"What Jesus REALLY meant was ...."

[John1.12]

LDS Christians believe in Jesus Christ, have faith (trust) in Him.

Why then do you deny they are saved?

If i said I believed in Muhammed as God's final and foremost Prophet and that it is indeed ' Allah ' who is God . But behind this i Muhammed to me was a Russian, and that Allah had a mother Goddess who birthed Muhammed ,literally. And that salvation was by standing on your head every Wednesday, by an act of faith. Would any Muslim consider me to be a Muslim ?

 

[John1.12]

Even if you talk only about Jesus himself and about Israel, you can still make up all kinds of stuff that has nothing to do with what Jesus was really saying. And that is exactly what they did. But for you it suffices to follow the Christian teachings and the Christian Church since you are not interested in knowing that original Jesus.

Jesus said: 9 10 Unto you it has been given to know the secrets of the Rule of God; but to the rest through parables, so that looking they may not perceive; and hearing they may not understand.

Yes that verse is specifically addressing THOSE pharisees/ Scribes / unbelieving Jews . Prior to the cross. This is the context.

 

[Soapy]

I don't need to play the greek game. I trust the KJV and the ' greek ' where the KJV comes from.

So you are not willing to see the truth? Does it scare you that much?

‘Great is the mystery of godliness...

• ‘Hos ἐφανερώθη en sarki’

‘He was revealed in the flesh’

The word ‘Theos’ (God) does not appear in the verse nor can it be inferred from the rest of the verse. The verse refers to the messiah that was prophesied BY GOD.

But didn’t I see you in a discussion that revolved around Greek Kione translations or some such somewhere in this thread?

 

[John1.12]

So you are not willing to see the truth? Does it scare you that much?

‘Great is the mystery of godliness...

• ‘Hos ἐφανερώθη en sarki’

‘He was revealed in the flesh’

The word ‘Theos’ (God) does not appear in the verse nor can it be inferred from the rest of the verse. The verse refers to the messiah that was prophesied BY GOD.

But didn’t I see you in a discussion that revolved around Greek Kione translations or some such somewhere in this thread?

Now try 'the greek ' from which the KJV used.

 

[John1.12]

KJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
NKJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.
Translations for 1Ti 3:16
KJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
NKJV
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

God was manifested in the flesh,
Justified in the Spirit,
Seen by angels,
Preached among the Gentiles,
Believed on in the world,
Received up in glory.
NLT
Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith:
Christ was revealed in a human body
and vindicated by the Spirit.
He was seen by angels
and announced to the nations.
He was believed in throughout the world
and taken to hea
DBY
And confessedly the mystery of piety is great. God has been manifested in flesh, has been justified in the Spirit, has appeared to angels, has been preached among the nations, has been believed on in the world, has been received up in glory.
HNV
Without controversy, the mystery of godliness is great: God was revealed in the flesh, Justified in the spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, And received up in glory.
RSV
Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of our religion: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.
YLT
and, confessedly, great is the secret of piety -- God was manifested in flesh, declared righteous in spirit, seen by messengers, preached among nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory!
WEB
And without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[John1.12]

So you are not willing to see the truth? Does it scare you that much?

‘Great is the mystery of godliness...

• ‘Hos ἐφανερώθη en sarki’

‘He was revealed in the flesh’

The word ‘Theos’ (God) does not appear in the verse nor can it be inferred from the rest of the verse. The verse refers to the messiah that was prophesied BY GOD.

But didn’t I see you in a discussion that revolved around Greek Kione translations or some such somewhere in this thread?

What you've done is read from a modern translation which comes from a different source to the Kjv and others . I do not rely or trust the so called ' modern and better ' translations .

 

[John1.12]

So you are not willing to see the truth? Does it scare you that much?

‘Great is the mystery of godliness...

• ‘Hos ἐφανερώθη en sarki’

‘He was revealed in the flesh’

The word ‘Theos’ (God) does not appear in the verse nor can it be inferred from the rest of the verse. The verse refers to the messiah that was prophesied BY GOD.

But didn’t I see you in a discussion that revolved around Greek Kione translations or some such somewhere in this thread?

Think about it . English is the dominate language today as was Greek back then ..This is one of reasons I believe God uses English Just fine . Out of all the English translations I believe the kjv is the best and most trust worthy translation .

 

[Soapy]

Why are you using human analogies to compare to God. God doesn't exist as we do .

Ummm... What do you mean???

I know that God is SPIRIT... isn’t it YOU who is saying that God procreated a Son in his own image and therefore that Son IS GOD because a Son has the same nature as his Father?

So which part of your false statement is not an analogy of humanity?

Yet we know that GOD DOES NOT PROCREATE. God only CREATES. So, if the son is an offspring, as you say, OF GOD and is not CREATED (because that would make him NOT GOD) then you must be speaking of a PROCREATION (as the Catholics claim... ‘God from very God’)

And a procreation is STILL A CREATION.

It appears clearer and clearer that you are floundering in your attempt to maintain the false belief now that you are seeing the truth.

Even the very words of Jesus Christ promising eternal life to those who believe in ‘The Only True God’, the Father, and that this ‘Only True God’ SENT HIM (John 17:3), still convinces you that Jesus Christ is that ‘Only True God’.

Trinity is Truly Treacherous Teaching.

 

[John1.12]

No, it is specifically addressing all those people who do not understand the teachings of Jesus and who have not been properly instructed to understand them.
But the Christian teachings are much easier to understand for you, so you can study those instead.
The saying is no longer in its original context in the narrative gospels, it has been put to another use, a Christian one.
So if you want to know what Jesus REALLY meant....
But I have a feeling you don't want to know and that is fine.

It doesn't say that does it ?

 

[Soapy]

What you've done is read from a modern translation which comes from a different source to the Kjv and others . I do not rely or trust the so called ' modern and better ' translations .

No, Barry... Why are you doing this? How are you refusing to look at the Greek that the translation comes from and yet claiming you know it is from a ‘later’ translation.

Further, have I not shown you that it makes no sense to say that:

• ‘God came in the flesh’

God, is at no time, said to ‘Come’ anywhere except poetically.

God sent ‘a man anointed with his holy spirit’ to deliver the testimony of himself, the Father.

This can be poeticly spoken of as ‘The Father coming to man’ but no one is going to say that that man delivering the testimony is ‘The Father’.

Jesus, again and again, repeatedly states that:

• The Father taught him
• The Father showed him
• The Father sent him
• The Father blessed him
• The Father is greater than he
• The Father is his God

Yet you say (effectively), ‘The Son is THE FATHER’.

Barry, I know you are having a laugh - but seriously, stop it!!! I can see from your responses that YOU DO recognise that your belief is not true. You just need to show it upfront here in this forum, in this thread.

Do you really have no fear of God Almighty?

Make note that if is Satan’s good pleasure that we should wrongly place the Heir to the throne of God on the throne of God - just as I put as an analogy to you!

 

[John1.12]

No, Barry... Why are you doing this? How are you refusing to look at the Greek that the translation comes from and yet claiming you know it is from a ‘later’ translation.

Further, have I not shown you that it makes no sense to say that:

• ‘God came in the flesh’

God, is at no time, said to ‘Come’ anywhere except poetically.

God sent ‘a man anointed with his holy spirit’ to deliver the testimony of himself, the Father.

This can be poeticly spoken of as ‘The Father coming to man’ but no one is going to say that that man delivering the testimony is ‘The Father’.

Jesus, again and again, repeatedly states that:

• The Father taught him
• The Father showed him
• The Father sent him
• The Father blessed him
• The Father is greater than he
• The Father is his God

Yet you say (effectively), ‘The Son is THE FATHER’.

Barry, I know you are having a laugh - but seriously, stop it!!! I can see from your responses that YOU DO recognise that your belief is not true. You just need to show it upfront here in this forum, in this thread.

Do you really have no fear of God Almighty?

Make note that if is Satan’s good pleasure that we should wrongly place the Heir to the throne of God on the throne of God - just as I put as an analogy to you!

Nope and I keep saying . I literally believe this verse as it says . There is no way round it .
15But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH .

 

[John1.12]

No, Barry... Why are you doing this? How are you refusing to look at the Greek that the translation comes from and yet claiming you know it is from a ‘later’ translation.

Further, have I not shown you that it makes no sense to say that:

• ‘God came in the flesh’

God, is at no time, said to ‘Come’ anywhere except poetically.

God sent ‘a man anointed with his holy spirit’ to deliver the testimony of himself, the Father.

This can be poeticly spoken of as ‘The Father coming to man’ but no one is going to say that that man delivering the testimony is ‘The Father’.

Jesus, again and again, repeatedly states that:

• The Father taught him
• The Father showed him
• The Father sent him
• The Father blessed him
• The Father is greater than he
• The Father is his God

Yet you say (effectively), ‘The Son is THE FATHER’.

Barry, I know you are having a laugh - but seriously, stop it!!! I can see from your responses that YOU DO recognise that your belief is not true. You just need to show it upfront here in this forum, in this thread.

Do you really have no fear of God Almighty?

Make note that if is Satan’s good pleasure that we should wrongly place the Heir to the throne of God on the throne of God - just as I put as an analogy to you!

Nope and I keep saying . I literally believe this verse as it says . There is no way round it .
15But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

16And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

GOD WAS MANIFEST IN THE FLESH .

There is absolutely nothing in the context of Colossians , that contradicts it . The whole point Paul is making is on who Jesus is .

 

[John1.12]

It has been moved out of context.
But this text is clearly referring to the original teachings of Jesus and Jesus is addressing his closest disciples who knew the meaning of all the sayings that follow this introduction.
But I no longer want to confuse you, please stick to one of the many Christian interpretations and ignore what I was trying to explain to you.

Thats called Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text.[1] It is often done to "prove" a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it.

I believe what the bible actually says and not " what Jesus REALLY meant was ...."

 

[John1.12]

No, Barry... Why are you doing this? How are you refusing to look at the Greek that the translation comes from and yet claiming you know it is from a ‘later’ translation.

Further, have I not shown you that it makes no sense to say that:

• ‘God came in the flesh’

God, is at no time, said to ‘Come’ anywhere except poetically.

God sent ‘a man anointed with his holy spirit’ to deliver the testimony of himself, the Father.

This can be poeticly spoken of as ‘The Father coming to man’ but no one is going to say that that man delivering the testimony is ‘The Father’.

Jesus, again and again, repeatedly states that:

• The Father taught him
• The Father showed him
• The Father sent him
• The Father blessed him
• The Father is greater than he
• The Father is his God

Yet you say (effectively), ‘The Son is THE FATHER’.

Barry, I know you are having a laugh - but seriously, stop it!!! I can see from your responses that YOU DO recognise that your belief is not true. You just need to show it upfront here in this forum, in this thread.

Do you really have no fear of God Almighty?

Make note that if is Satan’s good pleasure that we should wrongly place the Heir to the throne of God on the throne of God - just as I put as an analogy to you!

// Yet you say (effectively), ‘The Son is THE FATHER’.//
No this is your mind thinking this . This position is called ' Modalism ' and I believe its heretical.
The verse doesn't say " Father was manifested in the flesh "

 

[John1.12]

Indeed, that is what the Christian authors are doing: eisegesis. And that is the reason that their interpretations of the same sayings of Jesus differ from each other.
Exegeisis is when you try to interpret the saying in the way Jesus himself meant it.
You cannot believe in what the Bible was "actually saying" because the Christians who wrote the New Testament had many different ways of interpreting the words of Jesus.

And that is the reason why there is continual fighting on this forum between how those words of Jesus should be interpreted. The Christian authors don't agree, so how will you ever find the truth if you try to believe your Bible is speaking truth to you?
This also explains why there are so many types of churches in this world.

But your demonstrating not what Jesus says but what you think he REALLY means . You can make the bible say anything you want to with this approach.

 

[John1.12]

Indeed, that is what the Christian authors are doing: eisegesis. And that is the reason that their interpretations of the same sayings of Jesus differ from each other.
Exegeisis is when you try to interpret the saying in the way Jesus himself meant it.
You cannot believe in what the Bible was "actually saying" because the Christians who wrote the New Testament had many different ways of interpreting the words of Jesus.

And that is the reason why there is continual fighting on this forum between how those words of Jesus should be interpreted. The Christian authors don't agree, so how will you ever find the truth if you try to believe your Bible is speaking truth to you?
This also explains why there are so many types of churches in this world.

//Christian authors don't agree, // What do you mean by this ?

 

[Jane.Doe]

If i said I believed in Muhammed as God's final and foremost Prophet and that it is indeed ' Allah ' who is God . But behind this i Muhammed to me was a Russian, and that Allah had a mother Goddess who birthed Muhammed ,literally. And that salvation was by standing on your head every Wednesday, by an act of faith. Would any Muslim consider me to be a Muslim ?

No one is asking about Islam.

Now, if I’m understanding your beliefs correctly ( please correct any inaccuracies), you believe that in order to be saved, a person must:
1) have faith in God +
2) have a correct understanding of God.

Is that accurate?

 

[John1.12]

Indeed, that is what the Christian authors are doing: eisegesis. And that is the reason that their interpretations of the same sayings of Jesus differ from each other.
Exegeisis is when you try to interpret the saying in the way Jesus himself meant it.
You cannot believe in what the Bible was "actually saying" because the Christians who wrote the New Testament had many different ways of interpreting the words of Jesus.

And that is the reason why there is continual fighting on this forum between how those words of Jesus should be interpreted. The Christian authors don't agree, so how will you ever find the truth if you try to believe your Bible is speaking truth to you?
This also explains why there are so many types of churches in this world.

I said else where why there is some difference on interpretation and why so many denominations. It boils down to 'unbelief '. The less you believe the bible the further the interpretation becomes ( imo )

 

[John1.12]

No you cannot because after reconstruction the sayings are back in their original context and they form a coherent whole with a particular way of thought that you cannot make up (invent) yourself.
Unlike in their different contexts in the gospel stories where their content and meaning have clearly been changed by the Christian editors. If they had not been different from one author to the next you may have had a stronger case, now you clearly have no leg to stand on.

I can feel with you that you are trying to find a steady hold in the Bible but as far as the teachings of Jesus is concerned you will not find it.

edit: The Christian authors of Matthew and Luke don't agree on both the wording as well as the meaning (the explanation) of the same sayings. They have no respect for the original wording nor a proper understanding of the meaning of the original sayings.

The Authors are not trying to say the exact same thing in the Exact way . Why would God inspire that ?

 

[John1.12]

Yes, you are a fundamentalist Christian, that was clear from the start.
Logic and reasoning have no value to you, which is fine.
But I'm not writing all of this just for you.

Ahh the labels come out . Of course you use the term' fundamentalist ' as a shaming tactic , which possibly demonstrates your lack of understanding on this topic ?