>I'm still waiting for your explaination of Eph 1.

What about it? "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"
(Eph. 1:3, 17)

>I'm still waiting for your explaination of "exact" in Heb 1:3.

A replica is not an original. A representative is not the one who sent
him..etc...I have read anything of yours that supports the trinity so
I'm not sure what your grandstanding about. Your focus shoul dbe on the
word "representation" and "nature". Additionally
"the radiance of His
glory"?  If the writer of Hebrews wanted to say Jesus was God he could
have done so. Instead of "And He is the radiance of His glory and the
exact representation of His nature..." (NASB)

>I'm still waiting for your explaination of the imperfect tense of Jn
>1:1-2.

I don't need to. "ho theos" is not the same as "theos".

The Word was "alongside" ho theos thus the Word cannot be ho theos.

....the context lays the groundwork for accurate understanding. Even the
King James Version says, "The Word was with God." Someone who is
"with" another person cannot be the same as that other person. In
agreement with this, the Journal of Biblical Literature, edited by
Jesuit Joseph A. Fitzmyer, notes that if the latter part of John 1:1
were interpreted to mean "the" God, this "would then contradict
the preceding clause," which says that the Word was with God.

Notice, too, how other translations render this part of the verse:

1808: "and the word was a god." The New Testament in an Improved
Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: With
a Corrected Text.

1864: "and a god was the word." The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear
reading, by Benjamin Wilson.

1928: "and the Word was a divine being." La Bible du Centenaire,
L'Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.

1935: "and the Word was divine." The Bible-An American
Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed.

1946: "and of a divine kind was the Word." Das Neue Testament, by
Ludwig Thimme.

1950: "and the Word was a god." New World Translation of the
Christian Greek Scriptures.

1958: "and the Word was a God." The New Testament, by James L.
Tomanek.

1975: "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word." Das
Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.

1978: "and godlike kind was the Logos." Das Evangelium nach
Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.

At John 1:1 there are two occurrences of the Greek noun the·os´
(god). The first occurrence refers to Almighty God, with whom the Word
was ("and the Word [lo´gos] was with God [a form of the·os´]").
This first the·os´ is preceded by the word ton (the), a form of the
Greek definite article that points to a distinct identity, in this case
Almighty God ("and the Word was with [the] God").

On the other hand, there is no article before the second the·os´ at
John 1:1. So a literal translation would read, "and god was the
Word." Yet we have seen that many translations render this second
the·os´ (a predicate noun) as "divine," "godlike," or "a
god." On what authority do they do this?

The Koine Greek language had a definite article ("the"), but it did
not have an indefinite article ("a" or "an"). So when a
predicate noun is not preceded by the definite article, it may be
indefinite, depending on the context.

The Journal of Biblical Literature says that expressions "with an
anarthrous [no article] predicate preceding the verb, are primarily
qualitative in meaning." As the Journal notes, this indicates that
the lo´gos can be likened to a god. It also says of John 1:1: "The
qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun
[the·os´] cannot be regarded as definite."

So John 1:1 highlights the quality of the Word, that he was
"divine," "godlike," "a god," but not
Almighty God. This
harmonizes with the rest of the Bible, which shows that Jesus, here
called "the Word" in his role as God's Spokesman, was an obedient
subordinate sent to earth by his Superior, Almighty God.

There are many other Bible verses in which almost all translators in
other languages consistently insert the article "a" when
translating Greek sentences with the same structure. For example, at
Mark 6:49, when the disciples saw Jesus walking on water, the King
James Version says: "They supposed it had been a spirit." In the
Koine Greek, there is no "a" before "spirit." But almost all
translations in other languages add an "a" in order to make the
rendering fit the context. In the same way, since John 1:1 shows that
the Word was with God, he could not be God but was "a god," or
"divine."

>I'm still waiting for your explaination of the ingressive aorist in Jn
>1:14.

Why? "And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His
glory, glory as of the only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and
truth." (NASB)

self-explanatory.

>I'm still waiting for your explaination of "YHVH and His Redeemer,
YHVH
>of Hosts."

verse please

>I'm still waiting for your explaination of Jer 23, esp "YHVH Tsidkenu"

verse please

>shall I go on?

do what you want. You haven't posted anything that proves the trinity.


((( s.r.c.b-s is a moderated group.  All posts are approved by a moderator. )))
(((   Read http://srcbs.org for details about this group BEFORE you post.   )))


--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/26/05 8:46:23 PM ---