Is Jesus FULLY God & Praying

[Brother Mike]

The KJV seems to have clear evidence of the Divinity of Jesus whereas the other translations seems to not. What is the correct interpretation of these verses?

Don't get me wrong. I use the KJV, My Church believes in a form of Trinity doctrine (only Catholic, Southern Baptist, Methodist, Lutheran have released any Official statement) The King James Supported the Trinity Concept 100% and believed it so right to have changed a few words here or there to help it out some.

Some get mad about that but then I think if I would not do the same to help "Clarify" what I believed to be true. I was not in their shoes. So if you see a Trinity heavy Slant in the KJV, as opposed to other translations then that is why. Also remember there was a small war going on over the Trinity concept at the time from both Catholics and Protestants who did not believe in the Trinity concept. I was a real mess. The other issue was that the KJV scribes hated the Roman Doctrine and all the nonsense Rome put them though so there was also a big debate with Rome what to include and not to include. Hence we end up with the non cannon books thrown in which later were removed.

Blessings

Minke.

 

[Brother Mike]

All men are names manifest in the flesh. Jn. 17:6 'I have manifested thy name to the men whom thou gavest me out of the world.' Whose name did Jesus manifest? Jesus manifested the LORD's name. Who did the people see? The LORD's name.

Joh 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word.

Php_2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

Act_4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Acts is about healing. No other name given to be healed by.

We have his name now, Our authority is by inheritance that He gave His name for us to use.

The Trinity concept is a convoluted mess. I agree, However it's not the fault of the Word, but the fault of the way it was written. 1x1x1 = 1.............. Seriously, I would not hire you if you did Math that way.

1=part that is a person and fully God + 1= Part that is a person and fully God + 1=part that is a person Full God = 3 Gods.

I only counted the Father and Son called God, I have no idea where Trinity counts 3 of them, or even who the math genius was that came up with one. These were bible scholars though, not mathematicians. So to cover themselves they added "Mystery" of the Christian faith.

So, since Math escaped these great bible scholars Who also taught some amazing brilliant things that are right and very helpful. They added the Mystery part to all the Trinity Doctrines to cover up for the fact that can't add to save their own lives.

Blessings.

Mike.

 

[MarkT]

This simply cannot be the case. That would make the Father the Son and the Son the Father. But that would ignore the clear teaching of Scripture that the Son isn't, nor ever has been, the Father, and vice versa. It would completely ignore the very use of "Son" and "Father" and really make no sense.

It should also be said that nowhere in the Bible is it even alluded to that the Father's name is Jesus.

'Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me' 'While I was with them, I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11,12

If Jesus was given the Father's name, then the Father's name must be Jesus.

 

[MarkT]

There is a certain assumption going on here with regards to Pr 8:22. Many assume that it is referring to Jesus but there really is no reason to believe such. Proverbs is simply personifying wisdom and, significantly, is speaks of wisdom as being female, not male.

Say to wisdom, "You are my sister". Pr. 7:4 But wisdom is not the one speaking here. The one speaking is the workman, the one created at the beginning.

 

[Brother Mike]

'Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me' 'While I was with them, I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11,12

Mark brother, pay attention. I took the Angle you were taking and gave scriptures why we have the name of Jesus. It does not really pertain though to John 17:6 or 11

Joh 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Let me paraphrase this please.

Father God, keep these people in your own name, these people you have given me.
Read it carefully because you quoted the scripture like you were understanding it.

Joh 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which (The men you gave me) thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they (The ones you gave me) have kept thy word.

you said

Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me'

You switched a word around.

Mike.

 

[MarkT]

'Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me' 'While I was with them, I kept them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11,12

Mark brother, pay attention. I took the Angle you were taking and gave scriptures why we have the name of Jesus. It does not really pertain though to John 17:6 or 11

Joh 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

Let me paraphrase this please.

Father God, keep these people in your own name, these people you have given me.
Read it carefully because you quoted the scripture like you were understanding it.

Joh 17:6 I have manifested thy name unto the men which (The men you gave me) thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they (The ones you gave me) have kept thy word.

you said

Holy Father, keep them in thy name which thou hast given me'

You switched a word around.

Mike.

The RSV says, 'keep them in thy name, which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11 Also 'I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me' Jn. 17:12

 

[Brother Mike]

The RSV says, 'keep them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11 Also 'I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me' Jn. 17:12

I understand, but it's wrong. Try to find a point in the KJV, the KJV does support trinity doctrine where the RSV does not but nobody will bust you out on your "Faulty" translations and you can make the point with no issues. This way you don't have to cover the translation your using and get to your point. When making a point I try to stick with the KJV just so I don't get accused of switching things to better make my point. It sort of sucks because other translations make the point a whole lot better, but I have learned to deal with it.

Free has tried to slide these other translations in on me, but he is new at trying to debate something so it's forgivable. The KJV does a real fine Job of sticking to the Greek. The YLT does a fine job also.

Blessings.

Mike.

 

[MarkT]

The RSV says, 'keep them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11 Also 'I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me' Jn. 17:12

I understand, but it's wrong. Try to find a point in the KJV, the KJV does support trinity doctrine where the RSV does not but nobody will bust you out on your "Faulty" translations and you can make the point with no issues. This way you don't have to cover the translation your using and get to your point. When making a point I try to stick with the KJV just so I don't get accused of switching things to better make my point. It sort of sucks because other translations make the point a whole lot better, but I have learned to deal with it.

Free has tried to slide these other translations in on me, but he is new at trying to debate something so it's forgivable. The KJV does a real fine Job of sticking to the Greek. The YLT does a fine job also.

Blessings.

Mike.

No it's not wrong, as Jesus said, 'even as we are one'. One name.

 

[Free]

There is a certain assumption going on here with regards to Pr 8:22. Many assume that it is referring to Jesus but there really is no reason to believe such. Proverbs is simply personifying wisdom and, significantly, is speaks of wisdom as being female, not male.

Say to wisdom, "You are my sister". Pr. 7:4 But wisdom is not the one speaking here. The one speaking is the workman, the one created at the beginning.

Context, context, context. Don't forget about the rest of Proverbs:

Pro 1:20 Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; (ESV)

Right from the start Wisdom is referred to as "she."

 

[MarkT]

There is a certain assumption going on here with regards to Pr 8:22. Many assume that it is referring to Jesus but there really is no reason to believe such. Proverbs is simply personifying wisdom and, significantly, is speaks of wisdom as being female, not male.

Say to wisdom, "You are my sister". Pr. 7:4 But wisdom is not the one speaking here. The one speaking is the workman, the one created at the beginning.

Context, context, context. Don't forget about the rest of Proverbs:

Pro 1:20 Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; (ESV)

Right from the start Wisdom is referred to as "she."

So? Why don't you heed her? The proverbs also contain knowledge and understanding. The part I am referring to is the master workman. It says the LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.

 

[MarkT]

The RSV says, 'keep them in thy name which thou hast given me.' Jn. 17:11 Also 'I kept them in thy name, which thou hast given me' Jn. 17:12

I understand, but it's wrong. Try to find a point in the KJV, the KJV does support trinity doctrine where the RSV does not but nobody will bust you out on your "Faulty" translations and you can make the point with no issues. This way you don't have to cover the translation your using and get to your point. When making a point I try to stick with the KJV just so I don't get accused of switching things to better make my point. It sort of sucks because other translations make the point a whole lot better, but I have learned to deal with it.

Free has tried to slide these other translations in on me, but he is new at trying to debate something so it's forgivable. The KJV does a real fine Job of sticking to the Greek. The YLT does a fine job also.

Blessings.

Mike.

The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying. The RSV was published in 1952. That was before the rebellion of the 60s. I wouldn't trust anything published after that.

 

[Brother Mike]

The King James Version of the New Testament was based upon a Greek text that was marred by mistakes, containing the accumulated errors of fourteen centuries of manuscript copying. The RSV was published in 1952. That was before the rebellion of the 60s. I wouldn't trust anything published after that.

Wow!!! OK Mark thank you for sharing that wonderful Insight. I have no further questions, I think you have just answered any I might have asked.

God bless.
Mike.

 

[Elijah674]

Well before Adam & Eve were even.. 'was brought forth', we see God talking with another [as two]. (all angels are spirits!)
So there was NO SIN as of yet.

Gen. 1:2
[26] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: ... '

I suggest that one start from here for proof of such a thing!

--Elijah

 

[reba]

Back to topic this thread is not about Bible versions thanks Moderator

 

[Free]

There is a certain assumption going on here with regards to Pr 8:22. Many assume that it is referring to Jesus but there really is no reason to believe such. Proverbs is simply personifying wisdom and, significantly, is speaks of wisdom as being female, not male.

Say to wisdom, "You are my sister". Pr. 7:4 But wisdom is not the one speaking here. The one speaking is the workman, the one created at the beginning.

Context, context, context. Don't forget about the rest of Proverbs:

Pro 1:20 Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; (ESV)

Right from the start Wisdom is referred to as "she."

So? Why don't you heed her? The proverbs also contain knowledge and understanding. The part I am referring to is the master workman. It says the LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.

Yes, I know what part you are referring to. Let's go back to your initial argument, which is what I was addressing:

"Or the WORD was 'Jesus', the Father's real name. He was the workman. Is the CC willing to confer personhood on the workman even though he was created? Pr. 8:22 'The LORD created me at the beginning of his work.'"

My point is that not only is Proverbs merely personifying wisdom, so that alone means it isn't likely referring to Jesus, but that wisdom is always thought of as female. Not to mention you are ignoring who "the workman" is:

Pro 8:12 "I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion. (ESV)

That very workman is wisdom personified.

So the likelihood of the workman in Proverbs 8:22 being Jesus is slim to none. The case is just too weak.

 

[MarkT]

Context, context, context. Don't forget about the rest of Proverbs:

Pro 1:20 Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; (ESV)

Right from the start Wisdom is referred to as "she."

So? Why don't you heed her? The proverbs also contain knowledge and understanding. The part I am referring to is the master workman. It says the LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.

Yes, I know what part you are referring to. Let's go back to your initial argument, which is what I was addressing:

"Or the WORD was 'Jesus', the Father's real name. He was the workman. Is the CC willing to confer personhood on the workman even though he was created? Pr. 8:22 'The LORD created me at the beginning of his work.'"

My point is that not only is Proverbs merely personifying wisdom, so that alone means it isn't likely referring to Jesus, but that wisdom is always thought of as female. Not to mention you are ignoring who "the workman" is:

Pro 8:12 "I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion. (ESV)

That very workman is wisdom personified.

So the likelihood of the workman in Proverbs 8:22 being Jesus is slim to none. The case is just too weak.

Solomon, inspired by the Holy Spirit says, wisdom will come into your heart, Say to wisdom, "You are my sister," and call insight your intimate friend. Does not wisdom call, does not understanding raise her voice?

It's the Holy Spirit saying those things. The Spirit is not saying wisdom was created in the beginning. Wisdom is not saying the LORD created me in the beginning. The words given to Solomon are words inspired by the Spirit of God, the Counsellor. Where does the Counsellor lead us? He leads us to the beginning. So go back to the beginning. What did God create in the beginning? What was his first act? The light. Jesus said He was the light.

 

[Sparkey]

Jesus said He was the light.

Jesus said, "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture."

Jesus had been confronted by the Pharisees and showed them how they were denying themselves access to the Father and to heaven when they denied Him. In much the same manner, Jesus has also instructed that He, Himself, is the Light. The implication that Jesus was created when the symbol he used to illustrate his position and function (light) was made does not follow and may not be forced.

Jesus also called himself the "Good Shepherd" and said that the good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. That does not mean that the Word was not with God before the beginning of time, nor does it mean that all things created were not created by Him. Colossians 1:16-17

 

[Eugene]

What did God create in the beginning? What was his first act? The light. Jesus said He was the light.

Can you expound on this a bit? Are you saying that Jesus was created? Genesis 1:3. "And God said, Let there be light: and there was light."
Revelation 21:22-23 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. 23 And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof.

I read Genesis 1:1 that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and according to Isaiah 45:18 it was made inhabitable prior to Genesis 1:2. Isaiah 45:18 For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD (Jehovah); and there is none else.
John 1:3-5 All things were made by Him (Jesus); and without Him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

 

[Free]

Context, context, context. Don't forget about the rest of Proverbs:

Pro 1:20 Wisdom cries aloud in the street, in the markets she raises her voice; (ESV)

Right from the start Wisdom is referred to as "she."

So? Why don't you heed her? The proverbs also contain knowledge and understanding. The part I am referring to is the master workman. It says the LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old.

Yes, I know what part you are referring to. Let's go back to your initial argument, which is what I was addressing:

"Or the WORD was 'Jesus', the Father's real name. He was the workman. Is the CC willing to confer personhood on the workman even though he was created? Pr. 8:22 'The LORD created me at the beginning of his work.'"

My point is that not only is Proverbs merely personifying wisdom, so that alone means it isn't likely referring to Jesus, but that wisdom is always thought of as female. Not to mention you are ignoring who "the workman" is:

Pro 8:12 "I, wisdom, dwell with prudence, and I find knowledge and discretion. (ESV)

That very workman is wisdom personified.

So the likelihood of the workman in Proverbs 8:22 being Jesus is slim to none. The case is just too weak.

Solomon, inspired by the Holy Spirit says, wisdom will come into your heart, Say to wisdom, "You are my sister," and call insight your intimate friend. Does not wisdom call, does not understanding raise her voice?

It's the Holy Spirit saying those things. The Spirit is not saying wisdom was created in the beginning. Wisdom is not saying the LORD created me in the beginning. The words given to Solomon are words inspired by the Spirit of God, the Counsellor. Where does the Counsellor lead us? He leads us to the beginning. So go back to the beginning. What did God create in the beginning? What was his first act? The light. Jesus said He was the light.

The Counselor "leads us to the beginning" (I'd like to see you prove this somehow, especially in the exclusive sense in which you are saying it), where God created the light and, therefore, because Jesus said he was the light (he said he was quite a few things), that that means he was the light God created in the beginning? Goodness, no. That is just proof-texting. You are making connections where there aren't any and ignoring ample Scripture in doing so.

We simply cannot say that because Jesus said he was the light, that therefore he was the light God created in the beginning. There simply is no basis for doing so.

The better rendering of Pr 8:22 is that of "possessing," not "creating." In other words, God possessed wisdom from the beginning. To say that wisdom was created, God's first act of creation, would mean that he was without wisdom prior to creating.

Too many problems with this position and it really doesn't line up with what Scripture says.

 

[Free]

Free has tried to slide these other translations in on me, but he is new at trying to debate something so it's forgivable.

Firstly, why the personal attack? And why a personal attack that is so utterly baseless and presumptuous? An observant person would notice that I've been here for 10 years and am approaching 10,000 posts. A person who wasn't so presumptuous would first ask how long I've been debating such things and find out that I've been debating even longer than I've been here. I strongly suggest you begin to debate civilly and properly.


Secondly, I have never "slid translations in on you," which I take to mean that I am somehow switching translation to get a favourable reading. The first time you accused me of this I made it clear that I have been consistent in the translation I use, the ESV, which is one of the best, most accurate translations out there.


Thirdly, it doesn't matter the translation I use as I can likely prove my points with any of them because of their high degree of agreement. And as far as translations go, the best meaning and understanding is going to be derived from using many translations.