There's a bit more to it than that... like confessing and acknowledging Jesus Christ as Lord of All (that every knee will bow to and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord)
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
Actually that is a part of what John the Baptist said.
Matthew 3:11 kjv
11. I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.
Acts 2:37 kjv
37. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men andbrethren, what shall we do?
38. And Peter says to them, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
TMal3 has posted.
eddif
You say Greek has many words that mean "the."No, you don't understand Greek, as I said. There are approximately TWENTY-FOUR DIFFERENT WORDS for "THE" in Greek:
Whereas in English we have one word for the definite article ("the"), Greek has a couple dozen different words, but they ALL mean the same thing: "The." Everything highlighted aqua, violet, or yellow in the chart below means "the." Greek uses different endings to identify the part of speech, that's all. 'O (ho) is "the" used with the nominative case (and identifies the main subject); tou is "the" used with a genitive case (and identifies possessiveness); tw (tow) is "the" used with the dative case (and identifies the indirect object); and our tov (ton) is "the" used with the accusative case (and identifies the direct object that receives the action of the verb in a sentence or clause).
You still have yet to answer this question:
Do you at least acknowledge that the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation?
To a redneck there are a lot of English
“the’s”:
the - old wore out thing
the - new thing
The - thing we desire
THe - thing we hate
THE - one we love
More?
I stopped listing instead of wasting time.
Emotional states are attached to our English the’s. Not as intelligent as Greek words, but there on a level.
Mississippi redneck
eddif
“the’s”:
the - old wore out thing
the - new thing
The - thing we desire
THe - thing we hate
THE - one we love
More?
I stopped listing instead of wasting time.
Emotional states are attached to our English the’s. Not as intelligent as Greek words, but there on a level.
Mississippi redneck
eddif
Theo is gender neutral.
Theos is male gender.
Thea is female gender.
Theon is the contracted form of Theo eon.
eon
ē′ŏn″, ē′ən
noun
1. An indefinitely long period of time; an age.
2. The longest division of geologic time, containing two or more eras.
3. A long space of time; a secular period, either indefinite or limited to the duration of something, as a dispensation or the universe: used as equivalent to age, era, or cycle, and sometimes to eternity.
And so Theos was with the only Theon.
Genesis 21:33
Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and there he called on the name of (the Lord / Yahwah,) the Eternal God.
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
TON / TOV
The Greek word TON comes before names and titles and is some times translated as "The."
Theos is male gender.
Thea is female gender.
Theon is the contracted form of Theo eon.
eon
ē′ŏn″, ē′ən
noun
1. An indefinitely long period of time; an age.
2. The longest division of geologic time, containing two or more eras.
3. A long space of time; a secular period, either indefinite or limited to the duration of something, as a dispensation or the universe: used as equivalent to age, era, or cycle, and sometimes to eternity.
And so Theos was with the only Theon.
Genesis 21:33
Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and there he called on the name of (the Lord / Yahwah,) the Eternal God.
John 17:3
Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.
TON / TOV
The Greek word TON comes before names and titles and is some times translated as "The."
The Father is the only unbegotten or true God.
Jesus is begotten from the Father.
Its about the nature found in the only begotten Son. - He is the mirror image of the invisible God. He is one with the Father.
Colossians 1:19 ESV - For in him all the… | Biblia
For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
The two variances found in the Greek manuscripts are the only begotten Son and the only begotten God.
How do you know "Jesus"? Do you have the Spirit of Christ in you?
Please provide evidence that "Theon is the contracted form of Theo eon."
Given that ton is masculine accusative, it seems reasonable to me that theon is the masculine accusative form of theos. So, I did a search and this is what I found:
"The change in the noun in John 1:1, from Θεόν (Theon) to Θεὸς (Theos) for God in Greek is not because of any difference in meaning, but simply because the word was playing two different functions in the sentence.
In the text under consideration, the word for God was spelt differently in the two instances because in the first instance, Θεόν (Theon), the word was functioning in the accusative case whereas in the second occurrence, Θεὸς (Theos), it was in the predicate nominative.
There are many other places in the New Testament where either form of the word is used for God without impinging on the force and reality of his divinity in any of those contexts. Therefore, to say that Theon is the Supreme God and Theos is the Son, and thus less than Theon, is crass ignorance!"
https://seasonedapologist.com/2021/11/06/john-11-theon-vs-theos/
The irony of finding an article directly relating to this verse and this particular discussion.
What does this have to do with the discussion about Greek grammar?
Gen 21:33 και εφυτευσεν αβρααμ αρουραν επι τω φρεατι του ορκου και επεκαλεσατο εκει το ονομα κυριου θεος αιωνιος. (Sept.)
(Monogenēs) means "unique."The Father is the only unbegotten or true God.
Jesus is begotten from the Father.
Its about the nature found in the only begotten Son. - He is the mirror image of the invisible God. He is one with the Father.
Colossians 1:19 ESV - For in him all the… | Biblia
For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,biblia.com
The two variances found in the Greek manuscripts are the only begotten Son and the only begotten God.
How do you know "Jesus"? Do you have the Spirit of Christ in you?
Monogenēs Theo-s is "unique god."
The AI's are out to lunch, the explanations on the Internet are so poor there not worth repeating; the explanation in scripture4all is no longer working.
However, scripture4all does say that (TON / TOV) is translated a number of times as (the one.) TOU is translated a number of times as (of the.)
As everyone knows, the word (one) can also translate as (only.)
Yahshua is one in unity with the Father. We are also called to be one with Yahwah and Yahshua.The Father is the only unbegotten or true God.
Jesus is begotten from the Father.
Its about the nature found in the only begotten Son. - He is the mirror image of the invisible God. He is one with the Father.
Colossians 1:19 ESV - For in him all the… | Biblia
For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
The two variances found in the Greek manuscripts are the only begotten Son and the only begotten God.
How do you know "Jesus"? Do you have the Spirit of Christ in you?
- John 17:11
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name, the name you gave me, so that they may be one as we are one.
- John 17:21
that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me.
- John 17:22
I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one—
PLEASE TAG IN A MEMBER WHEN MENTIONING HIM.
USE THE @ SIGN IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED BY THE NAME.
THANKS.
That doesn't address the nature found in the Son. Yes, as I have repeated Jesus and the Father are one. Jesus is therefore the first and last just as those in Him are the seed of Abraham.
Col 1:19 - From the will of another. Whose fullness? - the one true God of course. The Father in Him. "Oneness"
John 1:18 - John stated "begotten" not the only unbegotten Son who came down from the Father's presence as the only such eyewitness.
John is stating that nature of the word which you continue to reject.
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
You continue to reject Gods own testimony concerning "His" Son. Jesus has to be God in some context. And the same and only one God the Father. Thats speaks of whose deity is found in Him in fullness. The Father. The eternal life found in the Son is the Father. Again they are one.
But about the Son he says,
“Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever;
a scepter of justice will be the scepter of your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;
therefore God, your God, has set you above your companions
by anointing you with the oil of joy
He also says,
“In the beginning, Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
11 They will perish, but you remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
12 You will roll them up like a robe;
like a garment they will be changed.
But you remain the same,
and your years will never end
All this IS to the glory of the Father. Not quite the same as Father, Son, Holy Spirit
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Our fellowship is with the Father and Son via the Spirit
That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2 The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We write this to make our[a] joy complete.
I have believe in and prayed to Jesus as far back as my memory goes with answers received from Him. I know HIM. How do you know Him? Do you ask things of Him as if He and the Father are one? Do you believe in that name? You don't want to come before Him, which at some point in the future will happen, and have Him state to you, "I don't know you"
You keep avoiding and dancing around the question
It is a simple statement of fact: the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation. Your unwillingness to acknowledge a simple statement of fact speaks volumes.
I went to scripture4all, and this is what it says for John 1.1:
Ton Theon = the God (just as I said)
YOUR OWN REFERENCES CONTRADICT YOU
It only shows up on the down loaded computer program.You keep avoiding and dancing around the question
It is a simple statement of fact: the scholarly consensus disagrees with your personal translation. Your unwillingness to acknowledge a simple statement of fact speaks volumes.
I went to scripture4all, and this is what it says for John 1.1:
Ton Theon = the God (just as I said)
YOUR OWN REFERENCES CONTRADICT YOU
If you truly believed in the "oneness" of Jesus and the Father then you can ask Him as if He and the Father are one for that judgment. I believe in that name and asked Him for that judgment and I know who He is from above and from the NT. Those who hold to the trinity, though I agree error is found in part, also believe in that name. The Spirit of the living God, the Father, leads us to Christ for our life. Any spirit that states don't pray or worship the Son is not from above. I have no need to win any debate but I state these things to you for your good hoping you can come to your senses and share that joy of fellowship and life found in the Son by the express will of the God and Father of Jesus.
After Jesus ascended to where He was before and sat down with His Father on His Fathers throne with everything made subject to "Him" then any word from Him would have to be received via prayer NOT when He was standing next to His disciples teaching them to pray as they could simply ask Him face to face.
Paul asked and received answers likewise I have also asked things of Him and received answers.
Therefore, in order to keep me from becoming conceited, I was given a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of Satan, to torment me. 8Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. 9But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.”
The Net Bible which Dr Daniel Wallace was one of the team on the translation. I contacted Dan via email about the use of He vs God and He stated the foot notes stated the reasoning in the "He"
1timothy 3
He was revealed in the flesh,
vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels,
proclaimed among Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory.
Oh brother!
footnotes
1timothy 3
He was revealed in the flesh,
vindicated by the Spirit,
seen by angels,
proclaimed among Gentiles,
believed on in the world,
taken up in glory.
Oh brother!
footnotes
- 1 Timothy 3:16 tc The Byzantine text along with a few other witnesses (א3 Ac C2 D2 Ψ [88] 1241 1505 1739 1881 M al vgms) read θεός (theos, “God”) for ὅς (hos, “who”). Most significant among these witnesses is 1739; the second correctors of some of the other mss tend to conform to the medieval standard, the Byzantine text, and add no independent voice to the textual problem. At least two mss have ὁ θεός (69 88), a reading that is a correction on the anarthrous θεός. On the other side, the masculine relative pronoun ὅς is strongly supported by א* A* C* F G 33 365 1175 Did Epiph. Significantly, D* and virtually the entire Latin tradition read the neuter relative pronoun, ὅ (ho, “which”), a reading that indirectly supports ὅς since it could not easily have been generated if θεός had been in the text. Thus, externally, there is no question as to what should be considered the Ausgangstext: The Alexandrian and Western traditions are decidedly in favor of ὅς. Internally, the evidence is even stronger. What scribe would change θεός to ὅς intentionally? “Who” is not only a theologically pale reading by comparison; it also is much harder (since the relative pronoun has no obvious antecedent, probably the reason for the neuter pronoun of the Western tradition). Intrinsically, the rest of 3:16, beginning with ὅς, appears to form a hymn with six strophes. As such, it is a text that is seemingly incorporated into the letter without syntactical connection. Hence, not only should we not look for an antecedent for ὅς (as is often done by commentators), but the relative pronoun thus is not too hard a reading (or impossible, as Dean Burgon believed). Once the genre is taken into account, the relative pronoun fits neatly into the author’s style (cf. also Col 1:15; Phil 2:6 for other places in which the relative pronoun begins a hymn, as was often the case in poetry of the day). On the other hand, with θεός written as a nomen sacrum, it would have looked very much like the relative pronoun: q-=s vs. os. Thus, it may have been easy to confuse one for the other. This, of course, does not solve which direction the scribes would go, although given their generally high Christology and the bland and ambiguous relative pronoun, it is doubtful that they would have replaced θεός with ὅς. How then should we account for θεός? It appears that sometime after the 2nd century the θεός reading came into existence, either via confusion with ὅς or as an intentional alteration to magnify Christ and clear up the syntax at the same time. Once it got in, this theologically rich reading was easily able to influence all the rest of the mss it came in contact with (including mss already written, such as א A C D). That this reading did not arise until after the 2nd century is evident from the Western reading, ὅ. The neuter relative pronoun is certainly a “correction” of ὅς, conforming the gender to that of the neuter μυστήριον (mustērion, “mystery”). What is significant in this reading is (1) since virtually all the Western witnesses have either the masculine or neuter relative pronoun, the θεός reading was apparently unknown to them in the 2nd century (when the “Western” text seems to have originated, though its place of origination was most likely in the east); they thus supply strong indirect evidence of ὅς outside of Egypt in the 2nd century; (2) even 2nd century scribes were liable to misunderstand the genre, feeling compelled to alter the masculine relative pronoun because it appeared to them to be too harsh. The evidence, therefore, for ὅς is quite compelling, both externally and internally. As TCGNT 574 notes, “no uncial (in the first hand) earlier than the eighth or ninth century (Ψ) supports θεός; all ancient versions presuppose ὅς or ὅ; and no patristic writer prior to the last third of the fourth century testifies to the reading θεός.” Thus, the cries of certain groups that θεός has to be original must be seen as special pleading. To argue that heretics tampered with the text here is self-defeating, for most of the Western fathers who quoted the verse with the relative pronoun were quite orthodox, strongly affirming the deity of Christ. They would have dearly loved such a reading as θεός. Further, had heretics introduced a variant to θεός, a far more natural choice would have been Χριστός (Christos, “Christ”) or κύριος (kurios, “Lord”), since the text is self-evidently about Christ, but it is not self-evidently a proclamation of his deity. (See ExSyn 341-42, for a summary discussion on this issue and additional bibliographic references.)tn Grk “who.”sn This passage has been typeset as poetry because many scholars regard this passage as poetic or hymnic. These terms are used broadly to refer to the genre of writing, not to the content. There are two broad criteria for determining if a passage is poetic or hymnic: “(a) stylistic: a certain rhythmical lilt when the passages are read aloud, the presence of parallelismus membrorum (i.e., an arrangement into couplets), the semblance of some metre, and the presence of rhetorical devices such as alliteration, chiasmus, and antithesis; and (b) linguistic: an unusual vocabulary, particularly the presence of theological terms, which is different from the surrounding context” (P. T. O’Brien, Philippians [NIGTC], 188-89). Classifying a passage as hymnic or poetic is important because understanding this genre can provide keys to interpretation. However, not all scholars agree that the above criteria are present in this passage, so the decision to typeset it as poetry should be viewed as a tentative decision about its genre.
The English form "Jesus" was not seen nor spoken until AFTER the year 1525...
when Sir William Tyndale, a Protestant Reformer from Oxford, England - INVENTED IT!
Christ name is Yahshua.
If Christ name is Jesus, then the word of God has failed.
Exodus 23:21
Pay attention to him and listen to what he says. Do not rebel against him; he will not forgive your rebellion, because my Name is in him.
John 17:11
I will remain in the world no longer, but they are still in the world, and I am coming to you. Holy Father, protect them by the power of your name—the name you gave me—so that they may be one as we are one.
Yahwah is the Father.
Yahshua is the Son.
Halleluyah