Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 226

Thread: The ONLY True God that Jesus serves. Scripture by Scripture

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Gracias, 1st John, for such good and TRUE points.
    However, you should KNOW it's a bad translation- **************
    Last edited by pastor2022; 05-14-2017 at 04:48 AM. Reason: *Edited*- Racial Inference...Cease such language
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    John 11:41- So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father, I thank you that you have heard me.
    42- I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me."

    Jesus was praying to the One he referred to as "God", and "MY God", thanking Him for working thru him.
    He wasn't talking to any 'God-the-Father', and 'God-the-Ghost' is NEVER mentioned- and NO ONE who ever knew God prayed to IT!
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    6,819
    Thanks
    3,050
    Thanked 1,129 Times in 945 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestion View Post
    Gracias, 1st John, for such good and TRUE points.
    However, you should KNOW it's a bad translation- **************
    I cannot say it is a bad translation because "ego eimi" does translate to a perfect "I am."

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    730
    Thanks
    191
    Thanked 244 Times in 168 Posts

    Default

    A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III (by Nigel Turner), p. 62, Edinburgh, 1963, tells us of present tense verbs such as eimi ('am'):

    “The present [tense] which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as perfective [perfect tense], the only difference being that the action is conceived of as still in progress.... It is frequent in the NT: Lk 2:48, 13:7... John 5:6, 8:58 (eimi), 14:9 ... 15:27” - T&T Clark, 1963.

    G. B. Winer (“the great Greek grammarian of the 19th century” - Wallace) also tells us:

    “Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues, - a state in its duration as, Jno. xv. 27 [Jn.15:27]..., viii. 58 [Jn 8:58].” - A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, Andover, 1897, p. 267.

    Blass and Debrunner also list the following as NT instances of present tense verbs indicating the duration of an act up to and including the present: Lk 13:7; 15:29; Jn 8:58 (eimi); 15:27 (este); 2 Cor. 12:19. - p. 168 (#322), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 1961.

    Trinitarian A. T. Robertson also agrees with this understanding of the Greek present tense. He calls it “The Progressive Present” and tells us that such a present tense verb often

    “has to be translated into English by a sort of ‘progressive perfect’ (‘have been’)...” - p. 879, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.

    Even A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by trinitarians Dana and Mantey confirms this understanding:

    “b. The present [tense] approaches its kindred tense, the perfect, when used to denote the continuation of existing results [D&M’s emphasis in italics]. Here it refers to a fact which has come to be in the past, but is emphasized as a present reality," ....
    “c. Sometimes the progressive present [tense] is retroactive in its application, denoting that which has begun in the past and continues into the present. For the want of a better name, we may call it the present of duration. This use is generally associated with an adverb of time [as ‘from the beginning’ in Jn 15:27 and ‘before Abraham came into existence’ in John 8:58 which both act as ‘adverbs of time’ - RDB], and may best be rendered by the English perfect.” - pp. 182, 183, The Macmillan Company, 30th printing, 1965. [material in brackets and emphasis has been added by me]

    Another NT scholar who verifies this is Kenneth L. McKay.

    McKay said in his book, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek, An Aspectual Approach:

    "Tense...4.2.4. Extension from Past. When used with an expression of either past time or extent of time with past implications (but not in past narrative, for which see 4.2.5), the present tense signals an activity begun in the past and continuing to the present time: Luke 13:7...Lu 15:29....Jn 14:9 [Tosouton khronon meth muoon eimi]..have I been with you so long...? ; Ac 27:33...Jn 8:58 [prin Abraam ego eimi], I have been in existence since before Abraham was born...."

    Perhaps even more surprising is this admission by trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace:

    A. Extending-from-Past Present (Present of Past Action Still in Progress)

    1. Definition
    The present tense may be used to describe an action which, begun in the past, continues in the present. ....
    .... It is different from the progressive present in that it reaches back in time and usually has some sort of temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase [such as ‘before Abraham came into existence’], to show this past-referring element.

    2. Key to Identification
    The key to this usage is normally to translate the present as an English present perfect. [And the presence of a ‘temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase, to show this past-referring element.’] - pp. 519-520, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996. [As in all other cases, bracketed material and emphasis are added by me.]

    The rendering of "I have been" or "I have existed" (Mo) is clearly appropriate for ego eimi at John 8:58 as shown by the above respected trinitarian scholars.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Tigger 2 For This Useful Post:

    theQuestion (05-16-2017)

  6. #205
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    7,082
    Thanks
    358
    Thanked 1,175 Times in 953 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tigger 2 View Post
    A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III (by Nigel Turner), p. 62, Edinburgh, 1963, tells us of present tense verbs such as eimi ('am'):

    “The present [tense] which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as perfective [perfect tense], the only difference being that the action is conceived of as still in progress.... It is frequent in the NT: Lk 2:48, 13:7... John 5:6, 8:58 (eimi), 14:9 ... 15:27” - T&T Clark, 1963.

    G. B. Winer (“the great Greek grammarian of the 19th century” - Wallace) also tells us:

    “Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues, - a state in its duration as, Jno. xv. 27 [Jn.15:27]..., viii. 58 [Jn 8:58].” - A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, Andover, 1897, p. 267.

    Blass and Debrunner also list the following as NT instances of present tense verbs indicating the duration of an act up to and including the present: Lk 13:7; 15:29; Jn 8:58 (eimi); 15:27 (este); 2 Cor. 12:19. - p. 168 (#322), A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, University of Chicago Press, 1961.

    Trinitarian A. T. Robertson also agrees with this understanding of the Greek present tense. He calls it “The Progressive Present” and tells us that such a present tense verb often

    “has to be translated into English by a sort of ‘progressive perfect’ (‘have been’)...” - p. 879, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research.

    Even A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament by trinitarians Dana and Mantey confirms this understanding:

    “b. The present [tense] approaches its kindred tense, the perfect, when used to denote the continuation of existing results [D&M’s emphasis in italics]. Here it refers to a fact which has come to be in the past, but is emphasized as a present reality," ....
    “c. Sometimes the progressive present [tense] is retroactive in its application, denoting that which has begun in the past and continues into the present. For the want of a better name, we may call it the present of duration. This use is generally associated with an adverb of time [as ‘from the beginning’ in Jn 15:27 and ‘before Abraham came into existence’ in John 8:58 which both act as ‘adverbs of time’ - RDB], and may best be rendered by the English perfect.” - pp. 182, 183, The Macmillan Company, 30th printing, 1965. [material in brackets and emphasis has been added by me]

    Another NT scholar who verifies this is Kenneth L. McKay.

    McKay said in his book, A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek, An Aspectual Approach:

    "Tense...4.2.4. Extension from Past. When used with an expression of either past time or extent of time with past implications (but not in past narrative, for which see 4.2.5), the present tense signals an activity begun in the past and continuing to the present time: Luke 13:7...Lu 15:29....Jn 14:9 [Tosouton khronon meth muoon eimi]..have I been with you so long...? ; Ac 27:33...Jn 8:58 [prin Abraam ego eimi], I have been in existence since before Abraham was born...."

    Perhaps even more surprising is this admission by trinitarian NT Greek scholar, Daniel B. Wallace:

    A. Extending-from-Past Present (Present of Past Action Still in Progress)

    1. Definition
    The present tense may be used to describe an action which, begun in the past, continues in the present. ....
    .... It is different from the progressive present in that it reaches back in time and usually has some sort of temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase [such as ‘before Abraham came into existence’], to show this past-referring element.

    2. Key to Identification
    The key to this usage is normally to translate the present as an English present perfect. [And the presence of a ‘temporal indicator, such as an adverbial phrase, to show this past-referring element.’] - pp. 519-520, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, 1996. [As in all other cases, bracketed material and emphasis are added by me.]

    The rendering of "I have been" or "I have existed" (Mo) is clearly appropriate for ego eimi at John 8:58 as shown by the above respected trinitarian scholars.
    All that drivel and still, you are unwilling to go to Jesus so that you may have life.

  7. #206
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    730
    Thanks
    191
    Thanked 244 Times in 168 Posts

    Default

    "All that drivel" is from respected Trinitarian scholars. I guess none of them are willing "to go to Jesus."

  8. #207
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1stjohn View Post
    I cannot say it is a bad translation because "ego eimi" does translate to a perfect "I am."
    Yes- but not there.
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  9. #208
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    John 12: 12- The next day the great crowd that had come for the Festival heard that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem.
    13- They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, "Hosanna! "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!"


    [Ps 118:25- Save now, we beseech thee, O Jehovah: O Jehovah, we beseech thee, send now prosperity.
    26- Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah: We haveblessed you out of the house of Jehovah. - ASV]


    "Blessed is the king of Israel!"
    14- Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it, as it is written:
    15- "Do not be afraid, Daughter Zion; see, your king is coming, seated on a donkey's colt."
    16- At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him.


    Coming in someone's Name simply means that you are representing, and speaking for that other person. Christ said he was doing that for another Person: God. His Father.
    The names"Immanuel"= With Us is God" Jesus"=Salvation of Jehovah" highlite this- as all of Christ's words do.
    It is Churchianity and their deceptive dogmas, like the Trinity Dogma that makes all these endless references twisted and meaningless.
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

  10. #209
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    1,754
    Thanks
    108
    Thanked 157 Times in 139 Posts
    Blog Entries
    68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by theQuestion View Post
    John 12: 12- The next day the great crowd that had come for the Festival heard that Jesus was on his way to Jerusalem.
    13- They took palm branches and went out to meet him, shouting, "Hosanna! "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!"


    [Ps 118:25- Save now, we beseech thee, O Jehovah: O Jehovah, we beseech thee, send now prosperity.
    26- Blessed be he that cometh in the name of Jehovah: We haveblessed you out of the house of Jehovah. - ASV]


    "Blessed is the king of Israel!"
    14- Jesus found a young donkey and sat on it, as it is written:
    15- "Do not be afraid, Daughter Zion; see, your king is coming, seated on a donkey's colt."
    16- At first his disciples did not understand all this. Only after Jesus was glorified did they realize that these things had been written about him and that these things had been done to him.


    Coming in someone's Name simply means that you are representing, and speaking for that other person. Christ said he was doing that for another Person: God. His Father.
    The names"Immanuel"= With Us is God" Jesus"=Salvation of Jehovah" highlite this- as all of Christ's words do.
    It is Churchianity and their deceptive dogmas, like the Trinity Dogma that makes all these endless references twisted and meaningless.
    On the contrary, it is heretical sects like yours which twist the Word of God to their own destruction.

    The problem is that you don't hold the Word of God to be inerrant. Therefore, you take certain verses and go to town with them. But when presented with verses like these, you lose it.

    "The Jews answered Him, 'For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make yourself out to be God.' ” (John 10:33)

    That shows that Jesus testified of His Divinity and the Jews understood what He was saying.

    “…He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” (John 14:9)

    This was in response to a question from St. Philip.

    John 14:8 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and we shall be satisfied.” 9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you do not know me, Philip? He who has seen me has seen the Father; how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

    The Scriptures are inerrant. But in order to understand them you have to read it all, in context. Scripture does not contradict Itself.

  11. #210
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    2,345
    Thanks
    342
    Thanked 162 Times in 143 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    So, the one who worships the Catholic Church just HAS to try and pollute the scriptures over here, too.
    The one who says Transubstantiation and Purgatory are doctrines from God.
    The one who believes Jesus NEVER died- He/They just used the mannequin of flesh.

    Pure Antichrists from the oldest cult in Churchianity...
    The INSANITY of CHURCHianity! Unequaled in All Religion.

Page 21 of 23 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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