John 5:18, answering a big question.

Jordan Kurecki said:

You cannot use the rules of proper English grammar and say that it refers sentences before to Jesus, you are ignoring simple english grammar.

as to the cherry picking of bible translations:

Acts 20:28 God's blood - Another King James Bible Believer

Click to expand...

Jordan Kurecki said:

You cannot use the rules of proper English grammar and say that it refers sentences before to Jesus, you are ignoring simple english grammar.

Mike is my son and he loves you very much and is sad because you have have broken the law and have to pay a fine. You need to start being more careful to obey the law because your father is very upset about it, and he paid your fine.

If I you read the preceding paragraph you would never say the "he" of "he paid your fine" was referring back to Mike, yet that is exactly what you are trying to do.


Acts 20:28 God's blood - Another King James Bible Believer

the translation you chose to pick is translated from a corrupt text and is not an accurate translation, it is based on faulty scholarship as the above link points to.

Click to expand...

angellous_evangellous said:

Do you believe that the Gospel of John exists, along with the Synoptics and 2,000 years of interpretative history?

Click to expand...

angellous_evangellous said:

It's very simple:

1) The statements used by modern Christians to establish the divinity of Christ do not actually establish the deity of Christ

2) Because the Scriptures do not establish the divinity of Christ, modern Christians must rely on much, much later theology to interpret these verses. Most modern Christians simply use material produced by living theologians who rely on theology from 400CE to today.

3) The doctrine of the divinity of Christ is not in Scripture - it is the product of 400 years of theological debate in the church. The debate itself establishes the lack of clarity in the Scripture.

4) When you read the Scripture, you are bringing in assumptions from a much later interpretative tradition that did not exist until at least 400 years after the Scripture was written.

It's not a complex argument.

Click to expand...

Ingledsva said:

Read in context. He is talking about God, and about Jesus. Obviously he does not consider them the same in this book.

Act 20:21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Act 20:24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received from the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

There are bibles that translate that ending to mean - his own kin/son.

(LEB) Act 20:28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock among which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which he obtained through the blood of his own (Son.)

*

Click to expand...

Muffled said:

I believe this is not obvious from the text. Say that a verse says that God is holy and merciful. Obviously God is not made twain by the "and."

Click to expand...

Jordan Kurecki said:

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace

Click to expand...

Yeshe Dondrub said:

We had to learn Old studies from Hebrew (yes Buddhist do this) to understand religions.

Hebrew transcripts:

Therefore, my Lord Himself will give you a sign; Behold, the maiden will become pregnant and bear a son, and she will name him Immanuel. (Virgin was used in translation later by mistranslation)

For a child has been born to us, a son has been given us. And authority has settled on his shoulders. He has been named (and knows) “The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler”—

Which is the full unedited text.

and continues explaining the child who is the descendant of direct descendant of David.

In token of abundant authority And of peace without limit Upon David’s Throne and kingdom, That it may be firmly established In justice and equity Now and evermore. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts Shall bring this to pass.

However Jewish prophecy doesn't seem met in some terms.

same being, no. Same in reflection of quality, yes.

Seems reflective of a student/guru relationship.

however reflect it how it helps you in a positive way.

Click to expand...

Yeshe Dondrub said:

We had to learn Old studies from Hebrew (yes Buddhist do this) to understand religions.

Hebrew transcripts:

Therefore, my Lord Himself will give you a sign; Behold, the maiden will become pregnant and bear a son, and she will name him Immanuel. (Virgin was used in translation later by mistranslation)

For a child has been born to us, a son has been given us. And authority has settled on his shoulders. He has been named (and knows) “The Mighty God is planning grace; The Eternal Father, a peaceable ruler”—

Which is the full unedited text.

and continues explaining the child who is the descendant of direct descendant of David.

In token of abundant authority And of peace without limit Upon David’s Throne and kingdom, That it may be firmly established In justice and equity Now and evermore. The zeal of the LORD of Hosts Shall bring this to pass.

However Jewish prophecy doesn't seem met in some terms.

same being, no. Same in reflection of quality, yes.

Seems reflective of a student/guru relationship.

however reflect it how it helps you in a positive way.

Click to expand...

Ingledsva said:

Also, this is talking about Isaiah's son Emmanuel, not some future Jesus.

Isaiah received his call from God in the Temple at Jerusalem. God tells him to go in to the virgin/maiden/prophetess, there.

Isa 2:1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

Isa 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

Isa 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin (maiden) shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isa 8:1 Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.

Isa 8:2 And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.

Isa 8:3 And I (Isaiah) went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.

Isa 8:8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.


Isa 8:18 Behold, I (Isaiah) and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

*

Click to expand...

Ingledsva said:

Also, this is talking about Isaiah's son Emmanuel, not some future Jesus.

Isaiah received his call from God in the Temple at Jerusalem. God tells him to go in to the virgin/maiden/prophetess, there.

Isa 2:1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

Isa 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD'S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.

Isa 2:3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.

Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin (maiden) shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Isa 8:1 Moreover the LORD said unto me, Take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning Mahershalalhashbaz.

Isa 8:2 And I took unto me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.

Isa 8:3 And I (Isaiah) went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the LORD to me, Call his name Mahershalalhashbaz.

Isa 8:8 And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel.


Isa 8:18 Behold, I (Isaiah) and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts, which dwelleth in mount Zion.

*

Click to expand...

Ingledsva said:

LOL! Dude I went back to the Greek and translated it. YOU take one sentence out of context.

And AGAIN - verses 21 - 28 make it very plain the God and Jesus are separate characters.

Act 20:21 Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

Act 20:24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received from the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

Act 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

There are bibles that translate that ending to mean - his own kin/son.

"AIMA" translated "blood" also means KIN - kindred - kin's blood, - and it is obvious when kept in context - that is what it means!

(LEB) Act 20:28 Be on guard for yourselves and for all the flock among which the Holy Spirit has appointed you as overseers, to shepherd the church of God, which he obtained through the blood of his own (Son.)

*

Click to expand...

Yeshe Dondrub said:

Jordon, Jewish scholars, as well as non-biast scholars, as well as comparative religion scholars, know that the translation was not Virgin but Maiden. The Greco twist came into effect after to support rising soon to be Christian ideals within rome.

Jewish Publication Society (JPS)
Assuredly, my Lord will give you a sign of His own accord! Look, the young woman is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel.

Scroll Tanach
Therefore, my Lord Himself will give you a sign; Behold, the maiden will become pregnant and bear a son, and she will name him Immanuel.

This is the correct original form. It is the true Hebrew form. Not Greco, which was later translated, retranslated, the virgin aspect was after Christian faith interpretations and is not original Jewish acceptance.

Jewish interpreters reject this interpretation of Isaiah 7:14 with several points, they see Isaiah 7:14 referring to a sign during the time of Ahaz, demonstrating before the child has the knowledge, to refuse “Wrong and right” the two kings of Israel and Syria will be destroyed. They say this is a near term sign, and does not refer to the Messiah.

Isaiah is not talking about a virgin, Matthew incorrectly translated the Hebrew word, hml[ `almah as virgin. The word means “Young maiden” and not virgin.

Click to expand...

disciple said:

The 'Judaism' you are referencing is not applicable as a standard to judge Xian belief. 'Jesus' for Xians is Deific, He literally is the manifestation of God. You're mixing up religious beliefs and pretending it's relevant. It isn't.

Click to expand...

Jordan Kurecki said:

There is no such thing as "THE GREEK"
There are two different streams of Greek texts that bibles are translated from.

there is what we would call the "Received Text" or "Textus Receptus" or the steams of texts from the reformation period.

and then there what is called the "Critical Text" which comes from 1881 when Wescott and Hort put out a new critical edition of the Greek New Testament.

Here is the text from the Textus Receptus (The more accurate text and the one traditionally used by churches throughout history:

προσεχετε ουν εαυτοις και παντι τω ποιμνιω εν ω υμας το πνευμα το αγιον εθετο επισκοπους ποιμαινειν την εκκλησιαν του θεου ην περιεποιησατο δια του ιδιου αιματος

SYSTRANet – Online translation software and tools – Text translation translates it as :

be careful oyn eaytois and panti to poimnio en oymas the spirit saint etheto bishops poimaine in the church of god in periepoiisatovia thesameblood

Here is the text from the Critical Text of Wescott and Hort, which im guessing you probably translated from it. or one of it's predecessors like the USB or Nestle Aland text:

προσεχετε εαυτοις και παντι τω ποιμνιω εν ω υμας το πνευμα το αγιον εθετο επισκοπους ποιμαινειν την εκκλησιαν του θεου ην περιεποιησατο δια του αιματος του ιδιου

the translation of this text is pretty funny actually:

be careful oyn eaytois and panti to poimnio en oymas the spirit saint etheto bishops poimaine in the church of god in periepoiisatovia via the blood of himself

Doesn't seem to support what you were saying.

Could you please post "The Greek" that you translated from? Again there is no such thing as "The Greek" whenever you refer back to "The Greek" you must specify what Greek text you translated it from, whether it be the T.R. of Scrivener, the Critical Text of Wescott and Hort, the United Bible Soceities/ Nestle Aland..etc.

Click to expand...

disciple said:

The 'Judaism' you are referencing is not applicable as a standard to judge Xian belief. 'Jesus' for Xians is Deific, He literally is the manifestation of God. You're mixing up religious beliefs and pretending it's relevant. It isn't.

Click to expand...

Jordan Kurecki said:

New Evidence of Messianic Nature of Isaiah 7:14

But there is newer evidence which has not been sufficiently
noticed. According to the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 99a),
Hillel, the great teacher of the time of Christ, said "There will
be no Messiah for Israel, because they already had him in the days
of Hezekiah."28 Also, Johanan B. Zakkai, according to Talmus,
Berakoth 28b, said: "Prepare a throne for Hezekiah, king of
Judah, who is coming." A fine Jewish scholar, Samson Levey29
comments "Johanan's statement is especially significant, for it
was he who salvaged what little he could in 70 C.E." That was
after the destruction of the Temple, a traumatic event for all
Jews. Levey also observes, in his comment on the Targum Jonathan
to Isaiah 9:5, that the use of tenses in the targum as compared
with the Hebrew makes us suspect that the writer of the targum had
Hezekiah in mind as the Messiah30 _ which incidentally is an
indication of a rather early date for the targum, since the view
that Hezekiah had been the Messiah was dropped later on. Since
later the Jews dropped the idea that Hezekiah was the Messiah:
the Talmud, Sanhedrin 99a cites Rabbi Joseph as pointing out it
could not be Hezekiah, since Zechariah 9:9, after the time of
Hezekiah, still foretold a Messiah as to come in the future.

from http://www.ewtn.com/library/SCRIPTUR/FR92203.TXT

Click to expand...

Jordan Kurecki said:

of course we could always go to John chapter 1:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:14 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.

I put the greek in for both of these verses into google translator and this is what came up:

"In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God, and God was the Word

And the Word became flesh and eskinosen in us and etheasametha his glory glory as of the only begotten father full of grace and truth"

the word (Jesus) became flesh and dwelt among us, and the word if God, the word was in the begin with God in his Deity, this expresses the union of Christ as the son and the Father in Eternity past.

You can deny Jesus is God if you want, but to argue that the plain teachings of the bible says he isn't is just mental gymnastics, the only way you can look at the scriptures and deny the teaching that Christ is deity, is to read it with presupposition that he is not and to then go and look to scholars with itching ears that have incorrect or dishonest scholarship.

Click to expand...