 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Texas
Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Location: Ontario
|
 Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 6:35 am Post subject: An addition to John 1: 1-20 |
 |
|
An examination of John 1: 1-20! The context Reveals What?
With an addition!
Trinitarians will take this scripture out of context using only verse 1 to support the Trinity Doctrine. It is true most Bible Translations word this scripture in this manner: "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God." Ignoring the entire context of this scripture, that to them is the last word. To them, Jesus was God, and he was with himself. Does that sound a trifle strange to you, the reader? It should, because it is. Right from the outset there is something wrong with their teaching. That is because they are ignoring what the entire context is saying. When one takes the entire context into consideration, as should be done, quite a different picture emerges than what the Trinitarians would have us believe. Note how my Websters New World Dictionary defines this word 'Context.' ...
... a joining together ... to weave together ... ... the parts of a sentence, paragraph, discourse/ immediately next to or surrounding a specified word or passage and determining its exact meaning / to quote a remark out of context/ the whole situation, background, or environment relative to a particular event, personality, creation, ect."
Did you notice? One can, 'quote a remark 'out of context'? By reading only one verse of scripture, or perhaps two, Trinitarians are quoting John 1:1 out of context and clouding the true meaning of what the entire context is saying, because reading the context in its entirety, shows their thinking to be terribly wrong.
Permit me now to 'join together' or 'weave together' certain other verses of this scripture in John 1: 1-18 so we can see clearly what the entire context is saying. Beginning with verse 1 which informs us: "In the beginning was the Word" ... Now Bible scholars recognize that the Word spoken about here is, none other than our Lord Jesus Christ. He is identified by that name in the Revelation by John, in the following words: "And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in Blood: and his name is called THE WORD OF GOD."
[Revelation 19:13] So, no doubt Jesus is the Word that was with God in the beginning.
Now, I will follow the rule given by Paul at 2 Corinthians 13:1 to supply two or three witnesses to, what I will now point out about the Christ being with the Father in the beginning. My first witness is found at Micah 5:2 where we learn this: "But thou, Beth'-le-hem Eph'-ra-tah, though thou be little among the Thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." So, according to that verse Jesus has been in existence from, as it said, 'from of old.' Paul adds to that this information: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature." [Colossians 1:15] Added to that, John calls Jesus "The faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God." [Revelation 3:14] Now, I know from experience that Trinitarians will try to distort the aforementioned scriptures, but they do that to their own peril. I will go on to show why that is. "Ye shall not add unto the word that I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you." [Deuteronomy 4: 2] Compare [Deuteronomy 12: 32] [Proverbs 30:6] {Ecclesiastes 3:14] Now just how serious is adding to, or subracting from Jehohah's Word of Truth? The Apostle John in the Revelation account will answer that: "If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this Book: And if any man shall take away from the words of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the Book of life, and out of the Holy City, and from the things that are written in this Book." [Revelalation 22: 18,19] My advice to you Trinitarians is, don't tamper with Jehovah's word of Truth. Leave it alone! If you value at all your opportunity for everlasting life under God's Kingdom!
Thus far we see that Jesus has been with the Father from the beginning, being himself 'the beginning of the creation by God,' the 'firstborn of all creation.' As well, we have learned that he is the word who was with God in the beginning. Now move on down to verse fourteen and consider these words of John: "And the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us,[and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." Now does this scripture tell us that God became flesh, and dwelt among us? Does it tell us that we beheld the glory of God? No! It does not does it! Now consider verse 18 where we read these words: "No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosum of the Father, he hath declared him."
Now would be a good time to use scripture to support scripture. By this, I am making reference to the words of Jesus at John 5:37 where Jesus is telling us this: "And the Father himself which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." Now all of Jesus followers saw his shape, and heard his voice.. They stood face to face with Jesus, saw clearly his form, heard clearly his voice, but Jesus very pointedly said, "Ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape. So, then, how could Jesus himself have been God? The truth is, he simply was not God Jehovah in the flesh. That is a Trinitarian lie, that is seen clearly now. I think in this instance we should believe the words of Jesus, for he taught nothing but the truth. Listen to this further truth stated by Jesus: "Not that any man has seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father." [John 6:46] Now, in case someone would accuse me of quoting scripture out of context by my using John 5:37;6:36 it should be remembered that I am not trying to support a false teaching, but, rather refute one; and I use these scriptures following the rule given by Paul to "supply two or three witnesses to establish a matter as the truth, so the two scriptures in John are my two witnesses. [2 Corinthians 13:1] Now should anyone desire to read the entire accounts of both of those scriptures please feel free to do to that. Only don't stop there, I encourage all to read the entire Bible through. Was I to have quoted the scriptures above and below the two in question it would have cast confusion on the point I was trying to draw out, that no man has ever seen God. Time and space did not permit me to quote the entire passage of both of those scripters in John, that would have only served to confuse the issue at hand, and would have detracted from the main point I was seeking to draw out, that 'no man has seen God at any time.'
Of course, in his heavenly existence he would have had to have seen his Father on many occassions. But, again, he pointed out that no man had ever seen the Father, because no man could look directly at Jehovah God and continue living. Jehovah told Moses who had asked, "I beseech thee, shew me thy glory. He was told, in part: "Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me and live." [Exodus 34: 12-20] First Century Christians looked upon the face of Christ, and yet there is no record of anyone ever dying because of that fact. No Christ was not God in the flesh. That is so far from the truth its laughable.
In conclusion then, I would like to focus attention back to my dictionary definition of this word, "Context" a reading of it again is very revealing: "A joining together, to weave together" ... "the parts of a sentence, paragraph, discourse, etc immediately next to or surrounding a specified word or passage and determining its exact meaning... the whole situation, background, or environment relevant to a particular event, personality, creation, etc. In other words, no one simply reads the first line of a discourse, and from that set forth a hard and fast interpretation, without first taking the entire discourse into consideration. The only way to determine the exact meaning of Johns discourse would be by examining closely every word, every sentence, every paragraph. When one does that with John 1: 1-18 he will find he has a very different picture painted than what the Trinitarians would have us believe is the case.
I have shown that by joining together, or weaving together certain passages in John 1: 1-18 and then by supplying other supportive scriptures from the Bible, as I have done, one comes up with a picture quite different from the one drawn by Trinitarians. One must examine closely the whole situation as described by John in order to determine the exact meaning of what John is trying to draw out in his discourse.
By ignoring what is being focused on in the entire context, and setting forth an interpretation based on only one sentence; one is not only robbing himself, but he/she is robbing others of accurate knowledge of Jehovah and his Son, because only the truth will set us free, and only the truth will put us on the road to everlasting life. Trinitarians would rob us of these treasures, by teaching a doctrine that completely misrepresents Jehovah God and his dear Son, Jesus Christ.[John 8:32] [John 17:3] By following this lying doctrine one would be led on a path to certain death at the hands of the two who are being so sadly misrepresented. Jehovah and his Son Jesus Christ!
So, what does a thorough examination of John 1: 1-20 reveal? The context reveals that the Trinity Doctrine ia a teaching inspired by demons, for who else would wish to so malign our great creator and his Son Jesus Christ, so as to mislead mankind into believing something about the creator and his son that is simply not true? [1 Timothy 4:1] [Revelation 12:9] [1 John 5:19] [2 Corinthians 4:3,4]
Let everyone notice, I do not, and I did not try to impress anyone with eloquent flowery speech as someone on this Board is want to do, using Ten Dollar words that served only to throw everyone off track. Some simply love to draw attention to themselves with a show of worldly knowledge, but let this one in question know, that Jehovah and his Son are not in the least impressed, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to him. [1 Corinthians 3:19;1:19,20] |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
pastor2022
Moderator
Joined: 07 Dec 2006
Posts: 693
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: Re: An addition to John 1: 1-20 |
|
|
| Texas wrote: | | Let everyone notice, I do not, and I did not try to impress anyone with eloquent flowery speech as someone on this Board is want to do, using Ten Dollar words that served only to throw everyone off track. Some simply love to draw attention to themselves with a show of worldly knowledge, but let this one in question know, that Jehovah and his Son are not in the least impressed, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to him. [1 Corinthians 3:19;1:19,20] |
I am assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you are referring to me since I used the word exegesis, hermeneutics and homeletics. Just so that you will know, these words are accepted words in the field of Biblical interpretation and have been around for hundreds of years and do not qualify as "Ten Dollar words." The word "hermeneutics" comes from the Greek and was first used by Aristotle in his classic work of De Interpretationie. "Exegesis" is also from the Greek and was used by the early Greeks as well. It has been in use in English, German and French, etc. since the 1600's. Anyway, you get the point. If you think I was trying to "draw attention to myself" you were sadly mistaken. I was simply trying to say that if you're going to "rightly divide the Word of God" there's a proper way of doing it and it involves these methods. If you choose not to, or cannot, or do not have the tools, that's your perogative.
I shall not post again on this thread except to function as a moderator. God bless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YLTYLT
Ferret
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 120
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Texas,
I am assuming that based on your post, that you do not believe that Jesus is Jehovah. Is this correct? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas
Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:27 pm Post subject: Addition to John 1:1 |
|
|
| YLTYLT wrote: | Texas,
I am assuming that based on you post, that you do not believe that Jesus is Jehovah. Is this correct? |
"YLTYLT"
No I do not believe that Jesus was Jehovah. The Bible doesn't teach that he was either!
Here's a few good reasons why. Note the following information:
Statements about the Trinity Doctrine from various sources!
The illustrated Bible Dictionary: "The word Trinity is not found in the Bible. It did not find a place formally in the theology of the Church till the 4th Century."
New Catholic Encyclopedia: "the Trinity is not directly and immediately {the] word of God."
The encyclopedia of Religion: "Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity."
New Catholic encyclopedia says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O[ld] T[estament]."
In his Book The Triune God, Jesuit Edmond Fortman admits: "The Old Testament ... tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit ... There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a [Trinity] within the Godhead ... Even to see in ["Old Testament"] suggestions or foreshadowings or 'veiled signs' of the Trinity of persons is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers."
A dictionary of Religious knowledge notes that many say that the Trinity "is a corruption borrowed from the heathen religions, and ingrafted on the Christian faith." And The Paganism in our Christianity declares: "The origin of the [Trinity] is entirely pagan."
The Encyclopedia of Religion says: "Theologians agree that the New Testament also does not contain an explicit doctrine of the Trinity."
Jesuit Fortman states: "The New Testament writers ... give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are thre co-equal divine persons ... Nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead."
The new encyclopedia Britannica observes: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament."
Bernard Lohse says in A short History of Christian Doctrine: "As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity.”
The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology similarly states: “The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are of equal essence’ [said Protestant theologian Karl Barth.”]
Yale University Professor E. Washburn Hopkins affirmed: “To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the Trinity was apparently unknown; ... they say nothing about it.” --- Origin and Evolution of Religion.
Historian Arthur Weigall notes: “Jesus Christ never mentioned such a phenomenon, and nowhere in the New Testament does the word ‘Trinity’ appear. The idea was only adopted by the Church three hundred years after the death of our Lord.” --- The Paganism in our Christianity -
The New International Dictionary of the New Testament Theology tells us: “Primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds.”
“The early Christians, however, did not at first think of applying the [Trinity] idea to their own faith. They paid their devotions to God the Father and to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and they recognised the Holy Spirit; but there was no thought of these three being an actual Trinity, co-equal and united in one.” --- The Paganism in our Christianity --
“At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian ... It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings.” Encyclopedia of Religion and ethics.
“The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the fourth Century. ... Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” -- New Catholic Encyclopedia [Texas] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas
Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:31 pm Post subject: Re: An addition to John 1: 1-20 |
|
|
| pastor2022 wrote: | | Texas wrote: | | Let everyone notice, I do not, and I did not try to impress anyone with eloquent flowery speech as someone on this Board is want to do, using Ten Dollar words that served only to throw everyone off track. Some simply love to draw attention to themselves with a show of worldly knowledge, but let this one in question know, that Jehovah and his Son are not in the least impressed, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to him. [1 Corinthians 3:19;1:19,20] |
I am assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you are referring to me since I used the word exegesis, hermeneutics and homeletics. Just so that you will know, these words are accepted words in the field of Biblical interpretation and have been around for hundreds of years and do not qualify as "Ten Dollar words." The word "hermeneutics" comes from the Greek and was first used by Aristotle in his classic work of De Interpretationie. "Exegesis" is also from the Greek and was used by the early Greeks as well. It has been in use in English, German and French, etc. since the 1600's. Anyway, you get the point. If you think I was trying to "draw attention to myself" you were sadly mistaken. I was simply trying to say that if you're going to "rightly divide the Word of God" there's a proper way of doing it and it involves these methods. If you choose not to, or cannot, or do not have the tools, that's your perogative.
I shall not post again on this thread except to function as a moderator. God bless. |
Pastor 2022!
Neither Jesus nor any of his Apostles used such high sounding words, so why do you? They managed to teach the truth of the Bible without doing that, so why can't you? Texas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ragman13
Labrador
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 322
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wrote: | | You quoted parts of two verses out of eighteen from John 1 :1-18 and then took a bunch of other verses, and wove them into your argument. If you would like I would be more than happy to discuss 1-18 with you in a word for word discussion. You have however done exactly what you state that Trinitarians do; you have used selected passages and taken them out of context. |
Guess you havn't figured this out yet.
| Texas wrote: | | Let everyone notice, I do not, and I did not try to impress anyone with eloquent flowery speech as someone on this Board is want to do, using Ten Dollar words that served only to throw everyone off track. Some simply love to draw attention to themselves with a show of worldly knowledge, but let this one in question know, that Jehovah and his Son are not in the least impressed, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to him. [1 Corinthians 3:19;1:19,20] |
If you think any of the words I used are to big let me know! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plotinus
Tiger
Joined: 15 May 2007
Posts: 843
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Texas,
I must offer my support here to pastor2022's use of technical vocabulary where he deems fit. We all use technical words on occasion. The important thing is to get to the heart of the meaning that the other person is trying to convey and not to get too caught up in issues of vocabulary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nobby
Board - Admin
Joined: 16 Sep 2002
Posts: 5050
Location: Missouri
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Texas, those 10 dollar words were actually used in Jesus time. Do you think it was really worth bad mouthing my moderator pastor2022?
Nobby |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zathrus
King Kong
Joined: 28 Aug 2002
Posts: 2207
Location: WI USA
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know whether he paid $10 or if he got them on sale, but I had no trouble understanding pastor2022's words.
And he made a good point with them.
How often have we heard people stick to the $.05 words and they didn't have a point worth making with them?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas
Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 5:00 pm Post subject: Re: An addition to John 1: 1-20 |
|
|
| pastor2022 wrote: | | Texas wrote: | | Let everyone notice, I do not, and I did not try to impress anyone with eloquent flowery speech as someone on this Board is want to do, using Ten Dollar words that served only to throw everyone off track. Some simply love to draw attention to themselves with a show of worldly knowledge, but let this one in question know, that Jehovah and his Son are not in the least impressed, because the wisdom of this world is foolishness to him. [1 Corinthians 3:19;1:19,20] |
I am assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you are referring to me since I used the word exegesis, hermeneutics and homeletics. Just so that you will know, these words are accepted words in the field of Biblical interpretation and have been around for hundreds of years and do not qualify as "Ten Dollar words." The word "hermeneutics" comes from the Greek and was first used by Aristotle in his classic work of De Interpretationie. "Exegesis" is also from the Greek and was used by the early Greeks as well. It has been in use in English, German and French, etc. since the 1600's. Anyway, you get the point. If you think I was trying to "draw attention to myself" you were sadly mistaken. I was simply trying to say that if you're going to "rightly divide the Word of God" there's a proper way of doing it and it involves these methods. If you choose not to, or cannot, or do not have the tools, that's your perogative.
I shall not post again on this thread except to function as a moderator. God bless. |
Pastor 2022!
I get the feeling I hurt or offended you. Perhaps I'm guilty of doing both. I just wanted to tell you that if I did that, it was not done deliberately so as to hurt you. If I did, I want you to know I'm very sorry for doing that. I hope you will accept my heartfelt apology. I'm really very sorry! Texas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Texas
Kitten
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 135
Location: Ontario
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 3:01 am Post subject: $10.00 Words! |
|
|
| Nobby wrote: | Texas, those 10 dollar words were actually used in Jesus time. Do you think it was really worth bad mouthing my moderator pastor2022?
Nobby |
Hi Nobby!
Would you mind showing me anywhere in the Bible, where we find Jesus and his Apostles using those $10.00 words. I'd really like to see that.
As far as bad mouthing your moderator. I think the saying goes "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen." Personally I really don't believe I bad mouthed anyone. That is in your own mind. That's nothing to what I have taken off individuals on some of these so-called Christian Boards. Quite mild by comparison actually! Texas |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zathrus
King Kong
Joined: 28 Aug 2002
Posts: 2207
Location: WI USA
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 5:32 am Post subject: Re: An addition to John 1: 1-20 |
|
|
A few on-topic comments before this thread gets locked.
Tex, I also do not accept the trinitarian creed that reads that Jesus is "...very God of very God" and that father, Son and Holy Ghost are equal.
I do believe however that Jesus is God. He has the quality of Diety.
Here is why: Jesus plainly said "My Father is greater than I". That statement right there conflicts with the trinitarian creed that says all persons of the godhead are equal.
Jesus said He had received all that He had from His Father. He had nothing of His own, only what He had received from His Father.
So if Jesus is God, it is only because God gave that status to Him. He is God because God said so!
Acts 2:36
| Quote: | | Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. |
Jesus said "If you love me, you will keep my commandments". As one here on the board pointed out, that is an allusion to something said by God Allmighty in Exodus. Jesus spoke in the person of God!
Jesus told the high priest
Mark 14:62
| Quote: | | And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. |
You remember the high priest's reaction.
Mark 14:
| Quote: | 63Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?
64Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death. |
Why did the high priest consider Jesus' statemnt blasphemous? What Jesus said means far more than just predicting that He would return up in the clouds in the sky. The words Jesus chose were allusions to how the judgement of God is described by thte prophets. God's judgement against Israel in sending Babylon to invade them was described in similar terms by Jeremiah and some of the minor prophets.
What the priest found blasphemous was that Jesus was in essence saying "As God came in past times to judge the people, so I will come to judge you. You will see me again, coming as God to judge you. " Shocking, and blasphemy in the high priest's estimation.
I'm just joining together, weaving together the surrounding verses and the old testament passages that Jesus was alluding to. Sound exegesis. It's a good method of interpreting scripture. Good hermeneutics.
But Jesus knew what He'd been given by His Father. He knew it included even the status of being Divine - of being God. Yet because He'd received it, it was not intrinsically (sorry for the $10 word) his, we know His Father is greater than He.
| Texas wrote: | | Paul adds to that this information: "Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature." [Colossians 1:15] Added to that, John calls Jesus "The faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God." [Revelation 3:14] Now, I know from experience that Trinitarians will try to distort the aforementioned scriptures, but they do that to their own peril. |
These passages that you quote here have been a subject of much discussion and debate in this endeavor to understand the Godhead. I submit that if we were to weave together, join together the topic that the writer is descussing in the verse surrounding these, we would likely find he was writing about this new creation, this covenant of grace and peace. Jesus was the beginning of this new creation. He is the firstborn of every creature in this new world. I sorta doubt the writer threw in a little hint there about Jesus' origin.
| Texas wrote: | | My advice to you Trinitarians is, don't tamper with Jehovah's word of Truth. Leave it alone! If you value at all your opportunity for everlasting life under God's Kingdom! |
You know , the trinitarians would accuse you and the Witnesses where you got many of these ideas from of the same thing. No one is trying to tamper. My advice is to ask questions, study diligently, look closely at it, and don't hold any idea so sacred that you would never dare question it. We're human and rather than purposefully tampering, I think well meaning people have let some foolish and uninformed ideas spring up regarding the godhead. I think one reason is that both sides hold certain ideas as too sacred to question. Others may be failure to look at context, and not just textual context, but covenantal context.
| Texas wrote: | | In other words, no one simply reads the first line of a discourse, and from that set forth a hard and fast interpretation, without first taking the entire discourse into consideration. The only way to determine the exact meaning of Johns discourse would be by examining closely every word, every sentence, every paragraph. |
Very true, Tex. Very sound advice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YLTYLT
Ferret
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 120
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Texas,
Was John the Baptist, preparing the way for Jesus? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
YLTYLT
Ferret
Joined: 06 Apr 2007
Posts: 120
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:51 am Post subject: Re: $10.00 Words! |
|
|
| Texas wrote: | | Nobby wrote: | Texas, those 10 dollar words were actually used in Jesus time. Do you think it was really worth bad mouthing my moderator pastor2022?
Nobby |
Hi Nobby!
Would you mind showing me anywhere in the Bible, where we find Jesus and his Apostles using those $10.00 words. I'd really like to see that.
As far as bad mouthing your moderator. I think the saying goes "If you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen." Personally I really don't believe I bad mouthed anyone. That is in your own mind. That's nothing to what I have taken off individuals on some of these so-called Christian Boards. Quite mild by comparison actually! Texas |
Texas, I am sure you did not intentionally misquote. But Nobby did not say these words were used in the Bible (regardless of whether they are in the Bible or not), but in Jesus' time. If you going to quote, quoting accurately creates more credibility for yourself.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
