Page 46 of 280 FirstFirst ... 364243444546474849505696146 ... LastLast
Results 1,126 to 1,150 of 6986
  1. #1126
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    Many interpretations, so I'm not going to sit here and say that I have vast knowledge on Greek or original translations. As I said before, I accept that the JW's teach the truth so it is by faith that I accept their translation to be the most accurate. It is very interesting though and I am now doing a bit of research online.

  2. #1127
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    Is Jesus God?




    MANY people view the Trinity as “the central doctrine of the Christian religion.” According to this teaching, the Father, Son, and holy spirit are three persons in one God. Cardinal John O’Connor stated about the Trinity: “We know that it is a very profound mystery, which we don’t begin to understand.” Why is the Trinity so difficult to understand?
    The Illustrated Bible Dictionary gives one reason. Speaking of the Trinity, this publication admits: “It is not a biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible.” Because the Trinity is “not a biblical doctrine,” Trinitarians have been desperately looking for Bible texts—even twisting them—to find support for their teaching.


    A Text That Teaches the Trinity?

    One example of a Bible verse that is often misused is John 1:1. In the King James Version, that verse reads: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God [Greek, ton the·on′], and the Word was God [the·os′].” This verse contains two forms of the Greek noun the·os′ (god). The first is preceded by ton (the), a form of the Greek definite article, and in this case the word the·on′ refers to Almighty God. In the second instance, however, the·os′ has no definite article. Was the article mistakenly left out?
    Why is the Trinity doctrine so difficult to understand?

    The Gospel of John was written in Koine, or common Greek, which has specific rules regarding the use of the definite article. Bible scholar A. T. Robertson recognizes that if both subject and predicate have articles, “both are definite, treated as identical, one and the same, and interchangeable.” Robertson considers as an exampleMatthew 13:38, which reads: “The field [Greek, ho a·gros′] is the world [Greek, ho ko′smos].” The grammar enables us to understand that the world is also the field.
    What, though, if the subject has a definite article but the predicate does not, as in John 1:1? Citing that verse as an example, scholar James Allen Hewett emphasizes: “In such a construction the subject and predicate are not the same, equal, identical, or anything of the sort.”
    To illustrate, Hewett uses 1 John 1:5, which says: “God is light.” In Greek, “God” is ho the·os′ and therefore has a definite article. But phos for “light” is not preceded by any article. Hewett points out: “One can always . . . say of God He is characterized by light; one cannot always say of light that it is God.” Similar examples are found at John 4:24, “God is a Spirit,” and at 1 John 4:16, “God is love.” In both of these verses, the subjects have definite articles but the predicates, “Spirit” and “love,” do not. So the subjects and predicates are not interchangeable. These verses cannot mean that “Spirit is God” or “love is God.”


    Iden y of “the Word”?

    Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 highlights, not the iden y, but a quality of “the Word.” Says Bible translator William Barclay: “Because [the apostle John] has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description . . . John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God.” Scholar Jason David BeDuhn likewise says: “In Greek, if you leave off the article from theos in a sentence like the one in John 1:1c, then your readers will assume you mean ‘a god.’ . . . Its absence makes theosquite different than the definite ho theos, as different as ‘a god’ is from ‘God’ in English.” BeDuhn adds: “In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being.” Or to put it in the words of Joseph Henry Thayer, a scholar who worked on the American Standard Version: “The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself.”
    Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father

    Does the iden y of God have to be “a very profound mystery”? It did not seem so to Jesus. In his prayer to his Father, Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father when he said: “This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.” (John 17:3) If we believe Jesus and understand the plain teaching of the Bible, we will respect him as the divine Son of God that he is. We will also worship Jehovah as “the only true God.”


  3. #1128
    Believe. it's me's Avatar
    Post Count
    2,150
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Yes, and then you asked why I though the Bible translation written by the JW's was the most accurate.
    I haven't done much research on the subject. I got some information from various books written by the Watchtower and tract Society and Jehovah's Witnesses. I would have to look them up again seeing as I did that when I was 14-15. No I did not. Where do you get your direct translations from?
    It explains a lot..... bottom line, we all around here, but seriously if you really care or are curious about the origins of the bible and religion go study the thing. My opinion, not trying to be offensive here... it is in fact my sincere opinion, you believe tons of bull , but if you're happy and stay away from the dangerous crap like no blood transfusion and such, don't even bother, live your life as you want. The search for the truth is a long journey, and when you think you are reaching the bottom you realize you're just touching the surface. I even have (had) ministry license for a christian denomination I'm ain't disclosing here. never satisfied got into textual biblical criticism, history of religion and many other things. Humans are capable of believing tons of bull .

  4. #1129
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    It explains a lot..... bottom line, we all around here, but seriously if you really care or are curious about the origins of the bible and religion go study the thing. My opinion, not trying to be offensive here... it is in fact my sincere opinion, you believe tons of bull , but if you're happy and stay away from the dangerous crap like no blood transfusion and such, don't even bother, live your life as you want. The search for the truth is a long journey, and when you think you are reaching the bottom you realize you're just touching the surface. I even have (had) ministry license for a christian denomination I'm ain't disclosing here. never satisfied got into textual biblical criticism, history of religion and many other things. Humans are capable of believing tons of bull .
    And I agree. Which is why I have always stated that I am learning new things every day. I have done prior research on different translations before but never deep or extensive. As I said, I accept their translation by faith. Your questions bring up even more interesting questions however, so I will be doing more research on the subject.

  5. #1130
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    I would also like to add that I am not yet a JW but one day would like to be. Just in case anyone was wondering why I curse/call people gots etc etc. I have a long way to go before I can feel comfortable and truthful calling myself a Christian.

  6. #1131
    Believe. it's me's Avatar
    Post Count
    2,150
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    I would also like to add that I am not yet a JW but one day would like to be. Just in case anyone was wondering why I curse/call people gots etc etc. I have a long way to go before I can feel comfortable and truthful calling myself a Christian.
    Just FYI.... JW are not christians similar to how mormons are not exactly christians. All believe some bull and have the bible as one or only holly book, but have different and many times opposite doctrines.

  7. #1132
    Banned
    Post Count
    49,723
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    The first giraffe?

  8. #1133
    Moss is Da Sauce! mouse's Avatar
    Post Count
    26,358
    NBA Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    39 pages and still no proof of Evolution

  9. #1134
    Banned
    Post Count
    49,723
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    39 pages and still no proof of Evolution
    There will never be any "stonecold absolute" proof of evolution.

  10. #1135
    silverblk mystix
    Guest
    I would also like to add that I am not yet a JW but one day would like to be. Just in case anyone was wondering why I curse/call people gots etc etc. I have a long way to go before I can feel comfortable and truthful calling myself a Christian.

    ...but why?

    Why aspire to any label?

    If you are a true person with true and decent actions - why not just accept this as enough?

  11. #1136
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    No one noticed that you completely ignored my other questions.
    They were dumb questions, tbh.

    1. If Jesus Christ walks up on the street and shoots my daughter, I'm not the one going to jail.

    2. If I murder someone, it's not both me and my daughter that get the death penalty. Just me.

    It's a very simple concept.

  12. #1137
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    ...but why?

    Why aspire to any label?

    If you are a true person with true and decent actions - why not just accept this as enough?
    Says the voyeur that spits out labels in almost every post.

  13. #1138
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    Was the word "God" or "a god"?

    "THAT question has to be considered when Bible translators handle the first verse of the Gospel of John. In the New World Translation, the verse is rendered: “In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” (John 1:1) Some other translations render the last part of the verse to convey the thought that the Word was “divine,” or something similar. (A New Translation of the Bible, by James Moffatt; The New English Bible) Many translations, however, render the last part of John 1:1: “And the Word was God.”—The Holy Bible—New International Version; The Jerusalem Bible.

    Greek grammar and the context strongly indicate that theNew World Translation rendering is correct and that “the Word” should not be identified as the “God” referred to earlier in the verse. Nevertheless, the fact that the Greek language of the first century did not have an indefinite article (“a” or “an”) leaves the matter open to question in some minds. It is for this reason that a Bible translation in a language that was spoken in the earliest centuries of our Common Era is very interesting.
    The language is the Sahidic dialect of Coptic. The Coptic language was spoken in Egypt in the centuries immediately following Jesus’ earthly ministry, and the Sahidic dialect was an early literary form of the language. Regarding the earliest Coptic translations of the Bible, The Anchor Bible Dictionary says: “Since the [Septuagint] and the [Christian Greek Scriptures] were being translated into Coptic during the 3d century C.E., the Coptic version is based on [Greek manuscripts] which are significantly older than the vast majority of extant witnesses.”
    The Sahidic Coptic text is especially interesting for two reasons. First, as indicated above, it reflects an understanding of Scripture dating from before the fourth century, which was when the Trinity became official doctrine. Second, Coptic grammar is relatively close to English grammar in one important aspect. The earliest translations of the Christian Greek Scriptures were into Syriac, Latin, and Coptic. Syriac and Latin, like the Greek of those days, do not have an indefinite article. Coptic, however, does. Moreover, scholar Thomas O. Lambdin, in his work Introduction to Sahidic Coptic, says: “The use of the Coptic articles, both definite and indefinite, corresponds closely to the use of the articles in English.”
    Hence, the Coptic translation supplies interesting evidence as to how John 1:1 would have been understood back then. What do we find? The Sahidic Coptic translation uses an indefinite article with the word “god” in the final part ofJohn 1:1. Thus, when rendered into modern English, the translation reads: “And the Word was a god.” Evidently, those ancient translators realized that John’s words recorded at John 1:1 did not mean that Jesus was to be identified as Almighty God. The Word was a god, not Almighty God."
    You'd think a smart loving God would clear that all up.

  14. #1139
    silverblk mystix
    Guest
    Says the voyeur that spits out labels in almost every post after some idiot does it to him first


    fify


    In the interest of accuracy

  15. #1140
    silverblk mystix
    Guest
    You'd think a smart loving God would clear that all up.

    You'd think a semi-intelligent person would understand that the problem is not in this "god" - nor in the message - but in himself and his wrong interpretations.

    ...but they never think this...

  16. #1141
    Banned
    Location
    San Antonio
    Post Count
    12,323
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    You'd think a semi-intelligent person would understand that the problem is not in this "god" - nor in the message - but in himself and his wrong interpretations.

    ...but they never think this...
    That is probably because it is the most obvious reason.

    We all tend to overlook or miss that which is the most obvious.

    We can't see the forest for the trees.

  17. #1142
    Banned
    Location
    San Antonio
    Post Count
    12,323
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Scientists discover that atheists might not exist, and that’s not a joke
    By Nury Vittachi | July 6th 2014 08:03 PM

    Metaphysical thought processes are more deeply wired than hitherto suspected

    WHILE MILITANT ATHEISTS like Richard Dawkins may be convinced God doesn’t exist, God, if he is around, may be amused to find that atheists might not exist.

    Cognitive scientists are becoming increasingly aware that a metaphysical outlook may be so deeply ingrained in human thought processes that it cannot be expunged.

    While this idea may seem outlandish—after all, it seems easy to decide not to believe in God—evidence from several disciplines indicates that what you actually believe is not a decision you make for yourself. Your fundamental beliefs are decided by much deeper levels of consciousness, and some may well be more or less set in stone.

    This line of thought has led to some scientists claiming that “atheism is psychologically impossible because of the way humans think,” says Graham Lawton, an avowed atheist himself, writing in the New Scientist. “They point to studies showing, for example, that even people who claim to be committed atheists tacitly hold religious beliefs, such as the existence of an immortal soul.”

    This shouldn’t come as a surprise, since we are born believers, not atheists, scientists say. Humans are pattern-seekers from birth, with a belief in karma, or cosmic justice, as our default setting. “A slew of cognitive traits predisposes us to faith,” writes Pascal Boyer in Nature, the science journal, adding that people “are only aware of some of their religious ideas”.

    http://www.science20.com/writer_on_t..._a_joke-139982
    For the whole article.
    Last edited by xmas1997; 08-22-2014 at 11:57 AM.

  18. #1143
    Banned
    Location
    San Antonio
    Post Count
    12,323
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    How Christianity Created Science
    (and Why Atheism Wouldn’t Have)

    http://www.str.org/blog/how-christia...e#.U_d37KONq71

    It takes some imagination to grasp how radically different ancient worldviews were from our Western perspective. Much of what we now take for granted as being common sense was not actually common throughout human history. Rather, our particular worldview was built over time on a foundation of unique ideas, and Rodney Stark, author of How the West Won, argued in a recent radio interview that it’s the Western view of God that made the biggest difference for us:

    It’s pretty obvious…that the Judeo-Christian concept of God held the key to the rise of the West, and that is the belief in a rational Creator God, because that had the implication, then, that the creation was itself rational—that is to say, it obeys rules. The rules are reasonable, rational. Consequently, since humans have the ability to reason, it might be possible to discover the rules of the creation. And that was the whole basis of science.

    Science only happened in the West. And the reason it happened [is] because only in the West was science plausible. Elsewhere, it was thought that the universe was eternal, that it was mystical, that it was beyond understanding and human comprehension. We could meditate on it, but we couldn’t try to discover the rules that made it work.


    People like Newton believed that there were rules to be discovered, and the marvelous thing, of course, is there were rules that could be discovered.

    So in one sense, the greatest scientific theory of all is that the universe is rational. And it’s been tested again and again, as people have discovered these rational rules by which everything works. That’s the key to the whole rise of the West.

    Very often, atheists will lump all ancient religions together, imagining that any belief in the supernatural necessarily conjures up a chaotic, unpredictable universe in the minds of the believers. But it was actually the opposite with Christianity. It was only a belief in the biblical God that rescued people from a chaotic-universe mindset.

    Atheists need to use their imaginations to strip away what our culture has unreflectively absorbed from Christianity and think about how they would see the world if Christianity had never existed.

    Imagine if at the beginning of human history every human being had a naturalistic understanding of the universe—everything was thought to have come together randomly, as atoms happened to bump into atoms, with no reason for its existence. No design, no purpose to the way the universe developed. That foundational idea would have invoked not the view of today’s naturalist scientist (whose view grew out of our culture’s ancient Christian belief in an ordered universe), but a worldview every bit as chaotic as any that rested on capricious gods. Who, in a culture developing under a belief in a meaningless, random universe where something might at any moment come out of nothing, would have thought to search for rational, predictable natural laws?

    An atheistic understanding of the universe does not naturally lead to the pursuit of science, nor does a supernatural view automatically lead there. Only in a culture with a belief in a rational, orderly, sovereign Creator—where it’s believed a reasonable mind is behind things—would science be likely to appear. And a look at world history backs up that conclusion.

    Now let’s take this one step further: No worldview other than one with a Creator would likely have brought people to science, and yet it turns out that science is an accurate way of discovering truth about our world—that is, the scientific laws predicted by a worldview with a biblical concept of God, and unexpected in any other worldview, actually exist.

    Why is that?
    Last edited by xmas1997; 08-22-2014 at 12:05 PM.

  19. #1144
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    fify


    In the interest of accuracy
    Doesn't matter who does it first.

    You hate labels but you use them any way.

  20. #1145
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    They were dumb questions, tbh.

    1. If Jesus Christ walks up on the street and shoots my daughter, I'm not the one going to jail.

    2. If I murder someone, it's not both me and my daughter that get the death penalty. Just me.

    It's a very simple concept.
    ROFL, you don't even know what you're talking about. Are you being ignorant on purpose? Who is responsible for your daughter? Who works so she can have clothes? Who provides her shelter? Who provides her transportation? Who decides what doctor she goes to? Who chooses which party she can attend? Who does she come to when something is wrong? Who makes important life decisions for her assuming she is still a child? Thank you. A parent is responsible for their child. Case closed.

  21. #1146
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Post Count
    100,825
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    UCLA Bruins
    am i considered an atheist? because if so i debunked xmas' article

  22. #1147
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    You'd think a semi-intelligent person would understand that the problem is not in this "god" - nor in the message - but in himself and his wrong interpretations.

    ...but they never think this...
    The fully intelligent person understands the flaw is in the god.

  23. #1148
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    ROFL, you don't even know what you're talking about. Are you being ignorant on purpose? Who is responsible for your daughter? Who works so she can have clothes? Who provides her shelter? Who provides her transportation? Who decides what doctor she goes to? Who chooses which party she can attend? Who does she come to when something is wrong? Who makes important life decisions for her assuming she is still a child? Thank you. A parent is responsible for their child. Case closed.
    Who killed the children in the flood?

    A. Parent
    B. God

    only you are stupid enough to answer A.

    It's a ridiculously simple concept.

    God's a murderer. Period.

  24. #1149
    right about pizzagate Blake's Avatar
    Post Count
    83,642
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Tech Red Raiders
    am i considered an atheist? because if so i debunked xmas' article
    It was tldr, but it had the look of an easily debunkable article

  25. #1150
    Veteran RD2191's Avatar
    Post Count
    51,864
    NBA Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    College
    Texas Longhorns
    Who killed the children in the flood?

    A. Parent
    B. God

    only you are stupid enough to answer A.

    It's a ridiculously simple concept.

    God's a murderer. Period.
    Who is responsible for their child? It's a ridiculously simple concept. Unless your daughter bosses you around which tbh I could def see happening.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •