner ("a" is for emphasis & clarity.
In Greek John1:1, "The Word is NOT tov theon (the God) =the son (the Word) is not the Father (the God).
Greek John1:1 Theon(the God)= the Father.
the Word= theos.

Bible > Strong's > Greek > 2316
◄ 2316. theos
►
Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun,
Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god "
*John10:34-36. 2Cor 4:4.
*a god= divine being, divine nature.

****----**
Also, How did your own bible consistently insert the determiner ( "a" in the New Testament?


*a) Acts 12:22. Acts 28:6 " a god".
Compare Acts 12:22. Acts 28:6 (Aramaic Bible).

b) John 1:6. "a man"
c) John 8:44 " a murderer"
*d) John 9:17. John4:19 "a prophet"
e) John 12:26 . John10:1 "a thief"
f) John18:37. 19:21. "a king"
etc....

*******####
In your Interlinear screenshot, where is the word for word of Greek 3588 ( tov) ?
What a deliberate, dubious plot to DISTORT the meaning of Greek John1:1 !!
To deceive the English reader & OBSCURE the difference of tov Theon ( the God ) & theos (the Word)
John1:1 (Kingdom interlinear).
John
1:1
1 ᾿Εν
In
ἀρχῇ
beginning
ἦν
was
ὁ
the
λόγος,
Word,
καὶ
and
ὁ
the
λόγος
Word
ἦν
was
πρὸς
toward
τὸν
the
θεόν,
God,
καὶ
and
θεὸς
god
ἦν
was
ὁ
the
λόγος.
Word

Ihedinobi3:

Hello.

It would be a gross mistake, even a misrepresentation to suggest that I disagree with Him or agree with you in any way. You are dead wrong in your position, and wherever you are right, it is either accidental or you are merely trying to use truth to send your lie farther.

Ihedinobi3:

Hello shadeyinka.

It's been a little bit.

Please excuse my coming in here. As you know, I don't share the Watchtower point of view, but it is good to be in the Truth even when those who oppose it agree with it in some way.

The Greek in John 1:1 actually reads more like this: "in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and enjoyed reciprocity with Him." That is, John did not exactly say that the Word was God. The reason for this was that John was trying to show that the Lord Jesus was God too, but that He was not the Father. It could be misunderstood if he said, "the Word was God" when he had just used "God" to identify the Father. As you probably know, the One most frequently identified as God in the Bible is the Father. This is because His Self-selected Role in the Plan of the Trinity for Creation was to be the representation of God to Creation. That is, He is the One in the Trinity with Whom we most clearly have to deal as God.


So, while it is not at all wrong to translate John 1:1 to read "and the Word was God," since that is actually what John meant, it is also not wrong to translate it in any way that says that the Word was the same in nature as the Father.

Therefore, "facing toward," while quite ridiculous as a translation, does hold in it a kernel of truth in that it points to the literal translation of John 1:1, namely, that the Word enjoyed reciprocity with the Father from the beginning, because He was God too.

[quote author=Ihedinobi3 post]

"The Greek in John 1:1 actually reads more like this: [i]"in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and enjoyed reciprocity with Him."
(Reciprocity maggi & tomato sauce)

That is, John did not exactly say that the Word was God.

So, while it is not at all wrong to translate John 1:1 to read "and the Word was God," since that is actually what John meant"
( Wetin Musa no go see for gate?
Verbal somersault dey run belle...)


it is also not wrong to translate it in any way that says that the Word was the same in nature as the Father.


******
The Internet NEVER forgets....
Take note.
Shalom.

shadeyinka2:
I received a ban for responding to your post.
Let me see if I can respond again

shadeyinka2:
@Ihedinobi3

I think the literal translation is

In (the) beginning was the Word
And the Word was with God
And God was the word

The word causing the problem for janosky was the word "with" πρὸς (pros) which was translated properly as "with".
The word "with" (pros/πρὸς) was as far a janosky was concerned should have been rendered as "facing towards" which even though is one of the shades of meanings of πρὸς, but meaningless in context. The NWT even correctly rendered it as WITH rather than FACING TOWARDS.

Therefore, every translator properly translate it as "with"

The Strongs Bible Concordance translate it to be

Strong's Concordance
pros:

Original Word: πρός
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: pros
Phonetic Spelling: (pros)

Definition: advantageous for, at (denotes local proximity), toward (denotes motion toward a place)
Usage: to, towards, with.

HELPS Word-studies
4314 prós (a preposition) – properly, motion towards to "interface with" (literally, moving toward a goal or destination).

4314 /prós ("towards, with" indicates "extension toward a goal, with implied interaction or reciprocity, with "presumed contact and reaction".
4314 (prós) naturally suggests the cycle of initiation and response.

[4314 (prós) can mean "in view of," or "in light of, but never "against," except where the context indicates an active exchange (interface) done in opposition.]

So you can see why all translators use WITH including the watchtower organisation.

shadeyinka2:
@Ihedinobi3
Trinity isn't as complex as we make it to be. Trinity is just a description what we as Christians observe about God.

We don't have any major problems about the attributes of God. The "confusion" we have is that even though God is ONE, yet we see three personalities having the nature or attributes of God. And these personalities are
1. The Father
2. The Word (Son)
3. The Holy Spirit.

The Word that became Flesh is the one we call Jesus.

A question we can ask ourselves is: does any other being exist who has the major attributes of God?

In the Physical, do you know that some particles exist that have a nature of Duality? They are both particle and wave. (This is like a contradiction because a particle have properties completely different from a wave). How much more the complexity of God.

Humans are exactly like that.
You are a physical being (correct)
Yet
You are a spiritual being (also correct)

Both have different personalities YET the same person. This is because even before resurrection, you are alive with your personality intact while your body is in the grave. You can't say your body isn't you at the same time, you can't claim that your spirit isn't you.

You'll notice that Lazarus and the rich man were alive (even though their bodies were in the grave) and especially the rich man's soul/spirit took responsibility over what his body did here while on earth.

The Father WILLS (DECIDES)
The Word COMMANDS
The Spirit IMPLEMENTS

This is why there was nothing made that was made without the WORD. You can't separate the Father from the Word neither can one separate the Word from the Spirit as they are three DIMENSIONS of the same GOD

I'm sorry for your ban. I'm not sure how quoting my post would have caused it, since my post was not tagged by the anti-spam bot and I was not banned myself. I'm glad for your response in any case.

I don't completely disagree with your translation of John 1:1. Those who believe the Bible know that the Lord Jesus is God as much as the Father is and that this is what John was saying. I would only say that John was actually demonstrating both the equality and separation of the Word from the Father. Your translation does not do this perfectly - it actually opens the door to the heresy that the Lord Jesus is the only Person that is God and He somehow manifests as the Father and the Holy Spirit as well - but it wouldn't bother anyone who knows and believes the Bible. I prefer the translation that I offered you because it fully demonstrates what John was saying in the Greek and it agrees with everything else that the Bible teaches regarding the Lord Jesus and the Trinity.

As for the complexity of the Trinity, I don't quite agree with you. It is simple enough in that it is clear from the Scriptures that God is One and there are Three Who are Each individually God (as I demonstrated in an earlier post on this thread). We see both things in the Bible and believe them both. It is not normal to our experience that Three Persons can Each be God and yet there is only One Unique God. But neither is it normal to our experience that anything can exist without ever beginning to exist. These things supersede our ability to understand. If you can understand it, then you are unique among creatures.

I have to remind you that I don't rely on logic or science or natural knowledge to interpret the Bible. Logic breaks down where faith can stand strong. The Scriptures make truth claims and many times offer no proof for them. In other words, we are expected to accept the things that the Bible says as axioms upon which we may build logical arguments where and when necessary, but not to scrutinize them to try to establish the truth of them. That is what it means to be a believer. Much about the Lord and even the universe that He made is not explained to us in the Bible or anywhere (Ecclesiastes 3:11). We are to wait until the Resurrection to understand very much (1 Corinthians 13:12). So I am quite content with being unable to make everything that I see in the Bible "simple" or even acceptable to the unbelieving. It is of little account to me whether others agree with what I believe as long as what I believe is what the Bible actually says.

The major question is who/ what is God?
The closest analogy that makes sense to me(though still imperfect) is that of the sun.

The Sun is a gaseous burning substance, but there is light and heat from the sun.

The sun only reaches us through it's light and heat, which causes evaporation from the waters.

Genesis 1v3, The spirit of God moved upon the surface of the waters.

The Spirit is this mysterious light and heat which proceeds from the father. In the beginning (according to Genesis) there was the father and the spirit from the father, and then God made man in his image(that is to say God gave him something of that spirit) making him a living soul.

ln jesus there was the fullness of that life giving spirit even from birth, so that the authors of the new testament could freely speak of the man jesus as though they were speaking of that same light(spirit from God) that created the world.

ln some form of Jewish mythology they equated this great spiritual presence of God as an Angel( the Angel of Exodus), so the author of Hebrews( as well as John's gospel) corrects this notion saying that this is not an Angel, but that same spirit of creation who finally made his home in jesus in order to express himself to us, and seeks to dwell in us in a richer manner as well.

ln the eyes of God only that which has the spirit is alive, anything without the spirit is dead because it would eventually pass away without the power for another life in it

This is my understanding of trinity

Ihedinobi3:

Hello.

You left an earlier conversation where you failed to demonstrate the truth of your position to try to hound me elsewhere and here on this forum. I'm not such a fool as to even pay attention to you.

As for the interlinear, it is correct, as far as I can see. See attached screenshot.

shadeyinka2:


FYI: the interlinear was correct. If you have another variation, paste the screenshot!

@ Ihedinobi3, where & when did I have "an earlier conversation" with you or "hound" you?
Please give proof.

@ Ihedinobi3,
@ Shadeyinka2,

In your screenshots of the NT interlinear Greek 3588, who is TÓV (ton) theon?

If both your screenshots, it's really correct, where is the Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) word for word omitted there?

Why the omission of word for word Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) in your Greek interlinear screenshots ?

Janosky:


Greek word "with" πρὸς (pros) .
Greek With= Towards.
In other words, "The word was with tov theon (the God)".
OR
"The word was facing towards tov theon (the God".
Proof: the Word & the God are 2 different beings. The Father is not the son.
Shadeyinka claims 1: "The Word is God himself!", FALSE.

Claims 2 :" facing towards" which even though is one of the shades of meanings of πρὸς, but meaningless in context.". BIG LIE.
Shadeyinka is LYING.

1. I asked you a very simple question:
Why did your revered organisations translation "the NWT" commit an error of translation by translating πρὸς as WITH rather than FACING TOWARDS?

2. Do you solemnly agree that the NWT commited the same lie you accused shadeyinka of committing?

Two questions explicitly stated for your truthful answer if truth is important to you.

Janosky:



The NWT is not wrong.
The determiner ("a" is for emphasis & clarity.
In Greek John1:1, "The Word is NOT tov theon (the God) =the son (the Word) is not the Father (the God).
Greek John1:1 Theon(the God)= the Father.
the Word= theos.

Bible > Strong's > Greek > 2316
◄ 2316. theos
►
Strong's Concordance
theos: God, a god
Original Word: θεός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine; Noun,
Masculine
Transliteration: theos
Phonetic Spelling: (theh'-os)
Definition: God, a god
Usage: (a) God, (b) a god "
*John10:34-36. 2Cor 4:4.
*a god= divine being, divine nature.

****----**
Also, How did your own bible consistently insert the determiner ( "a" in the New Testament?


*a) Acts 12:22. Acts 28:6 " a god".
Compare Acts 12:22. Acts 28:6 (Aramaic Bible).

b) John 1:6. "a man"
c) John 8:44 " a murderer"
*d) John 9:17. John4:19 "a prophet"
e) John 12:26 . John10:1 "a thief"
f) John18:37. 19:21. "a king"
etc....

*******####
In your Interlinear screenshot, where is the word for word of Greek 3588 ( tov) ?
What a deliberate, dubious plot to DISTORT the meaning of Greek John1:1 !!
To deceive the English reader & OBSCURE the difference of tov Theon ( the God ) & theos (the Word)
John1:1 (Kingdom interlinear).
John
1:1
1 ᾿Εν
In
ἀρχῇ
beginning
ἦν
was
ὁ
the
λόγος,
Word,
καὶ
and
ὁ
the
λόγος
Word
ἦν
was
πρὸς
toward
τὸν
the
θεόν,
God,
καὶ
and
θεὸς
god
ἦν
was
ὁ
the
λόγος.
Word

For clarity!? So that it will fit into your doctrine of two gods (one senior and the other junior)!?

For clarity, why didn't NWT translate (for consistency) θεόν into "a god"?
Who decided and on what criteria did θεὸς become "a god"?

Is the NWT consistent in translating θεὸς as "a god"?

Within the context of John1: what gave an iota of suggestion or context that θεὸς means "a god"?


I can see that you have a proof that the NWT lied (or erred) in translating πρὸς as WITH (seethe red highlight).

Ihedinobi3:



I'm sorry for your ban. I'm not sure how quoting my post would have caused it, since my post was not tagged by the anti-spam bot and I was not banned myself. I'm glad for your response in any case.

I don't completely disagree with your translation of John 1:1. Those who believe the Bible know that the Lord Jesus is God as much as the Father is and that this is what John was saying. I would only say that John was actually demonstrating both the equality and separation of the Word from the Father. Your translation does not do this perfectly - it actually opens the door to the heresy that the Lord Jesus is the only Person that is God and He somehow manifests as the Father and the Holy Spirit as well - but it wouldn't bother anyone who knows and believes the Bible. I prefer the translation that I offered you because it fully demonstrates what John was saying in the Greek and it agrees with everything else that the Bible teaches regarding the Lord Jesus and the Trinity.

I gave you a literal translation

I think the literal translation is

In (the) beginning was the Word
And the Word was with God
And God was the word

Please check the attached screenshot to confirm.

Ihedinobi3:

As for the complexity of the Trinity, I don't quite agree with you. It is simple enough in that it is clear from the Scriptures that God is One and there are Three Who are Each individually God (as I demonstrated in an earlier post on this thread). We see both things in the Bible and believe them both. It is not normal to our experience that Three Persons can Each be God and yet there is only One Unique God. But neither is it normal to our experience that anything can exist without ever beginning to exist. These things supersede our ability to understand. If you can understand it, then you are unique among creatures.

I have to remind you that I don't rely on logic or science or natural knowledge to interpret the Bible. Logic breaks down where faith can stand strong. The Scriptures make truth claims and many times offer no proof for them. In other words, we are expected to accept the things that the Bible says as axioms upon which we may build logical arguments where and when necessary, but not to scrutinize them to try to establish the truth of them. That is what it means to be a believer. Much about the Lord and even the universe that He made is not explained to us in the Bible or anywhere (Ecclesiastes 3:11). We are to wait until the Resurrection to understand very much (1 Corinthians 13:12). So I am quite content with being unable to make everything that I see in the Bible "simple" or even acceptable to the unbelieving. It is of little account to me whether others agree with what I believe as long as what I believe is what the Bible actually says.

I said:

@Ihedinobi3
Trinity isn't as complex as we make it to be. Trinity is just a description what we as Christians observe about God.

I guess you misunderstood my post.

A teacher has the gift to explain and describe complex and deep spiritual truths (just like Christ does) using parables and physical relations. Please forgive me for "trying to use logics and reasoning" to explain Trinity.

At least we are on the same page. Some people by nature are content with having faith for its sake while some are wired by the same God to want to understand why faith is the key.

Both are OK as long as at the end deep Faith in God is attained.

Daejoyoung:
The major question is who/ what is God?
The closest analogy that makes sense to me(though still imperfect) is that of the sun.

The Sun is a gaseous burning substance, but there is light and heat from the sun.

The sun only reaches us through it's light and heat, which causes evaporation from the waters.

Genesis 1v3, The spirit of God moved upon the surface of the waters.

The Spirit is this mysterious light and heat which proceeds from the father. In the beginning (according to Genesis) there was the father and the spirit from the father, and then God made man in his image(that is to say God gave him something of that spirit) making him a living soul.

ln jesus there was the fullness of that life giving spirit even from birth, so that the authors of the new testament could freely speak of the man jesus as though they were speaking of that same light(spirit from God) that created the world.

ln some form of Jewish mythology they equated this great spiritual presence of God as an Angel( the Angel of Exodus), so the author of Hebrews( as well as John's gospel) corrects this notion saying that this is not an Angel, but that same spirit of creation who finally made his home in jesus in order to express himself to us, and seeks to dwell in us in a richer manner as well.

ln the eyes of God only that which has the spirit is alive, anything without the spirit is dead because it would eventually pass away without the power for another life in it

This is my understanding of trinity

Even though I agree with you, the closest description or explanation of trinity is the TRINITY of MAN.

1. Your Physical Identity (Physical Body) is You (even at death)
This is the person your parent, friends and even your dog know as you

2. Your Spiritual Identity (Spiritual Body) is You (even at death)
This is the person, God, Angels, Demons and satan know as you

3. Your Personal Identity (Your Soul) is You (even at death)
This is the person you call "I", "Me", "My", "Myself"

Rev 6:9-11:
"And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, do you not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given to every one of them; and it was said to them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brothers, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled."

Their bodies were on earth (slain, buried etc) but they were still fully represented in heaven. They could speak and even put on white clothes.

HOWEVER:
The Light of the Sun is NOT the Sun
The Heat of the Sun is NOT the Sun
The Fusing Hydrogen of the Sun is not the sun. The sun is the "round ball" we see in the sky which emits light and heat through nuclear fission of hydrogen gas.

The attribute of the sun is to give light and heat BUT neither light nor heat is the Sun.

A lesser illustration is the electron:
An electron is a Wave and Yet an electron is a Particle.
A particle has characteristics different from a wave and a wave has characteristics different from a particle.
In Physics, this seemingly contradictory BUT verifiable phenomenon and paradox is called "Wave-Particle Duality of Matter".

Janosky:

@ Shadeyinka2,

In your screenshots of the NT interlinear Greek 3588, who is TÓV (ton) theon?

If both your screenshots, it's really correct, where is the Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) word for word omitted there?

Why the omission of word for word Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) in your Greek interlinear screenshots ?

1. So you agree that you err with your accusation of wrong transliteration of John1.
2. For your correction, TÓV is not a "who" it is a definite article "the"
https://biblehub.com/greek/3588.htm
3. Why was it omitted?
Because in English language, we don't put a definite article before God as "the God".

Eg.
We don't say " the God spoke to Abraham!" :
Rather we'll say "God spoke to Abraham!"

My question: Please explain
How come the NWT also omitted the article TÓV in their translation?

NWT:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with (TÓV) God, and the Word was a god.
2 This one was in the beginning with God.

The red highlight was my insertion for where TÓV should have been!

[img]https://s5/images/JwJohn1_1.jpg[/img]

Janosky, why did you not attempt to try and answer each one and all of those my previous up there above six questions erhn? You let six dead easy, peasy, lemon, squeasy, harmless simple questions seem like too hard for you to answer, lol.

If you had attempted to answer the six dead easy, peasy, lemon, squeasy, harmless simple questions, you wouldnt be making a right prat of yourself asking where is the Greek 3588 TÓV (ton), why is the word for word omitted there. you wouldnt be asking for an explanation for why the omission of word for word Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) in the Greek interlinear screenshot, lol.

Its beggars belief that Jehovah's Witnesses and of course you inclusive Janosky, could have the fearlessness, rude and disrespectful behaviour towards the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ to have Him described as a god, smh. That New World Translation forced upon you Janosky should be torn up into shreds, burned and/or flushed down the toilet. Mtcheew

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
- According to John 1:1 New World Translation (NWT)

What kind of expensive joke, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, is this, they are playing at with this their above New World Translation bible version rendition of John 1:1, hmm? Wonders never cease to happen, smh.

Janosky, let's find out how honest, sincere and truthful, if at all, you are or can be erhn?. Here is how it goes, Janosky please according to your full knowledge and/or your understanding, give an exhaustive list of what the translation and/or meaning of this your much beloved Greek word "TÓV" is, lol.

Putting it candidly, this way, we are going to start with finding out your full knowledge and/or understanding of the translation and/or meaning of that your much beloved Greek word "TÓV" first, before next, then be looking into the other two or three ones you too, are grappling with, lol (i.e. Theon and Theos)

BIBLESPEAKS:
The Truth About the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit


PEOPLE who believe the Trinity teaching say that God consists of three persons—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Each of these three persons is said to be equal to the others, almighty, and without beginning. According to the Trinity doctrine, therefore, the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, yet there is only one God.
Many who believe the Trinity admit that they are not able to explain this teaching. Still, they may feel that it is taught in the Bible. It is worth noting that the word “Trinity” never occurs in the Bible. But is the idea of a Trinity found there? To answer this question, let us look at a scripture that supporters often cite to uphold the Trinity.


"THE WORD WAS GOD”
John 1:1 states: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” ( King James Version ) Later in the same chapter, the apostle John clearly shows that “the Word” is Jesus. ( John 1:14 ) Since the Word is called God, however, some conclude that the Son and the Father must be part of the same God.
Bear in mind that this part of the Bible was originally written in Greek. Later, translators rendered the Greek text into other languages. A number of Bible translators, though, did not use the phrase “the Word was God.” Why not? Based on their knowledge of Biblical Greek, those translators concluded that the phrase “the Word was God” should be translated differently. How? Here are a few examples: “The Logos [Word] was divine.” ( A New Translation of the Bible) “The Word was a god.” ( The New Testament in an Improved Version ) “The Word was with God and shared his nature.” ( The Translator’s New Testament ) According to these translations, the Word is not God himself. * Instead, because of his high position among God's creatures, the Word is referred to as “a god.” Here the term “god” means “mighty one.”


GET MORE FACTS
Most people do not know Biblical Greek. So how can you know what the apostle John really meant? Think of this example: A schoolteacher explains a subject to his students. Afterward, the students differ on how to understand the explanation. How can the students resolve the matter? They could ask the teacher for more information. No doubt, learning additional facts would help them to understand the subject better. Similarly, to grasp the meaning of John 1:1 , you can look in the Gospel of John for more information on Jesus’ position. Learning additional facts on this subject will help you to draw the right conclusion.
For instance, consider what John further writes in chapter 1, verse 18 : “No man has seen [Almighty] God at any time.” However, humans have seen Jesus, the Son, for John says: “The Word [Jesus] was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory.” ( John 1:14 , KJ ) How, then, could the Son be part of Almighty God? John also states that the Word was “with God.” But how can an individual be with someone and at the same time be that person? Moreover, as recorded at John 17:3 , Jesus makes a clear distinction between himself and his heavenly Father. He calls his Father “the only true God.” And toward the end of his Gospel, John sums up matters by saying: “These have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.” ( John 20:31 ) Notice that Jesus is called, not God, but the Son of God. This additional information provided in the Gospel of John shows how John 1:1 should be understood. Jesus, the Word, is “a god” in the sense that he has a high position but is not the same as Almighty God.


CONFIRM THE FACTS
Think again about the example of the schoolteacher and the students. Imagine that some still have doubts, even after listening to the teacher’s additional explanation. What could they do? They could turn to another teacher for further information on the same subject. If the second teacher confirms the explanation of the first one, the doubts of most students may be put to rest. Similarly, if you are not sure what the Bible writer John was really saying about the relationship between Jesus and Almighty God, you could turn to another Bible writer for further information. Consider what was written by Matthew, for example. Regarding the end of this system of things, he quotes Jesus as saying: “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” ( Matthew 24:36 ) How do these words confirm that Jesus is not Almighty God?

Jesus says that the Father knows more than the Son does. If Jesus were part of Almighty God, however, he would know the same facts as his Father. So, then, the Son and the Father cannot be equal. Yet, some will say: ‘Jesus had two natures. Here he speaks as a man.’ But even if that were so, what about the holy spirit? If it is part of the same God as the Father, why does Jesus not say that it knows what the Father knows?

As you continue your Bible studies, you will become familiar with many more Bible passages that have a bearing on this subject. They confirm the truth about the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit.— Psalm 90:2; Acts 7:55; Colossians 1:15

This piece is very educative. I think it destroyed the trinity. I've stopped attending churches because there are a lot of objections I have about the teachings and doctrines in mainstream Christian churches. The Trinity in an example.

The point was made by Biblespeaks when he laid bare Matthew 24:36, where the father is said of knowing something which the son or the Holy Spirit doesn't know. There wouldnt be scriptural passages like this if there is a triune God. Maybe Ihedinobi3, Shadeyinka or MuttleyLaff could make a comment about this. I would be glad if they tried to.
I think the Christian Church has been fucke'd up since long ago....we're all in the mess.

If the word TRINITY did not appear in any part of the scriptures, then it should be taught within the confines of those PRACTICING what they think about it!

The BENEFITS of this TRINITY God should be emphasized as it permeates amongst it's adherents or better still a trinitarian calls others attention to the uncommon achievement of TRINITY amongst TRINITARIANS!

Jesus said "BY THEIR FRUIT" Matthew 7:15-20

There is no need for all these fruitless, endless, useless arguments on TRINITY since it doesn't appeare in any part of the scriptures!

shadeyinka:

Even though I agree with you, the closest description or explanation of trinity is the TRINITY of MAN.

1. Your Physical Identity (Physical Body) is You (even at death)
This is the person your parent, friends and even your dog know as you

2. Your Spiritual Identity (Spiritual Body) is You (even at death)
This is the person, God, Angels, Demons and satan know as you

3. Your Personal Identity (Your Soul) is You (even at death)
This is the person you call "I", "Me", "My", "Myself"

Rev 6:9-11:
"And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, do you not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given to every one of them; and it was said to them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brothers, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled."

Their bodies were on earth (slain, buried etc) but they were still fully represented in heaven. They could speak and even put on white clothes.

HOWEVER:
The Light of the Sun is NOT the Sun
The Heat of the Sun is NOT the Sun
The Fusing Hydrogen of the Sun is not the sun. The sun is the "round ball" we see in the sky which emits light and heat through nuclear fission of hydrogen gas.

The attribute of the sun is to give light and heat BUT neither light nor heat is the Sun.

A lesser illustration is the electron:
An electron is a Wave and Yet an electron is a Particle.
A particle has characteristics different from a wave and a wave has characteristics different from a particle.
In Physics, this seemingly contradictory BUT verifiable phenomenon and paradox is called "Wave-Particle Duality of Matter".

Well l know that my definition of the trinity is not the orthodox one( and I don't care about that).
My definition of the trinity is that there is the Father(the only true God) and both the son and spirit comes from the father.

lf you use the analogy of body, soul, and spirit, you get more confused, because the body, soul, and spirit together make up one person and are not seperate persons.

The bible is clear that jesus is the image of God and had the fullness of the Godhead in him bodily, so jesus had a dual nature of full humanity and full spirit, the difference is that his very spirit or subconscious self is Holy Spirit, so that jesus is now both God and man.

So l believe in the incarnation of God's Holyspirit as jesus the christ, but not trinity(as defined by the council of Nicea).

The difference between us and jesus is that the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily in him, but together we are the body of christ. So on our own we have Holy Spirit in us but we are not God like jesus, but when we all come together as one operating through the spirit we become the body of christ( or the body of God on earth).

Middleborn:
This piece is very educative. I think it destroyed the trinity. I've stopped attending churches because there are a lot of objections I have about the teachings and doctrines in mainstream Christian churches. The Trinity in an example.

This is the beauty of breaking bread and sharing it in opened topics like as this one. Interlocutors bring along food, you eat with them on the table, chew the food but making sure not to swallow the bones but to spit them out, lol

Middleborn:
The point was made by Biblespeaks when he laid bare Matthew 24:36, where the father is said of knowing something which the son or the Holy Spirit doesn't know. There wouldnt be scriptural passages like this if there is a triune God. Maybe Ihedinobi3 or MuttleyLaff could make a comment about this. I would be glad if they tried to.

Middleborn, my position, is God is not a "not-known-number" of person. God, as a matter of fact then, is, x-person and so God, in effect is, ∞-persons, as in, meaning, God is infinite or infinity.

God is someone without any bound, without limit, without an end. God is the first and the last, God oxymoronically has no beginning and no end. God is someone bigger and larger than any specified number, even three or trinity. This means, dont put God in a box. It explains why God in His infinite wisdom didnt allow the the word trinity to be printed black and white kokoro out in the Bible, lol

Now going to what you referenced and about the point made by Biblespeaks when he laid bare Matthew 24:36. Well, you've likely, often heard it said, if you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Something to be done right is exactly what it's all about and so what God did. This is a matter of the classsic diy aka Do-It-Yourself.

God can send Himself on an errand, and did send Himself to earth, in the form of Jesus Christ because God simultaneously can be in more than one place at a time (i.e. God can be in Heaven and on earth, at the same time) Note that, Jesus didnt correct people that addressed Him as God, for example, where and when said: "My Lord, My God" to Him

Christ cannot share the same body with God the father, because God is formless. God has no clear definite shape or size. Jesus Christ is the product of God projecting Himself as a human being in the person of Jesus Christ on earth. Jesus Christ is the visible image of the invisible God. Why does Jesus Christ need to be a human being on earth?. Fundamentally, it is because one needs a human body to lawfully and have a permitted way to legally operate on earth. God is not going to be a law breaker and be breaking Genesis 1:26-28

Now, though Jesus is God, He did not think of equality with God, as something to cling to. Instead, He gave up his divine privileges. He took the humble position of a servant and was born as a human being, and so God appeared on earth, in human form, as in, the person of Jesus Christ, God's Son, which means, it is a guarantee and not rocket science, that fathers will always know things that sons will have no idea or knowledge of.

Middleborn:
I think the Christian Church has been fucke'd up since long ago....

This isnt news anymore

Middleborn:
we're all in the mess.

Speak for yourself

Middleborn:


This piece is very educative. I think it destroyed the trinity. I've stopped attending churches because there are a lot of objections I have about the teachings and doctrines in mainstream Christian churches. The Trinity in an example.

The point was made by Biblespeaks when he laid bare Matthew 24:36, where the father is said of knowing something which the son or the Holy Spirit doesn't know. There wouldnt be scriptural passages like this if there is a triune God. Maybe Ihedinobi3, Shadeyinka or MuttleyLaff could make a comment about this. I would be glad if they tried to.
I think the Christian Church has been fucke'd up since long ago....we're all in the mess.

You don't need trinity for your salvation, what you need is a worldview of the kingdom of God, the cross, and the mysterious resurrection.

Daejoyoung:
You don't need trinity for your salvation, what you need is a worldview of the kingdom of God, the cross, and the mysterious resurrection.

You're right, and for the record, no one to my knowledge on the thread has proposed that trinity is needed for salvation. The brethren are breaking the bread of Hebrews 1:1-3 together and invite is for any to join if they wish to