Should You Believe In The Trinity?

[HisServant]

Oh please. Anything that has to do with Christ having a beginning is tied together. Why is it even spoken of if it wasn't important or true?

Because you are using a false or wrong definition to define something else.
You say A = B and B = C so therefore A = C. That is only true if A = B.
We keep telling you and you won't acknowledge that First born when referencing Jesus does not mean created. We keep telling you that Begotten when referencing Jesus does not mean created. Yet you insist and saying these 2 verses prove Jesus was created. And it does not because none of the verses say Jesus was created. That is the fault in your thinking and in your Bible study. They only tie in together when you realize that First born means position of Authority and begotten means he came from God and was not Created. Now tie them together to get a picture of who Jesus is. One with All Authority from God and God Himself.

[HisServant]

If you are wrong , How do you think God will view you? You are getting to defensive because of the argument presented by the ones who don't believe in the trinity. No one is forcing you to participate in this thread.

Lets get back to the topic. In light of what First born and begotten mean, since we now have the definitions from the original language, do you care to comment on what Col. 1:15 means?

[HisServant]

Do us a favor and read.

Col chapter 1

Rev chapter 3

You totally take things out of context. He had a begininng before he came to the earth.

What is the definiton of first born? it does not mean created.

[HisServant]

It amazes me they don't know the meaning of first born nor only begotten.

Angry are you serious? CTG speaks greek. You are telling him he does not know what a greek word means. :rolleyes:

Yet you will gladly run to him or Harmoinious when the definition of a word suits you theology. That is hypocracy.

CTG and I have differences is some areas but not in what things mean. Only in how they are applied or in differences of Faith. I do however submit myself to him when it comes to a difiniton of a greek word. That is not an area I know anything about without researching. It is however his native language. Would you argue with a Jewish person over the meaning of a word when they speak the language and you don't?

[Warrior4God]

I am not seeing the problem ya,ll are having here,I think it may be that both sides of the issue may have a point but I cant see where,beginning or begotten is relevant to the fact that Jesus was born and that he was the beginning of the church of his body,the church that he is head over and the church he created.
Apples and oranges,now where have I heard that before,just kidding sounded funny

[DRS]

Protecting one's country from a megalomaniac world conqueror hardly qualifies as "returning evil for evil", for cryin out loud!

It is no different than defending your home from an invader who wants to do you, and your family, harm.

There is a big difference between reacting to a person in your home when you have no chance of escape and going into another country and killing thousands of innocent people who just happen to live there.

Hardly that love that identifies one as Christian to kill another person who shares your faith.

[Angryamerican]

In all honesty you don't want to see the truth. You continue to hold onto a fasle belief of Christ being created even though I have shown you, CTG and others have stated the same. The terms being used in relation to Christ in the original language do not mean created. It denotes that He always existed and came into being as man when God chose to do so. The Logos always was, always will be. He is not created but always was with God and is God. He is not a created being. First born denotes position of Authority. Begotten speaks not of physical birth but of the fact that He at one point became a seperate entity (if you will) from God the Father. Again the terms never never ever denotes a created person. once you get past understanding that He is not created the verses will take on another meaning and you will see based on scripture who Jesus is.

You have not shown that spin miester.

[DRS]

Um . . . I believe, you have misquoted the verse and changed its meaning.

Col 1:16

KJV
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

NIV
For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him.

NASB
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things have been created through Him and for Him.


So, "All Things" were created by Jesus, NOT all OTHER things as the NWT mistranslates. Christ is not a "thing". He created all things.

So you wish to say Jesus created himself?

[DRS]

What is the definiton of first born? it does not mean created.

First born for Jesus covers 3 things, firstborn from the dead, his position as a the great prince(his rule is called princely) and his place as the first creation.

[Angryamerican]

Protecting one's country from a megalomaniac world conqueror hardly qualifies as "returning evil for evil", for cryin out loud!

It is no different than defending your home from an invader who wants to do you, and your family, harm.

If what you were saying is true why Didn't Christ conquer rome and clear Israel of their enemies?

I think if he was ok with war he would have done so.

The only war he will be apart of is judgment day.

[Angryamerican]

DRS it shows ones ignorance when the insist on using terms they don't understand even after it has been pointed out. So I can only come to a couple of conclusions. 1 you don't understand what begotten means. 2 you understand but your pride cannot let you say oh I am wrong. 3 you don't really care about the truth you like being a JW whether your theology is wrong or not is not the point.

So lets eliminate point 1. Begotten

Another objection might be based on the word “firstborn,” prototokos in Greek. The problem again is that the Greek word is not identical in semantic range to the English rendering. The English “firstborn” usually (though, it must be said, not always) implies the existence of subsequent children, but with prototokos there is no such implication. In Hebrews 1:6, for example, the use of prototokos in reference to the Incarnation of the Word of God cannot mean that there is a “second-born” Word of God! Nowhere is the term used to express merely the order of birth; instead in Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:15, 18, Hebrews 11:28 and 12:23, and Revelation 1:5, the title is applied to Jesus as the privileged and legal Heir of the Kingdom, attesting that He is truly “first in all things.” To the contemporary ear, a better translation might indeed be “heir,” which is similarly silent on the subject of other children and carries the same legal and poetic force that is intended by “firstborn.”

The Greek word for '(only) begotten' is 'monogenes'.
'Mono' translates 'single, unique, sole, singular' and speaks of nature, not birth.
'Genes' (genos) translates clan, offspring, house, genus, class, kind, family, progeny, sort, species, direct/collateral descent, tribe, race, stock, kin, and speaks of nature, not source.

In both words, we see that reference is to nature. Jesus was God in nature (homoousios - being of one substance); not to be confused with the idea of 'homoiousious' (being of a similar substance; being like the Father in substance only, but not in nature). If we look again at the example of Abraham and Isaac, we see that Isaac became Abraham's 'only-begotten son' through birth. This means that, at some time, Isaac wasn't 'only-begotten' since he wouldn't have been born. Jesus never became because Jesus had always been - Jesus IS. We have only to read of Jesus identifying Himself with the Godhead in John 8:58 where He speaks of Himself as the "I am"; a direct reference to Exodus 3:14, identifying Himself totally with God in substance and nature. Benjamin Warfield, stated in his work "The Person and Work of Christ" (p56) that, "The adjective 'only-begotten' conveys the ideas, not of derivation and subordination, but of uniqueness and consubstantiality: Jesus is all that God is, and He alone is this."


Now go to each of the verses in question. You will see when it talks about Jesus being first born is says prototokos. When it says Jesus is begotten the word is monogenes.

When it refers to others these words are not used.

So we can continue to discuss col 1:15, Phil 2:6, Rev 3:15 John 1:1, John 3:16 and the other verses as long as we use these definitions for firstborn and begotten. Otherwise we are never going to come to an agreement on what scripture says because you are using the wrong meaning and thus change the thought and intent of the verse in question.

So now what do you say in relation to Jesus First born and Begotten mean?

It has been shown the meaning of the words you keep bringing up.

But yet you still spin.

[DRS]

So now what do you say in relation to Jesus First born and Begotten mean?

I go into the whole bible, Proverbs where Jesus creation is pointed out. Then I go into the fact that Paul draws the paralell between Jesus and Issac both sons, though who promises come.

Jesus is also called only begotten before coming to Earth, and Jesus is called the only begotten god, are you going to say that this term makes higher than the Father?

[Angryamerican]

Because you are using a false or wrong definition to define something else.
You say A = B and B = C so therefore A = C. That is only true if A = B.
We keep telling you and you won't acknowledge that First born when referencing Jesus does not mean created. We keep telling you that Begotten when referencing Jesus does not mean created. Yet you insist and saying these 2 verses prove Jesus was created. And it does not because none of the verses say Jesus was created. That is the fault in your thinking and in your Bible study. They only tie in together when you realize that First born means position of Authority and begotten means he came from God and was not Created. Now tie them together to get a picture of who Jesus is. One with All Authority from God and God Himself.

I have shown clearly what they mean. You just refuse to believe.

[Angryamerican]

Lets get back to the topic. In light of what First born and begotten mean, since we now have the definitions from the original language, do you care to comment on what Col. 1:15 means?

So what does that scripture mean?


The word image.

H646
אפד אפוד
'êphôd 'êphôd
ay-fode', ay-fode'
Second form is a rare form; probably of foreign derivation; a girdle; specifically the ephod or high priest’s shoulder piece; also generally an image: - ephod.

Invisible.

G517
ἀόρατος
aoratos
ah-or'-at-os
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G3707; invisible: - invisible (thing).

First-born.

H1060
בּכור
bekôr
bek-ore'
From H1069; firstborn; hence chief: - eldest (son), first-born (-ling).

Creation.

H1278
בּריאה
berîy'âh
ber-ee-aw'
Feminine from H1254; a creation, that is, a novelty: - new thing.

[Angryamerican]

What is the definiton of first born? it does not mean created.

ONE'S OLDEST CHILD.

[Angryamerican]

Angry are you serious? CTG speaks greek. You are telling him he does not know what a greek word means. :rolleyes:

Yet you will gladly run to him or Harmoinious when the definition of a word suits you theology. That is hypocracy.

CTG and I have differences is some areas but not in what things mean. Only in how they are applied or in differences of Faith. I do however submit myself to him when it comes to a difiniton of a greek word. That is not an area I know anything about without researching. It is however his native language. Would you argue with a Jewish person over the meaning of a word when they speak the language and you don't?

I posted what it meant in both hebrew and greek.

[Angryamerican]

What is the definiton of first born? it does not mean created.

No the word creation points to him being created.

[Warrior4God]

No the word creation points to him being created.

It must point to that as Rev 3:14 points to that

[Angryamerican]

It must point to that as Rev 3:14 points to that

I'm not sure why they can't see that.

Or keep saying that first-born & only - begotten doesn't mean what we are saying they mean.

I am taking my definitions from the KJV dictionary.

[Tucson Jim]

There is a big difference between reacting to a person in your home when you have no chance of escape and going into another country and killing thousands of innocent people who just happen to live there.

Hardly that love that identifies one as Christian to kill another person who shares your faith.

If you were attacked by a person of your faith who went nuts and started killing people, would you fight back?

Whether or not the guy pointing the rifle at me is a Presbyterian makes little difference. If he's following a Hitler, I don't believe God would have us lie down and let him kill us.

So, in my opinion, your whole point of view about this is flawed.

You say it is a "work of the flesh" to defend your country from dictators, tyrants and others who would do you and your family harm if not stopped.

I say it is a work of courage to oppose such evil.

If everyone thought like you, we'd all be speaking German or Russian right now (those of us left alive that is).

[DRS]

If you were attacked by a person of your faith who went nuts and started killing people, would you fight back?

Whether or not the guy pointing the rifle at me is a Presbyterian makes little difference. If he's following a Hitler, I don't believe God would have us lie down and let him kill us.

So, in my opinion, your whole point of view about this is flawed.

You say it is a "work of the flesh" to defend your country from dictators, tyrants and others who would do you and your family harm if not stopped.

I say it is a work of courage to oppose such evil.

If everyone thought like you, we'd all be speaking German or Russian right now (those of us left alive that is).


What does Romans say about taking a stand against the superior authorities?

[Tucson Jim]

So you wish to say Jesus created himself?

Of course not. The plain meaning is right before your eyes, but you cannot see.

Christ created all things. He is not therefore created, nor is He a thing.

He is the creator.

The Creator of the universe is God.

Jesus Is God.

[Tucson Jim]

If what you were saying is true why Didn't Christ conquer rome and clear Israel of their enemies?

All in good time, according to His perfect plan.

I think if he was ok with war he would have done so.

The only war he will be apart of is judgment day.

So is he "OK" with war or isn't He? You just totally contradicted yourself!!:))

[Angryamerican]

If you were attacked by a person of your faith who went nuts and started killing people, would you fight back?

Whether or not the guy pointing the rifle at me is a Presbyterian makes little difference. If he's following a Hitler, I don't believe God would have us lie down and let him kill us.

So, in my opinion, your whole point of view about this is flawed.

You say it is a "work of the flesh" to defend your country from dictators, tyrants and others who would do you and your family harm if not stopped.

I say it is a work of courage to oppose such evil.

If everyone thought like you, we'd all be speaking German or Russian right now (those of us left alive that is).

Was Jesus's point of view flawed?

No one said you don't have a right to protect yourself and your family.

If no one showed up at the fight there wouldn't be a fight.

I use to hold your view until i looked at the big picture.

We are to obey mans laws until they conflict with God's law.

If Israel went to war without the prophets ok they had it handed to them, But if they did as the prophets ordered they won convincingly because it came from God. But God is no longer doing that why?

[Tucson Jim]

No the word creation points to him being created.

Sure it does . . .:wall:

[Angryamerican]

Of course not. The plain meaning is right before your eyes, but you cannot see.

Christ created all things. He is not therefore created, nor is He a thing.

He is the creator.

The Creator of the universe is God.

Jesus Is God.

Sorry your info is flawed.

[Tucson Jim]

What does Romans say about taking a stand against the superior authorities?

Maniacal dictators from another country are not "superior authorities". They are trying to conquer and Kill.

A WHOLE different situation . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Was Jesus's point of view flawed?

No one said you don't have a right to protect yourself and your family.

If no one showed up at the fight there wouldn't be a fight.

I use to hold your view until i looked at the big picture.

We are to obey mans laws until they conflict with God's law.

If Israel went to war without the prophets ok they had it handed to them, But if they did as the prophets ordered they won convincingly because it came from God. But God is no longer doing that why?

Ooh, that's a tough one . . . let's see, because we are all supposed to be pacifists and let them kill us?

[Tucson Jim]

Sorry your info is flawed.


Right back Atcha Bubba!

[Angryamerican]

Sure it does . . .:wall:


Well i will just chalk it up to selective comprehension on your part.

[DRS]

Maniacal dictators from another country are not "superior authorities". They are trying to conquer and Kill.

A WHOLE different situation . . .

Superior authorities are superior authorites and are allowed to rule and for a Christian to stand against them is to stand against God's arangement.

[Angryamerican]

Maniacal dictators from another country are not "superior authorities". They are trying to conquer and Kill.

A WHOLE different situation . . .

You are suffering from paranoia.

And do you realize no Government is gonna change what has already been predicted by God?

[Angryamerican]

Ooh, that's a tough one . . . let's see, because we are all supposed to be pacifists and let them kill us?

What did you learn a new word?

When our enemies bring the fight to my country and my neighbors i will fight.

I am an ex soldier and i don't need your uninformed opinion.

[Angryamerican]

Ooh, that's a tough one . . . let's see, because we are all supposed to be pacifists and let them kill us?

Ok back up and give me your opinion of what Christ was like?


And then tell me what a Christian should be like?


If i remember right Christ was no part of the world. And he said his followers were no part of the world.

Define that for me?

[Angryamerican]

Ooh, that's a tough one . . . let's see, because we are all supposed to be pacifists and let them kill us?

What is a Christian?

G81
ἀδελφότης
adelphotēs
ad-el-fot'-ace
From G80; brotherhood (properly the feeling of brotherliness), that is, (the (Christian) fraternity: - brethren, brotherhood.

Chris·tian /ˈkrɪstʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kris-chuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith.
2. of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ: Spain is a Christian country.
3. of or pertaining to Christians: many Christian deaths in the Crusades.
4. exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.
5. decent; respectable: They gave him a good Christian burial.
6. human; not brutal; humane: Such behavior isn't Christian.
–noun
7. a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
8. a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian.
9. a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren.

at 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, He went up into a mountain. And when He had sat down, His disciples came to Him.
Mat 5:2 And He opened His mouth and taught them, saying,
Mat 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn! For they shall be comforted.
Mat 5:5 Blessed are the meek! For they shall inherit the earth.
Mat 5:6 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness! For they shall be filled.
Mat 5:7 Blessed are the merciful! For they shall obtain mercy.
Mat 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart! For they shall see God.
Mat 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers! For they shall be called the sons of God.
Mat 5:10 Blessed are they who have been persecuted for righteousness sake! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:11 Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for My sake.
Mat 5:12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for your reward in Heaven is great. For so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Mat 5:13 You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt loses its savor, with what shall it be salted? It is no longer good for anything, but to be thrown out and to be trodden underfoot by men.
Mat 5:14 You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
Mat 5:15 Nor do men light a lamp and put it under the grain-measure, but on a lampstand. And it gives light to all who are in the house.
Mat 5:16 Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in Heaven.
Mat 5:17 Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.
Mat 5:18 For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."
Mat 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be liable to the judgment. And whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the sanhedrin; but whoever shall say, Fool! shall be liable to be thrown into the fire of hell.
Mat 5:23 Therefore if you offer your gift on the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you,
Mat 5:24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Mat 5:25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are in the way with him; that the opponent not deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mat 5:26 Truly I say to you, You shall by no means come out from there until you have paid the last kodrantes.
Mat 5:27 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not commit adultery."
Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Mat 5:29 And if your right eye offends you, pluck it out and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand offends you, cut it off and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:31 It was also said, Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery.
Mat 5:33 Again, you have heard that it has been said to the ancients, "You shall not swear falsely, but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord."
Mat 5:34 But I say to you, Do not swear at all! Not by Heaven, because it is God's throne;
Mat 5:35 not by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; not by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King;
Mat 5:36 nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your word be, Yes, yes; No, no. For whatever is more than these comes from evil.
Mat 5:38 You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist evil. But whoever shall strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Mat 5:40 And to him desiring to sue you, and to take away your tunic, let him have your coat also.
Mat 5:41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two.
Mat 5:42 Give to him who asks of you, and you shall not turn away from him who would borrow from you.
Mat 5:43 You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you,
Mat 5:45 so that you may become sons of your Father in Heaven. For He makes His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
Mat 5:46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors do the same?
Mat 5:47 And if you greet your brothers only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax-collectors do so?
Mat 5:48 Therefore be perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect.

[Warrior4God]

Right back Atcha Bubba!

Laughin at the Bubba name
Sup Bubba angry
still laughing Bubba is so redneck I know 3 Bubba's and the are so country
NW FL. is actually lower Alabama
Im getting a kick out of this.
Wheres the love Bubba.
Im in tears I dont know why this so funny
You went the Bubba route.
I lived in Mobile Al. for 22 years and Mardis Gras is very big there. not that I agree with the mardis gras thing,But they have a song they play on the radio during that time that is titled(Bubba like Moon pie)
They throw moonpies off the floats and they fight over them.
Bubba angry you like moonpie too?

[Warrior4God]

I think I must be worn out with this debate as I sit here talking about Bubba liking moonpies,I dont think any one on this thread really thinks they can change my belief so my thinking it is rather to prove me wrong,I understand in a sense why a trinity person believes it to a degree if they were not well versed but after seeing that some of you are well versed I must believe that you just accept it because most do.
That is ok with me not that it matters that it is ok with me.
My concern is that we each must weigh evidence of both sides and conclude that what God is and what his Son is in relation to us,without bias and without prejiduce.
That is what God expects from us as individuals in his service.

[Angryamerican]

Laughin at the Bubba name
Sup Bubba angry
still laughing Bubba is so redneck I know 3 Bubba's and the are so country
NW FL. is actually lower Alabama
Im getting a kick out of this.
Wheres the love Bubba.
Im in tears I dont know why this so funny
You went the Bubba route.
I lived in Mobile Al. for 22 years and Mardis Gras is very big there. not that I agree with the mardis gras thing,But they have a song they play on the radio during that time that is titled(Bubba like Moon pie)
They throw moonpies off the floats and they fight over them.
Bubba angry you like moonpie too?

HEHE yeah i got a laugh out of it. And i do like moonpies. I was born in Pensacola Florida and raised in Birminham Alabama for the first five years of my life ,last forty years in Arizona.

[Angryamerican]

I think I must be worn out with this debate as I sit here talking about Bubba liking moonpies,I dont think any one on this thread really thinks they can change my belief so my thinking it is rather to prove me wrong,I understand in a sense why a trinity person believes it to a degree if they were not well versed but after seeing that some of you are well versed I must believe that you just accept it because most do.
That is ok with me not that it matters that it is ok with me.
My concern is that we each must weigh evidence of both sides and conclude that what God is and what his Son is in relation to us,without bias and without prejiduce.
That is what God expects from us as individuals in his service.

I already tried this, but because i didn't accept what jim was saying now i'm a bubba. But i don't mind showing people the truth whether they accept it or not is up to them.

But every time they say something that isn't in line with the bible i'll be like a bee on a flower in spring, but i expect my brothers to do the same to me.

I know i don't have all the answers but some i do. You won't see me jumping in to something i know nothing about.

[DRS]

Don't worry if Jesus was here they would be telling him your God you just don't understand Greek

[Angryamerican]

Don't worry if Jesus was here they would be telling him your God you just don't understand Greek

I almost fell out of my chair lol.

Now that was funny.

[Tucson Jim]

What does Romans say about taking a stand against the superior authorities?

I already answered this DRS. Defending your country against foreign tyrants has nothing whatsoever to do with "Superior authorities". Foreign dictators have no authority over any of us.

Unless we let them work their evil without standing up for ourselves and protecting our families that is.

[Mathius]

I don't believe God would have us lie down and let him kill us.

Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.

[Tucson Jim]

Superior authorities are superior authorites and are allowed to rule and for a Christian to stand against them is to stand against God's arangement.

Horsefeathers! Kim Jong Il is not a "superior authority" over me.

Not even close.

You are confused.

[Mathius]

Of course not. The plain meaning is right before your eyes, but you cannot see.

Christ created all things. He is not therefore created, nor is He a thing.

He is the creator.

The Creator of the universe is God.

Jesus Is God.

Unless God created Jesus and then gave Jesus the power to create the universe. Check out a guy named Barbelo or I think that is his name.

[Tucson Jim]

You are suffering from paranoia.

And do you realize no Government is gonna change what has already been predicted by God?

1. I am merely stating fact. You can't give me a rational answer so you resort to attacking me.

Sad.

2. Your second point makes no sense at all.

[DRS]

I already answered this DRS. Defending your country against foreign tyrants has nothing whatsoever to do with "Superior authorities". Foreign dictators have no authority over any of us.

Unless we let them work their evil without standing up for ourselves and protecting our families that is.

There is nothing in the bible that says only the superior authorites of your respective country. It says the superior authorities.

People thought they were fighting against oppression when the fought for Hitler, you see the folly of fighting in mans wars?

[DRS]

Horsefeathers! Kim Jong Il is not a "superior authority" over me.

Not even close.

You are confused.

He is standing as the sword to the bad deed or are you standing against God's arrangement?

[Tucson Jim]

What did you learn a new word?

When our enemies bring the fight to my country and my neighbors i will fight.

I am an ex soldier and i don't need your uninformed opinion.

Well, at least I am capable of learning . . .

[Tucson Jim]

Ok back up and give me your opinion of what Christ was like?


And then tell me what a Christian should be like?


If i remember right Christ was no part of the world. And he said his followers were no part of the world.

Define that for me?

My post really got to you.

Wow.

[Tucson Jim]

What is a Christian?

G81
ἀδελφότης
adelphotēs
ad-el-fot'-ace
From G80; brotherhood (properly the feeling of brotherliness), that is, (the (Christian) fraternity: - brethren, brotherhood.

Chris·tian /ˈkrɪstʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kris-chuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith.
2. of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ: Spain is a Christian country.
3. of or pertaining to Christians: many Christian deaths in the Crusades.
4. exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.
5. decent; respectable: They gave him a good Christian burial.
6. human; not brutal; humane: Such behavior isn't Christian.
–noun
7. a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
8. a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian.
9. a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren.

at 5:1 And seeing the multitudes, He went up into a mountain. And when He had sat down, His disciples came to Him.
Mat 5:2 And He opened His mouth and taught them, saying,
Mat 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn! For they shall be comforted.
Mat 5:5 Blessed are the meek! For they shall inherit the earth.
Mat 5:6 Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness! For they shall be filled.
Mat 5:7 Blessed are the merciful! For they shall obtain mercy.
Mat 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart! For they shall see God.
Mat 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers! For they shall be called the sons of God.
Mat 5:10 Blessed are they who have been persecuted for righteousness sake! For theirs is the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:11 Blessed are you when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all kinds of evil against you falsely, for My sake.
Mat 5:12 Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for your reward in Heaven is great. For so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Mat 5:13 You are the salt of the earth, but if the salt loses its savor, with what shall it be salted? It is no longer good for anything, but to be thrown out and to be trodden underfoot by men.
Mat 5:14 You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden.
Mat 5:15 Nor do men light a lamp and put it under the grain-measure, but on a lampstand. And it gives light to all who are in the house.
Mat 5:16 Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in Heaven.
Mat 5:17 Do not think that I have come to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to destroy but to fulfill.
Mat 5:18 For truly I say to you, Till the heaven and the earth pass away, not one jot or one tittle shall in any way pass from the Law until all is fulfilled.
Mat 5:19 Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."
Mat 5:22 But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be liable to the judgment. And whoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be liable to the sanhedrin; but whoever shall say, Fool! shall be liable to be thrown into the fire of hell.
Mat 5:23 Therefore if you offer your gift on the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you,
Mat 5:24 leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.
Mat 5:25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are in the way with him; that the opponent not deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be thrown into prison.
Mat 5:26 Truly I say to you, You shall by no means come out from there until you have paid the last kodrantes.
Mat 5:27 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not commit adultery."
Mat 5:28 But I say to you that whoever looks on a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.
Mat 5:29 And if your right eye offends you, pluck it out and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:30 And if your right hand offends you, cut it off and throw it from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not that your whole body should be thrown into hell.
Mat 5:31 It was also said, Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a bill of divorce.
Mat 5:32 But I say to you that whoever shall put away his wife, except for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery. And whoever shall marry her who is put away commits adultery.
Mat 5:33 Again, you have heard that it has been said to the ancients, "You shall not swear falsely, but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord."
Mat 5:34 But I say to you, Do not swear at all! Not by Heaven, because it is God's throne;
Mat 5:35 not by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; not by Jerusalem, because it is the city of the great King;
Mat 5:36 nor shall you swear by your head, because you cannot make one hair white or black.
Mat 5:37 But let your word be, Yes, yes; No, no. For whatever is more than these comes from evil.
Mat 5:38 You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth."
Mat 5:39 But I say to you, Do not resist evil. But whoever shall strike you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Mat 5:40 And to him desiring to sue you, and to take away your tunic, let him have your coat also.
Mat 5:41 And whoever shall compel you to go a mile, go with him two.
Mat 5:42 Give to him who asks of you, and you shall not turn away from him who would borrow from you.
Mat 5:43 You have heard that it was said, "You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you,
Mat 5:45 so that you may become sons of your Father in Heaven. For He makes His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.
Mat 5:46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax-collectors do the same?
Mat 5:47 And if you greet your brothers only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax-collectors do so?
Mat 5:48 Therefore be perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect.

Sorry, I didn't see the verse about how Christians are forbidden from defending their country against tyrants and dictators.

None of what you have quoted has any bearing whatsoever on the point we have been discussing.

Maybe you should go back a few pages and re-read.

[DRS]

Sorry, I didn't see the verse about how Christians are forbidden from defending their country against tyrants and dictators.

None of what you have quoted has any bearing whatsoever on the point we have been discussing.

Maybe you should go back a few pages and re-read.

Jesus did bother forbidding things he set the example and told us how to identify followers of his.

[Tucson Jim]

Laughin at the Bubba name
Sup Bubba angry
still laughing Bubba is so redneck I know 3 Bubba's and the are so country
NW FL. is actually lower Alabama
Im getting a kick out of this.
Wheres the love Bubba.
Im in tears I dont know why this so funny
You went the Bubba route.
I lived in Mobile Al. for 22 years and Mardis Gras is very big there. not that I agree with the mardis gras thing,But they have a song they play on the radio during that time that is titled(Bubba like Moon pie)
They throw moonpies off the floats and they fight over them.
Bubba angry you like moonpie too?

I lived in New Orleans for a while. Been through a few Mardi Gras.

I knew several Bubbas there.

It just seemed to fit. :))

[Tucson Jim]

I think I must be worn out with this debate as I sit here talking about Bubba liking moonpies,I dont think any one on this thread really thinks they can change my belief so my thinking it is rather to prove me wrong,I understand in a sense why a trinity person believes it to a degree if they were not well versed but after seeing that some of you are well versed I must believe that you just accept it because most do.

But of course your last point makes no sense Warrior. If one is well versed, and believes the Trinity, it strongly suggests that it is the Biblical evidence that compels the conlusion, not that one is merely following along.


That is ok with me not that it matters that it is ok with me.
My concern is that we each must weigh evidence of both sides and conclude that what God is and what his Son is in relation to us,without bias and without prejiduce.
That is what God expects from us as individuals in his service.

I totally agree!

[Tucson Jim]

Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.

Irrelevant to the discussion.

Find me a verse about "When a Nazi blows off your wife's head, offer him your child."

[Tucson Jim]

Unless God created Jesus and then gave Jesus the power to create the universe. Check out a guy named Barbelo or I think that is his name.

No idea what you're talking about.

[Tucson Jim]

There is nothing in the bible that says only the superior authorites of your respective country. It says the superior authorities.

People thought they were fighting against oppression when the fought for Hitler, you see the folly of fighting in mans wars?

For the third time, foreign dictators are not a superior authority over us. You are again trying to make the Bible fit your preconceived doctrine.

It doesn't.

[Tucson Jim]

He is standing as the sword to the bad deed or are you standing against God's arrangement?

Show me where the Bible says we are supposed to let foreign tyrants kill us and our families.

[Mathius]

No idea what you're talking about.

Nevermind it was one of the early church writings that wasn't added to the bible.

[Mathius]

Show me where the Bible says we are supposed to let foreign tyrants kill us and our families.

Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.

[Tucson Jim]

Jesus did bother forbidding things he set the example and told us how to identify followers of his.

Still can't show me where God says we are supposed to let foreign tyrants slaughter us.

[Tucson Jim]

Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.

So then you are a pacifist, is that what you're saying?

If someone breaks in your home to kill you and your family, you would just kneel down, head bowed, and let them rape and kill your wife while you did absolutely nothing to stop them.

Is that your position?

[Constantine the Great]

I just don't understand your reasoning.
You don't need to understand anything. Just take a good hard look at yourself right now.

[DRS]

Show me where the Bible says we are supposed to let foreign tyrants kill us and our families.

You don't have to you can look to his followers flee when Jerusalem was surrounded, no instruction to fight.

[Constantine the Great]

Adam was created perfect, Jesus is also called the last Adam.
Jesus is sooo much more than Adam. I know it works for your theology to just see him from an Arian perspective but what the Father gave to us is so much more precious.

The men who wrote the gospels and epistles were also followers of Judaism, the term only begotten son is also used in Hebrews for Issac.
Sorry, the language of the NT is Greek, not Hebrew. That is the only language that really matters.

Only begotten is a term used for Jesus in his orehuman existence also, so it does not refer to his human birth.
It is a term for Jesus in his human existance so it doesn't refer to his human birth? You realize you just contradicted yourself right?

1 John 4:9*By this the love of God was made manifest in our case, because God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world that we might gain life through him.
I already explained it to you. Accept it or deny it, but it has been explained and I reject your interpretation of that (or just about any verse really given your denominational background).

[Mathius]

So then you are a pacifist, is that what you're saying?

If someone breaks in your home to kill you and your family, you would just kneel down, head bowed, and let them rape and kill your wife while you did absolutely nothing to stop them.

Is that your position?

Yes, this life means nothing....

[DRS]

Jesus is sooo much more than Adam. I know it works for your theology to just see him from an Arian perspective but what the Father gave to us is so much more precious.



Take it up with Paul he is the one who calls him the last Adam.

[Constantine the Great]

If you are wrong , How do you think God will view you?
That is between God and myself and funny, you are not part of that equation.

You are getting to defensive because of the argument presented by the ones who don't believe in the trinity. No one is forcing you to participate in this thread.
No, the problem why you are so ANGRY is because in your mind, you figured you were going to stroll in here, lay your arrogance and ignorance and hubris before the world bringing to us poor trinitarians some type of profound revelation that nobody else has ever dreamed up before you and we were going to all bow down to the anti-trinitarian god you think you have set yourself up as because you did some studying of your own for 26 years. When that didn't work, you became ANGRY and now you just can't understand how is it us poor, ignorant, uneducated trinitarians can stick to our faith in spite of us having been blessed by your profundity.
Does that pretty much some you up ANGRY? I think it does.

[DRS]

Sorry, the language of the NT is Greek, not Hebrew. That is the only language that really matters.




actually Matthew seems to have be written in Hebrew and it was written by Jews to mostly Jews so yes the Hebrew matters, espicially as there are numerous quotes from the Ot

[Constantine the Great]

Easy now you are getting close to stepping over the line.
If that is getting close, you have overstepped it times a plenty. However, please feel free to file a report with the mods. You know your way to the mod forum I take it?

How can you be sure you are not the one being mislead?
One indication is because it disagrees with you. But like I said earlier, that is between God and me. Notice AngryAmerican doesn't appear in that equation.

[Constantine the Great]

Do us a favor and read.

Col chapter 1

Rev chapter 3

You totally take things out of context. He had a begininng before he came to the earth.
Do us a favor and stop denigrating the nature of our Lord and God Jesus Christ.

[Constantine the Great]

It amazes me they don't know the meaning of first born nor only begotten.
Sorry. Already gave the correct definition in Greek and its proper usage. Are you Greek? Do you read the NT in the original language? No? Ok, you maky go back to your Concordance or whatever it is you use.

[Constantine the Great]

ONE'S OLDEST CHILD.
Wrong. One's first child. Does not mean necessarily subsequent children. Hebrews proves that.

[Constantine the Great]

I am taking my definitions from the KJV dictionary.

The NT was not written in 17th century English.

[Constantine the Great]

Don't worry if Jesus was here they would be telling him your God you just don't understand Greek
Considering Christ came first for the Jew, then the Greek, I'm sure He'd have no such issues.

[Constantine the Great]

Take it up with Paul he is the one who calls him the last Adam.
Paul doesn't leave it with just that. You are content to do so. So my problem is you, not Paul.

[DRS]

It is a term for Jesus in his human existance so it doesn't refer to his human birth? You realize you just contradicted yourself right?


It is a contadiction to say that John refers to Jesus in his prehuman existence as only begotten son?

Which the scripture Iposted shows, Jesus was begotten before being born on Earth, hence Jesus was created, is not equal to Jehovah.
There is also that scripture in Proverbs 8 that backs all this up.

[DRS]

Paul doesn't leave it with just that. You are content to do so. So my problem is you, not Paul.

Paul calls Jesus the last Adam, what was Adam suppose to be the father of all humanity, but he did not give us life but rather gave man death so Jesus was sent that is why he can be called eternal father, because all fauthful humans here on Earth have life made possible because of Jesus.

[Constantine the Great]

It is a contadiction to say that John refers to Jesus in his prehuman existence as only begotten son?
Read your post again. It is contradictory at best, illegible at worst.

Which the scripture Iposted shows, Jesus was begotten before being born on Earth, hence Jesus was created, is not equal to Jehovah.
John 1:1 my boy. As much as you hate it, it's part of the bible.

[Constantine the Great]

Paul calls Jesus the last Adam, what was Adam suppose to be the father of all humanity, but he did not give us life but rather gave man death so Jesus was sent that is why he can be called eternal father, because all fauthful humans here on Earth have life made possible because of Jesus.

Right. So Jesus was not just another Adam. He is soooooo much more. It's my impression though you would enjoy repeating the "adam" analogy because it is a subtle hint at the idea Jesus was just a glorified man.

[Tucson Jim]

Yes, this life means nothing....

It must mean something or God would not have put us here.

Well Mathius, you have even outdone our JW friends on this one. Not even DRS would allow an intruder to kill his family. I spoke to a couple of JWs at my doorstep the other day and had a similar discussion. Both of them drew the line at somone trying to kill their families. They felt Governments often started wars as land grabs or to plunder needed natural resources, or for other less-than-admirable reasons and that seemd to be the main reason they were against war.

But they both said they would defend their families against an intruder, even if that intruder was a fellow JW who had someone gone nuts.

Your views are truly extreme on this.

I don't believe God wants us to let innocents be killed when we could stop it because we hold such extremist views.

You should re-think your position mathius. Really.

[Angryamerican]

1. I am merely stating fact. You can't give me a rational answer so you resort to attacking me.

Sad.

2. Your second point makes no sense at all.

You don't seem to care what Jesus say's .

[Angryamerican]

Well, at least I am capable of learning . . .

You could have fooled me.

[Mathius]

It must mean something or God would not have put us here.

Well Mathius, you have even outdone our JW friends on this one. Not even DRS would allow an intruder to kill his family. I spoke to a couple of JWs at my doorstep the other day and had a similar discussion. Both of them drew the line at somone trying to kill their families. They felt Governments often started wars as land grabs or to plunder needed natural resources, or for other less-than-admirable reasons and that seemd to be the main reason they were against war.

But they both said they would defend their families against an intruder, even if that intruder was a fellow JW who had someone gone nuts.

Your views are truly extreme on this.

I don't believe God wants us to let innocents be killed when we could stop it because we hold such extremist views.

You should re-think your position mathius. Really.

My love for God is greater than for anyone in this life or the next. If the choice should arise between obeying God and my family's lives I will pick God everytime. You may call me extreme but that is what I believe.

[Angryamerican]

My post really got to you.

Wow.


Answer the questions.

[Angryamerican]

Sorry, I didn't see the verse about how Christians are forbidden from defending their country against tyrants and dictators.

None of what you have quoted has any bearing whatsoever on the point we have been discussing.

Maybe you should go back a few pages and re-read.

This don't have no bearing?

Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."

Do you see any exception here?

[Angryamerican]

Irrelevant to the discussion.

Find me a verse about "When a Nazi blows off your wife's head, offer him your child."

If there was such a verse you wouldn't listen.

[Angryamerican]

For the third time, foreign dictators are not a superior authority over us. You are again trying to make the Bible fit your preconceived doctrine.

It doesn't.

You are the one that has no doctrine that is supported by scripture.

[Angryamerican]

Still can't show me where God says we are supposed to let foreign tyrants slaughter us.

Show us where Jesus said it is ok to go to war for our country.

[Constantine the Great]

This don't have no bearing?

Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."

Do you see any exception here?

Yes there is an exception.

Matthew 5:21
ηκουσατε οτι ερρεθη τοις αρχαιοις ου φονευσεις ος δ αν φονευση ενοχος εσται τη κρισει


That bolded phrase "ου φονευσεις" means in Greek, thou shalt not murder, not kill. There's your exception.
That's what happens when someone puts too much stock in 17th century English.

[Angryamerican]

So then you are a pacifist, is that what you're saying?

If someone breaks in your home to kill you and your family, you would just kneel down, head bowed, and let them rape and kill your wife while you did absolutely nothing to stop them.

Is that your position?

I don't know about you ,but if they get past my two rottweilers then they have to deal with my 12 guage shotgun.

[Angryamerican]

You don't need to understand anything. Just take a good hard look at yourself right now.

Ok.

[Constantine the Great]

I don't know about you ,but if they get past my two rottweilers then they have to deal with my 12 guage shotgun.
So you don't follow Christ's teachings as you understand them to be? How hypocritical.

[Angryamerican]

That is between God and myself and funny, you are not part of that equation.


No, the problem why you are so ANGRY is because in your mind, you figured you were going to stroll in here, lay your arrogance and ignorance and hubris before the world bringing to us poor trinitarians some type of profound revelation that nobody else has ever dreamed up before you and we were going to all bow down to the anti-trinitarian god you think you have set yourself up as because you did some studying of your own for 26 years. When that didn't work, you became ANGRY and now you just can't understand how is it us poor, ignorant, uneducated trinitarians can stick to our faith in spite of us having been blessed by your profundity.
Does that pretty much some you up ANGRY? I think it does.

Ok you think what you like. I don't think you are stupid at all. and thats why i shake my head in disbelief.

[Constantine the Great]

Ok you think what you like. I don't think you are stupid at all. and thats why i shake my head in disbelief.

Now we are in complete agreement on something. DITTO ON ALL COUNTS.

[Angryamerican]

Do us a favor and stop denigrating the nature of our Lord and God Jesus Christ.

I guess we will see who is doing that.

[Constantine the Great]

I guess we will see who is doing that.
What else is there to see? Throughout 3 different threads, there's something that hasn't been covered?

[Angryamerican]

Sorry. Already gave the correct definition in Greek and its proper usage. Are you Greek? Do you read the NT in the original language? No? Ok, you maky go back to your Concordance or whatever it is you use.

KJV dictionary a trinitarian dictionary. are you forgetting that some of the gosples were written in hebrew? And the deciples were jewish?

And the OT was quoted by both deciples and Christ?

[Angryamerican]

Wrong. One's first child. Does not mean necessarily subsequent children. Hebrews proves that.

Even with that definition you prove my point thanks for being honest.

[Angryamerican]

The NT was not written in 17th century English.

More spin?

[Angryamerican]

Paul doesn't leave it with just that. You are content to do so. So my problem is you, not Paul.

Quit spewing and prove him wrong.:rolleyes:

[Constantine the Great]

More spin?
Spin? Not at all. Was it written in 17th century English? And yes, the KJV may be a good translation, but it is still a faulty translation.

[Constantine the Great]

Quit spewing and prove him wrong.:rolleyes:

What are you, DRS's knight in shining armor? Keep reading putz. Although by the time you catch up to this post I'm sure we will have moved on. Or at least I will have. You are the antitrinitarian crusader.

ETA: I think you're getting angry again, eh Angry?

[HisServant]

I am not seeing the problem ya,ll are having here,I think it may be that both sides of the issue may have a point but I cant see where,beginning or begotten is relevant to the fact that Jesus was born and that he was the beginning of the church of his body,the church that he is head over and the church he created.
Apples and oranges,now where have I heard that before,just kidding sounded funny

Here is the point there are several meanings for the word begotten and firstborn. In the original language the word used does not mean or indicate that Jesus is a created being. Thus this changes the meaning of the verses.
Col 1:15 now takes on a different meaning from what you guys have been saying. Jesus is not created. He always existed as the Logos. He became Jesus when Mary gave birth to Him. But He was not created for He always existed. Do you agree that Jesus is not a created being?

[Angryamerican]

Read your post again. It is contradictory at best, illegible at worst.


John 1:1 my boy. As much as you hate it, it's part of the bible.

Running again are you. You are presented with facts that you can't dispute so you turn to a disputed scripture. One that has intelligence such as you ,i would expect you to see the contradiction the way it is translated in verse two.

But the contradiction also is in the first verse. But since it is in Greek:rolleyes:

[Constantine the Great]

Running again are you. You are presented with facts that you can't dispute so you turn to a disputed scripture.
Disputed only by the antitrinitarians. Is not the Bible the Word of God? I thought it was infallible. What happened? The Bible is correct only when it agrees with AngryAmerican? God is not a God of confusion right? I'm not confused, are you? Get over it. It's there. You can't remove it. You can't erase it. Live with it.

One that has intelligence such as you ,i would expect you to see the contradiction the way it is translated in verse two.

But the contradiction also is in the first verse. But since it is in Greek:rolleyes:

No, there is no contradiction in John 1:1, unless you are Jehovah's Witness buying into a deficient translation of it by non-scholars. Good luck with that one. Now considering you haven't been able to prove a damned thing about your self styled doctrine of Christ, I don't know what else you want to accomplish.

[HisServant]

It must point to that as Rev 3:14 points to that

It does not read it again.
It states He is the beginning of the creation of God. It does not say He is created merely creation starts with Him. Big difference. Do you not see or do you not want to see? Since all things were created by Him and for Him that is what it is saying.

[Constantine the Great]

Keep reading though AA, you'll see I also prove you wrong on the commandment of not killing. Love to see the self serving hatchet job you do on that one.

[Angryamerican]

Yes there is an exception.

Matthew 5:21
ηκουσατε οτι ερρεθη τοις αρχαιοις ου φονευσεις ος δ αν φονευση ενοχος εσται τη κρισει


That bolded phrase "ου φονευσεις" means in Greek, thou shalt not murder, not kill. There's your exception.
That's what happens when someone puts too much stock in 17th century English.

When you are at war is that not killing?

[Constantine the Great]

When you are at war is that not killing?
Again, murder is forbidden. Read my post again SLOWLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make sure to pause, where there is a comma and follow all the other rules of punctuation as well.

[HisServant]

It has been shown the meaning of the words you keep bringing up.

But yet you still spin.

Yes it has been shown by one who speaks the language. Do you deny what CTG says is true?

[Constantine the Great]

Yes it has been shown by one who speaks the language. Do you deny what CTG says is true?
Of course he denies it. Even those with sight can be blind.
ETA: Besides, he has a concordance.

[Angryamerican]

So you don't follow Christ's teachings as you understand them to be? How hypocritical.


I have a right to defend myself and family. So what does that make you?

[HisServant]

I go into the whole bible, Proverbs where Jesus creation is pointed out. Then I go into the fact that Paul draws the paralell between Jesus and Issac both sons, though who promises come.

Jesus is also called only begotten before coming to Earth, and Jesus is called the only begotten god, are you going to say that this term makes higher than the Father?

In other words you refuse to understand or see that begotten does not mean created even though the definition of the word has been presented. :rolleyes: Begotten does not mean created in those verses. Don't bring up proverbs it does not reference Jesus.

[Constantine the Great]

I have a right to defend myself and family. So what does that make you?

I was not the one trying to convince the world that Christ taught against defending their family did I? I have the true commandment regarding it, and it doesn't have to do with killing. It is your own translation you are violating.
This is about you remember? I never said Christ denies your right to defend yourself. You did. You are getting wrapped up in your own eisegesis.

[HisServant]

So what does that scripture mean?


The word image.

H646
אפד אפוד
'êphôd 'êphôd
ay-fode', ay-fode'
Second form is a rare form; probably of foreign derivation; a girdle; specifically the ephod or high priest’s shoulder piece; also generally an image: - ephod.

Invisible.

G517
ἀόρατος
aoratos
ah-or'-at-os
From G1 (as a negative particle) and G3707; invisible: - invisible (thing).

First-born.

H1060
בּכור
bekôr
bek-ore'
From H1069; firstborn; hence chief: - eldest (son), first-born (-ling).

Creation.

H1278
בּריאה
berîy'âh
ber-ee-aw'
Feminine from H1254; a creation, that is, a novelty: - new thing.

Is this greek?

[Angryamerican]

Spin? Not at all. Was it written in 17th century English? And yes, the KJV may be a good translation, but it is still a faulty translation.

So what version do you read from?

[HisServant]

ONE'S OLDEST CHILD.

Then we disagree. And you stand incorrect since someone who speaks the language has told you in his native tongue what the original word used means. You refuse to acknowlegde it for sake of pride. How very sad.

[Constantine the Great]

So what version do you read from?

Nestle-Aland New Testament, in the original Koine Greek although, Stephanus 1550 is not bad either.

ETA: For the OT, the Septuagint of course.

http://bibledatabase.net/html/septuagint/index.htm

[Angryamerican]

What are you, DRS's knight in shining armor? Keep reading putz. Although by the time you catch up to this post I'm sure we will have moved on. Or at least I will have. You are the antitrinitarian crusader.

ETA: I think you're getting angry again, eh Angry?

Nope not at all.

[HisServant]

I already tried this, but because i didn't accept what jim was saying now i'm a bubba. But i don't mind showing people the truth whether they accept it or not is up to them.

But every time they say something that isn't in line with the bible i'll be like a bee on a flower in spring, but i expect my brothers to do the same to me.

I know i don't have all the answers but some i do. You won't see me jumping in to something i know nothing about.

Yes you would. You are arguing with someone who speaks greek over what the meaning of a greek word means. :rolleyes:

[HisServant]

Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on (your) right cheek, turn the other one to him as well.

You do realize this was talking about preaching the gospel?

[Angryamerican]

Here is the point there are several meanings for the word begotten and firstborn. In the original language the word used does not mean or indicate that Jesus is a created being. Thus this changes the meaning of the verses.
Col 1:15 now takes on a different meaning from what you guys have been saying. Jesus is not created. He always existed as the Logos. He became Jesus when Mary gave birth to Him. But He was not created for He always existed. Do you agree that Jesus is not a created being?

Prove what the word means then?

You have yet to give a definate definition to the word.

[Angryamerican]

Disputed only by the antitrinitarians. Is not the Bible the Word of God? I thought it was infallible. What happened? The Bible is correct only when it agrees with AngryAmerican? God is not a God of confusion right? I'm not confused, are you? Get over it. It's there. You can't remove it. You can't erase it. Live with it.



No, there is no contradiction in John 1:1, unless you are Jehovah's Witness buying into a deficient translation of it by non-scholars. Good luck with that one. Now considering you haven't been able to prove a damned thing about your self styled doctrine of Christ, I don't know what else you want to accomplish.

I am not a Jehovahs witness.

[Constantine the Great]

I am not a Jehovahs witness.
Read the post again. Never said you were.

[Constantine the Great]

Prove what the word means then?

You have yet to give a definate definition to the word.
Interesting thing about Colossians 1. It says Christ was the creator of all things.
Genesis says God was the creator of all things. Who is right? A trinitarian knows the right answer, but what say you?

[Angryamerican]

It does not read it again.
It states He is the beginning of the creation of God. It does not say He is created merely creation starts with Him. Big difference. Do you not see or do you not want to see? Since all things were created by Him and for Him that is what it is saying.


What does of God mean?
H5
אבגתא
'ăbagthâ'
ab-ag-thaw'
Of foreign origin; Abagtha, a eunuch of Xerxes: - Abagtha.

Head means.

H505
אלף
'eleph
eh'-lef
Properly the same as H504; hence (an ox’s head being the first letter of the alphabet, and this eventually used as a numeral) a thousand: - thousand.

Head does it not mean first?

[Angryamerican]

Again, murder is forbidden. Read my post again SLOWLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make sure to pause, where there is a comma and follow all the other rules of punctuation as well.

I'm suppost to trust your biased definition when i find otherwise.

Sorry but it is thou shall not kill.

Read exodus again genious. As well as what scripture i posted.

[Angryamerican]

Then we disagree. And you stand incorrect since someone who speaks the language has told you in his native tongue what the original word used means. You refuse to acknowlegde it for sake of pride. How very sad.


Boy you are esaily mislead. now i know why you believe what you do.

[Constantine the Great]

I'm suppost to trust your biased definition when i find otherwise.
You don't have to trust anything I say. However, it is true and that's your loss. By the way, where did you find it otherwise? That's right, 17th century English.

Sorry but it is thou shall not kill.

Read exodus again genious. As well as what scripture i posted.

:)) You need to ask a Jew about Exodus DUMBASS. The Jews say the same thing. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!!!!!!!!!!! :)) DUMBASS! Even Poisonshady, a Jew, will tell you that!!!! :))

[Angryamerican]

Yes you would. You are arguing with someone who speaks greek over what the meaning of a greek word means. :rolleyes:

I guess you don't realize that some of the gosples were in hebrew. After all the deciples were jewish.

[Constantine the Great]

I guess you don't realize that some of the gosples were in hebrew. After all the deciples were jewish.

Keep telling yourself that. You can run, but you can't hide.

[Angryamerican]

Interesting thing about Colossians 1. It says Christ was the creator of all things.
Genesis says God was the creator of all things. Who is right? A trinitarian knows the right answer, but what say you?

It was answered earlier in the thread. Same old same old.

[Constantine the Great]

It was answered earlier in the thread. Same old same old.
Answer it again.

[Constantine the Great]

I guess you don't realize that some of the gosples were in hebrew. After all the deciples were jewish.

The Gospel is full of allusions to those passages of the Old Testament in which Christ is predicted and foreshadowed. The one aim prevading the whole book is to show that Jesus is he "of whom Moses in the law and the prophets did write." This Gospel contains no fewer than sixty-five references to the Old Testament, forty-three of these being direct verbal citations, thus greatly outnumbering those found in the other Gospels. The main feature of this Gospel may be expressed in the motto, "I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." As to the language in which this Gospel was written there is much controversy. Many hold, in accordance with old tradition, that it was originally written in Hebrew (i.e., the Aramaic or Syro-Chaldee dialect, then the vernacular of the inhabitants of Palestine), and afterwards translated into Greek, either by Matthew himself or by some person unknown.

This theory, though earnestly maintained by able critics, we cannot see any ground for adopting. From the first this Gospel in Greek was received as of authority in the Church. There is nothing in it to show that it is a translation. Though Matthew wrote mainly for the Jews, yet they were everywhere familiar with the Greek language. The same reasons which would have suggested the necessity of a translation into Greek would have led the evangelist to write in Greek at first. It is confessed that this Gospel has never been found in any other form than that in which we now possess it. The leading characteristic of this Gospel is that it sets forth the kingly glory of Christ, and shows him to be the true heir to David's throne. It is the Gospel of the kingdom.



http://mb-soft.com/believe/txs/matthew.htm

[Angryamerican]

You don't have to trust anything I say. However, it is true and that's your loss. By the way, where did you find it otherwise? That's right, 17th century English.



:)) You need to ask a Jew about Exodus DUMBASS. The Jews say the same thing. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!!!!!!!!!!! :)) DUMBASS! Even Poisonshady, a Jew, will tell you that!!!! :))

Look little man i take it back you are very stupid. You want people think you are fluent in greek i don't believe a word you say. You are probably getting it off some morons website.

What a Christian you are. Did i hit a nerve little man. Like Jesus said you will know them by their fruits.

[Constantine the Great]

Look little man i take it back you are very stupid. You want people think you are fluent in greek i don't believe a word you say. You are probably getting it off some morons website.

What a Christian you are. Did i hit a nerve little man. Like Jesus said you will know them by their fruits.

With me? NO but I hit one with you. Stings doesn't it? You have been exposed. Caught, in your own stupidity.
Why did you attack me and not refute the post? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T. YOU KNOW I AM RIGHT

ETA: IN case you haven't figured it out; I don't care what you think. Especially when proven wrong.

[Angryamerican]

Keep telling yourself that. You can run, but you can't hide.

Hide from what?

[Constantine the Great]

I'm suppost to trust your biased definition when i find otherwise.
You don't have to trust anything I say. However, it is true and that's your loss. By the way, where did you find it otherwise? That's right, 17th century English.

Sorry but it is thou shall not kill.

Read exodus again genious. As well as what scripture i posted.

:)) You need to ask a Jew about Exodus DUMBASS. The Jews say the same thing. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!!!!!!!!!!! :)) DUMBASS! Even Poisonshady, a Jew, will tell you that!!!! :))


REPOSTING FOR POSTERITY :))

[Angryamerican]

Answer it again.

Don't be lazy read the thread. But it has been addressed.

[Constantine the Great]

Don't be lazy read the thread. But it has been addressed.
Answer it again. Or did you lose your website?
By the way, what was the origiinal commandment in Jewish? THat's right, same as the Greek. THou shalt not murder.

[Angryamerican]

With me? NO but I hit one with you. Stings doesn't it? You have been exposed. Caught, in your own stupidity.
Why did you attack me and not refute the post? BECAUSE YOU CAN'T. YOU KNOW I AM RIGHT

ETA: IN case you haven't figured it out; I don't care what you think. Especially when proven wrong.

You have proven nothing genious.

[Constantine the Great]

You have proven nothing genious.

Yes I have. A simple question to Poisonshady will confirm what I posted. GO FOR IT COWARD.
Of course, unless you are the intellectually dishonest person I know you to be and exposed you as such.

[Constantine the Great]

You can apologize to me and save what little face you have left right about now.

[Constantine the Great]

You have proven nothing genious.

Answer the question; Why did you chose to attack me instead of addressing my post? BECAUSE YOU KNOW YOU SCREWED UP!

[Angryamerican]

Answer it again. Or did you lose your website?
By the way, what was the origiinal commandment in Jewish? THat's right, same as the Greek. THou shalt not murder.

Killing is muder. What do you do in war? Is this clear enough for you?

Exo 20:13 You shall not kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

[Constantine the Great]

Killing is muder. What do you do in war? Is this clear enough for you?

Exo 20:13 You shall not kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

SPIN SPIN SPIN. There's a reason for the word kill, and a reason for the word murder. They are similar, not same. Try again! Make sure to get some Jewish help on it.

[Angryamerican]

Yes I have. A simple question to Poisonshady will confirm what I posted. GO FOR IT COWARD.
Of course, unless you are the intellectually dishonest person I know you to be and exposed you as such.

That Christian thing got to you EH!!

[Constantine the Great]

That Christian thing got to you EH!!
That's called deflection. When is the apology forthcoming? You've been hardly Christlike so stop with your self aggrandizement hypocrite.

[Angryamerican]

SPIN SPIN SPIN. There's a reason for the word kill, and a reason for the word murder. They are similar, not same. Try again! Make sure to get some Jewish help on it.

I knew you were not big enough to admit when you are wrong.

[Constantine the Great]

I knew you were not big enough to admit when you are wrong.

Do I need to post the fact you screwed up big time regarding 1 of the 10 Commandments? STOP DEFLECTING! You look ridiculous.
And I wasn't wrong. You were :)) :clap:

[Angryamerican]

That's called deflection. When is the apology forthcoming? You've been hardly Christlike so stop with your self aggrandizement hypocrite.

Denial it is.

Is killing murder?

[Constantine the Great]

Denial it is.

Is killing murder?

No. Are you ready to apologize for being wrong and having the intellectual dishonesty to deflect by attacking me personally? Hypocrite!

[Angryamerican]

Do I need to post the fact you screwed up big time regarding 1 of the 10 Commandments? STOP DEFLECTING! You look ridiculous.
And I wasn't wrong. You were :)) :clap:

Show me where i am wrong? i am a big enough person to admit when i am wrong.

[Angryamerican]

No.

I just posted the definition of the word.

[Constantine the Great]

Show me where i am wrong? i am a big enough person to admit when i am wrong.


I already did. I posted it twice. If you don't want to believe me, ask Poisonshady, ask Harmonious, they will concur with me.

[Angryamerican]

No. Are you ready to apologize for being wrong and having the intellectual dishonesty to deflect by attacking me personally? Hypocrite!

I was ok until the dumbass comment idiot.

[Constantine the Great]

Here you go


I'm suppost to trust your biased definition when i find otherwise.
You don't have to trust anything I say. However, it is true and that's your loss. By the way, where did you find it otherwise? That's right, 17th century English.

Sorry but it is thou shall not kill.

Read exodus again genious. As well as what scripture i posted.

:)) You need to ask a Jew about Exodus DUMBASS. The Jews say the same thing. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!!!!!!!!!!! :)) DUMBASS! Even Poisonshady, a Jew, will tell you that!!!! :))

[Angryamerican]

I already did. I posted it twice. If you don't want to believe me, ask Poisonshady, ask Harmonious, they will concur with me.

I think i will trust the bible had it right goodnight.

[Constantine the Great]

I was ok until the dumbass comment idiot.

And it was well deserved for mockingly calling me a genious, hypocrite.

[Constantine the Great]

I think i will trust the bible had it right goodnight.
Your erroneous interpretation of it.

[Angryamerican]

I already did. I posted it twice. If you don't want to believe me, ask Poisonshady, ask Harmonious, they will concur with me.

It's in both the NT and the OT.

[Constantine the Great]

It's in both the NT and the OT.

Exactly the way I posted it. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!
Still trying to fight that loss? Stings huh? I wouldn't know.

[Constantine the Great]

More hypocrisy on your part. I wonder, how many times have you claimed you would admit you were wrong, if you were shown to be? How quickly we forget huh?

[Angryamerican]

Exactly the way I posted it. THOU SHALT NOT MURDER!
Still trying to fight that loss? Stings huh? I wouldn't know.

What loss? is that what makes you tick?

Mat 5:19 Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."

And you saw it from the OT to i posted it. It sounds like they are in agreement.

[Constantine the Great]

What loss? is that what makes you tick?

Mat 5:19 Therefore whoever shall relax one of these commandments, the least, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven. But whoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:20 For I say to you that unless your righteousness shall exceed that of the scribes and Pharisees, you shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.
Mat 5:21 You have heard that it was said to the ancients, "You shall not kill" --and, "Whoever shall kill shall be liable to the judgment."

And you saw it from the OT to i posted it. It sounds like they are in agreement.

SPIN SPIN SPIN. YOu told me to look again at Exodus because you disagreed with the Greek saying murder instead of kill. The OT HEBREW says the same, thou shalt not murder. Keep trying my boy. Backpeddling only takes you in reverse.

MURDER, the word is MURDER. It does not say KILL.

[Angryamerican]

SPIN SPIN SPIN. YOu told me to look again at Exodus because you disagreed with the Greek saying murder instead of kill. The OT HEBREW says the same, thou shalt not murder. Keep trying my boy. Backpeddling only takes you in reverse.

MURDER, the word is MURDER. It does not say KILL.

Killing is murder.

[Constantine the Great]

Killing is murder.


:naughty:

More spin! There is a distinction. The result is the same but as the mods love to say

"intent matters, and it matters alot".

But at least you're back to actually being able to discuss without personally attacking me (by the way, did you apologize for that? I'll have to look).

[Angryamerican]

SPIN SPIN SPIN. YOu told me to look again at Exodus because you disagreed with the Greek saying murder instead of kill. The OT HEBREW says the same, thou shalt not murder. Keep trying my boy. Backpeddling only takes you in reverse.

MURDER, the word is MURDER. It does not say KILL.

Who is spinning ?take your pick.

Exo 20:13

(ASV) Thou shalt not kill.

(ESV) "You shall not murder.

(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.

(KJV) Thou shalt not kill.

(KJV+) Thou shalt not3808 kill.7523

(MKJV) You shall not kill.

[Constantine the Great]

Who is spinning ?take your pick.

Exo 20:13

(ASV) Thou shalt not kill.

(ESV) "You shall not murder.

(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.

(KJV) Thou shalt not kill.

(KJV+) Thou shalt not3808 kill.7523

(MKJV) You shall not kill.

THE 10 COMMANDMENTS WERE NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH!!!!!!!!!!

ASK A JEW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

STOP THINKING AS THOUGH THE WORLD HAS ALWAYS REVOLVED AROUND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

[Angryamerican]

THE 10 COMMANDMENTS WERE NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH!!!!!!!!!!

ASK A JEW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Goodnight hehe.

[Constantine the Great]

Yeah, I'd be sounding the retreat too if I had just been humiliated.

[Angryamerican]

THE 10 COMMANDMENTS WERE NOT WRITTEN IN ENGLISH!!!!!!!!!!

ASK A JEW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

STOP THINKING AS THOUGH THE WORLD HAS ALWAYS REVOLVED AROUND THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

They were written in hebrew so what? it is now translated in to english.

[Constantine the Great]

They were written in hebrew so what? it is now translated in to english.

Incorrectly, which you swallowed hook, line and sinker, along with the foot you stuck in your mouth right behind it.

[Angryamerican]

Yeah, I'd be sounding the retreat too if I had just been humiliated.

No some people have a life.

[Constantine the Great]

No some people have a life.

Yes, some do. Astute observation. You're not completely lost I guess.

[Angryamerican]

Incorrectly, which you swallowed hook, line and sinker, along with the foot you stuck in your mouth right behind it.

Did somebody **** in your cheerios?

I'm sorry i always heard the truth hurts.

[Constantine the Great]

Did somebody **** in your cheerios?

I'm sorry i always heard the truth hurts.

Yes, which is why you have wriggled and writhed in the face of it ever since you stuck your foot in your mouth.
Weren't you going to bed? What happened, second wind?

[Angryamerican]

Yes, which is why you have wriggled and writhed in the face of it ever since you stuck your foot in your mouth.
Weren't you going to bed? What happened, second wind?

Nope Goodnight. Just a reminder before i go.


Who is spinning ?take your pick. Looks like murder is killing.

Exo 20:13

(ASV) Thou shalt not kill.

(ESV) "You shall not murder.

(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.

(KJV) Thou shalt not kill.

(KJV+) Thou shalt not3808 kill.7523

(MKJV) You shall not kill.

[Constantine the Great]

Nope Goodnight. Just a reminder before i go.


Who is spinning ?take your pick. Looks like murder is killing.

Exo 20:13

(ASV) Thou shalt not kill.

(ESV) "You shall not murder.

(JPS) Thou shalt not murder.

(KJV) Thou shalt not kill.

(KJV+) Thou shalt not3808 kill.7523

(MKJV) You shall not kill.

When it comes to Hebrew, I pick the Hebrew language. Need help extracting the foot from your mouth?

[Angryamerican]

When it comes to Hebrew, I pick the Hebrew language. Need help extracting the foot from your mouth?

Loserrrrrrrr!!

[Constantine the Great]

Loserrrrrrrr!!
Oh yeah, that's a very compelling argument right there. Man, you are a DUMBASS.
Although not very Christlike. Hypocrite.

Try not to lose too much sleep over your intellectual failure.

[Constantine the Great]

Thank goodness my faith in Father, Son and Holy Spirit is on equally sound footing, and not based on your scholarship AA. That would be disasterous.

[Angryamerican]

Oh yeah, that's a very compelling argument right there. Man, you are a DUMBASS.
Although not very Christlike. Hypocrite.

Try not to lose too much sleep over your intellectual failure.

Spin Spin Spin. You do , murder is to kill & kill is to murder.

I really enjoyed shining light on you.

BY THE WAY I SHOULDN'T HAVE HURT YOU TO MUCH WITH THAT CHRISTIAN COMMENT, YOU EVIDENTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ONE IS.

[Constantine the Great]

Spin Spin Spin. You do , murder is to kill & kill is to murder.
Still here? Oh dear I knew humiliating you would cause you to lose sleep.

I really enjoyed shining light on you.
:)) :)) :))

BY THE WAY I SHOULDN'T HAVE HURT YOU TO MUCH WITH THAT CHRISTIAN COMMENT, YOU EVIDENTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ONE IS.

I know it isn't you!

By the way, are you saying I am not a Christian?

[Gabby]

Spin Spin Spin. You do , murder is to kill & kill is to murder.

I really enjoyed shining light on you.

BY THE WAY I SHOULDN'T HAVE HURT YOU TO MUCH WITH THAT CHRISTIAN COMMENT, YOU EVIDENTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ONE IS.

Constantine the Great is right. The commandment is not to murder. Murder is taking the life of an innocet. God does allow killing..... remember all the people He commanded the Jews to kill? They were the enemies of the Jews and of God. He ordered their wholesale slaughter.

[Ron Jon]

Killing is murder.So if you kill someone in self defense it's still "murder"? :eh:

[Ron Jon]

Constantine the Great is right. The commandment is not to murder. Murder is taking the life of an innocet. God does allow killing..... remember all the people He commanded the Jews to kill? They were the enemies of the Jews and of God. He ordered their wholesale slaughter.Yeah, I guess by AngryAmerican's standards, God is guilty of breaking His own command not to "kill". :rolleyes:

[Poisonshady313]

Spin Spin Spin. You do , murder is to kill & kill is to murder.

I really enjoyed shining light on you.

BY THE WAY I SHOULDN'T HAVE HURT YOU TO MUCH WITH THAT CHRISTIAN COMMENT, YOU EVIDENTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT ONE IS.

All chihuahuas are dogs... but not all dogs are chihuahuas.


All mitsubishis are cars.... but not all cars are mitsubishis.

All New Yorkers are American... but not all Americans are New Yorkers.

All murder is killing, but NOT ALL KILLING IS MURDER.

The words in Hebrew are two totally different words.... and the choice of words used in Hebrew is significant.

Murder is particularly unlawful, premeditated with an element of hatred.

Killing might be necessary in time of war (lawful), self defense (obviously not premeditated) or carrying out capital punishment (justice, not hatred).

[HisServant]

Of course he denies it. Even those with sight can be blind.
ETA: Besides, he has a concordance.

LOL.. I just literally hit my head on my desk laughing.

[Angryamerican]

Still here? Oh dear I knew humiliating you would cause you to lose sleep.


:)) :)) :))



I know it isn't you!

By the way, are you saying I am not a Christian?

No i wouldn't say something like that and mean it.

[HisServant]

Boy you are esaily mislead. now i know why you believe what you do.

I doubt you have a clue. I researched it. Not just looked in my concordance. I've read books on it. Now I actually know someone (CTG) who speaks the language and confirms it. But hey at least you have a cute book to boast about.

[Angryamerican]

Constantine the Great is right. The commandment is not to murder. Murder is taking the life of an innocet. God does allow killing..... remember all the people He commanded the Jews to kill? They were the enemies of the Jews and of God. He ordered their wholesale slaughter.

Day late and a dollar short we have done been over that.

But remember it was God that ordered it not man.

I don't think he is doing that these days.

[Angryamerican]

So if you kill someone in self defense it's still "murder"? :eh:

I guess so but if i was defending myself or family i'll take that chance.

[HisServant]

I guess you don't realize that some of the gosples were in hebrew. After all the deciples were jewish.

And I guess you don't realize that words have different meanings and you have to use the correct meaning of a word to get to the root of what the writer is saying. What you do is find the definition you like. What I do is find the right definition then reread the text.

I just find it laughable that you really believe that the greek definition is going to be different than the Hebrew. :wall:

[Angryamerican]

Yeah, I guess by AngryAmerican's standards, God is guilty of breaking His own command not to "kill". :rolleyes:


So you are saying it's ok to kill?

Does God lie?

When God kills it is divine justice wouldn't you say?

Or did God say ok you can kill since i killed?

Either way killing doesn't seem to Christian to me.

[HisServant]

Denial it is.

Is killing murder?

Let me help you Angry.
They are both the taking of a life.
Murder is the taking of an innocent life.
Killing is just the taking of a life.

The one we are commanded never to do is the taking of an innocent life, hence thou shall not murder.

Where you get confused quite easily is that to murder is to kill. But to kill is not to murder.

[Ron Jon]

I guess so but if i was defending myself or family i'll take that chance.I can tell you don't like being wrong. There's nothing wrong with being wrong, as long as you recognize it and repent. Let's face it AngryAmerican, you were wrong. Now the honorable and honest thing to do now would be to admit you were wrong and accept the truth. Yes, all murder is killing but not all killing is murder. Otherwise, God is guilty of committing murder. Is this what you believe?

[Ron Jon]

So you are saying it's ok to kill?

Does God lie?

When God kills it is divine justice wouldn't you say?

Or did God say ok you can kill since i killed?

Either way killing doesn't seem to Christian to me.Yeah, I guess God shouldn't have told the children of Israel to kill men, women and children. I guess, by your standards, God is guilty of murder.

[Angryamerican]

All chihuahuas are dogs... but not all dogs are chihuahuas.


All mitsubishis are cars.... but not all cars are mitsubishis.

All New Yorkers are American... but not all Americans are New Yorkers.

All murder is killing, but NOT ALL KILLING IS MURDER.

The words in Hebrew are two totally different words.... and the choice of words used in Hebrew is significant.

Murder is particularly unlawful, premeditated with an element of hatred.

Killing might be necessary in time of war (lawful), self defense (obviously not premeditated) or carrying out capital punishment (justice, not hatred).

Ok maybe i am wrong. But did the Israelites ever fight wars without God ordering it through the prophets? And is it a just war if it is not ordered through the prophets?

That did make sense how you put it. Maybe my view is wrong i will think on it.

But i showed 5 different versions of the OT that used either murder or kill and why do they have the same definition?

[HisServant]

Thank you all so much for the early morning entertainment.
Blessings to one and all.

[Angryamerican]

I doubt you have a clue. I researched it. Not just looked in my concordance. I've read books on it. Now I actually know someone (CTG) who speaks the language and confirms it. But hey at least you have a cute book to boast about.


Can you speak for yourself. Or do you just repeat what others say?

[HisServant]

Ok maybe i am wrong. But did the Israelites ever fight wars without God ordering it through the prophets? And is it a just war if it is not ordered through the prophets?

That did make sense how you put it. Maybe my view is wrong i will think on it.

But i showed 5 different versions of the OT that used either murder or kill and why do they have the same definition?

Angry it is very simple. It is the same problem we have been going over again and again. The Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Spanish languages are very picturesque (sp?). There are words in these languages that do not translate into english very well. Some translations try to do there best but sometimes fail. That is why one needs to understand in the original language what certain words and terms mean. What is murder, what is killing, what does firstborn mean, what does begotten mean. In english there is one word Firstborn and it makes us think the Bible is talking about a first born child ie, physical birth. In the original language the word used does not mean a physical birth. ie created being. It denotes positon of authority. there are 2 different words in greek that mean first born. One is what you keep thinking of the other is the one we are talking about and it is the one used in greek and hebrew to mean one in position of authority. It does not mean Jesus is created.

[HisServant]

Can you speak for yourself. Or do you just repeat what others say?

I have spoken for myself. I have told you over and over again that your understanding of the term first born was incorrect. Please go back through these posts. You will see long before CTG got involved I have pointed it out to you.

It is ok to say you were incorrect. It shows maturity. It shows the ability for one to learn and grow. Instead you make comments like above. You question peoples faith and their walk. That is not a good quality. All it tries to do is shift or change the focus away from the topic. I have been corrected many times and I am the better for it. I have learned much from CTG and Harmonious. I appreciate their insight. Do I always agree no. But I can always respect their opinion as I hope they do mine. But when one argues what a word means with one who speaks the very language then that goes beyond stubborness and goes into pride. Pride that will not let you say I was wrong. Pride that is the downfall of man.

[Angryamerican]

I can tell you don't like being wrong. There's nothing wrong with being wrong, as long as you recognize it and repent. Let's face it AngryAmerican, you were wrong. Now the honorable and honest thing to do now would be to admit you were wrong and accept the truth. Yes, all murder is killing but not all killing is murder. Otherwise, God is guilty of committing murder. Is this what you believe?

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.Not directed at you ron.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

The word kill used at Exodus this is the definition.

H7523
רצח
râtsach
raw-tsakh'
A primitive root; properly to dash in pieces, that is, kill (a human being), especially to murder: - put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er).

The word kill used in the NT means.

G5407
φονεύω
phoneuō
fon-yoo'-o
From G5406; to be a murderer (of): - kill, do murder, slay.

There is no difference i can see.

[ralittlefield]

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

The folks that write our laws recognize a difference between murder and killing.

[HisServant]

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Do you ever use more than 1 source to support what you think? In other words use a different dictionary or concordenace to see if there is another or better definition of a word? Or do you just stick with this one book you are using?

[Angryamerican]

Do you ever use more than 1 source to support what you think? In other words use a different dictionary or concordenace to see if there is another or better definition of a word? Or do you just stick with this one book you are using?

You don't have a problem with the KJV do you?

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.Not directed at you ron.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

The word kill used at Exodus this is the definition.

H7523
רצח
râtsach
raw-tsakh'
A primitive root; properly to dash in pieces, that is, kill (a human being), especially to murder: - put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er).

The word kill used in the NT means.

G5407
φονεύω
phoneuō
fon-yoo'-o
From G5406; to be a murderer (of): - kill, do murder, slay.

There is no difference i can see.

[Ron Jon]

There is no difference i can see.So you believe God is guilty of murder?

[HisServant]

You don't have a problem with the KJV do you?

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.Not directed at you ron.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

The word kill used at Exodus this is the definition.

H7523
רצח
râtsach
raw-tsakh'
A primitive root; properly to dash in pieces, that is, kill (a human being), especially to murder: - put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er).

The word kill used in the NT means.

G5407
φονεύω
phoneuō
fon-yoo'-o
From G5406; to be a murderer (of): - kill, do murder, slay.

There is no difference i can see.

No problem with the KJV. I have 2 copies. I also have other versions because sometimes it gives better clarity on what something means. The reason I ask is because your definition of Kill and murder miss one important distinguishing point. Murder is the taking of an innocent life. killing just means the taking of a life. Perhaps looking at other sources will help you in seeing that. When I study I like to use several sources to get a better picture.

BTW: I did not take your comment to be directed at me. But it was not nice.

[Angryamerican]

No problem with the KJV. I have 2 copies. I also have other versions because sometimes it gives better clarity on what something means. The reason I ask is because your definition of Kill and murder miss one important distinguishing point. Murder is the taking of an innocent life. killing just means the taking of a life. Perhaps looking at other sources will help you in seeing that. When I study I like to use several sources to get a better picture.

BTW: I did not take your comment to be directed at me. But it was not nice.

Could it be that law was interpeted that way confusing the definition of both words?

[Angryamerican]

So you believe God is guilty of murder?

I think our laws was defined like you are saying making the definitions not the same. I'll show you why.

mur·der /ˈmɜrdər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mur-der] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun
1. Law. the killing of another human being under conditions specifically covered in law. In the U.S., special statutory definitions include murder committed with malice aforethought, characterized by deliberation or premeditation or occurring during the commission of another serious crime, as robbery or arson (first-degree murder), and murder by intent but without deliberation or premeditation (second-degree murder).
2. Slang. something extremely difficult or perilous: That final exam was murder!
3. a group or flock of crows.
–verb (used with object)
4. Law. to kill by an act constituting murder.
5. to kill or slaughter inhumanly or barbarously.
6. to spoil or mar by bad performance, representation, pronunciation, etc.: The tenor murdered the aria.
–verb (used without object)
7. to commit murder.
—Idioms

Kill

kill1 /kɪl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kil] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object)
1. to deprive of life in any manner; cause the death of; slay.
2. to destroy; do away with; extinguish: His response killed our hopes.
3. to destroy or neutralize the active qualities of: to kill an odor.
4. to spoil the effect of: His extra brushwork killed the painting.
5. to cause (time) to be consumed with seeming rapidity or with a minimum of boredom, esp. by engaging in some easy activity or amusement of passing interest: I had to kill three hours before plane time.
6. to spend (time) unprofitably: He killed ten good years on that job.
7. Informal. to overcome completely or with irresistible effect: That comedian kills me.
8. to muffle or deaden: This carpet kills the sound of footsteps.
9. Informal. to cause distress or discomfort to: These new shoes are killing me.
10. Informal. to tire completely; exhaust: The long hike killed us.
11. Informal. to consume completely: They killed a bottle of bourbon between them.
12. to cancel publication of (a word, paragraph, item, etc.), esp. after it has been set in type.
13. to defeat or veto (a legislative bill, etc.).
14. Electricity. to render (a circuit) dead.
15. to stop the operation of (machinery, engines, etc.): He killed the motor and the car stopped.
16. Tennis. to hit (a ball) with such force that its return is impossible.
17. Metallurgy.
a. to deoxidize (steel) before teeming into an ingot mold.
b. to eliminate springiness from (wire or the like).
c. to cold-roll (sheet metal) after final heat treatment in order to eliminate distortion.
18. Ice Hockey. to prevent the opposing team from scoring in the course of (a penalty being served by a teammate or teammates).
–verb (used without object)
19. to inflict or cause death.
20. to commit murder.
21. to be killed.
22. to overcome completely; produce an irresistible effect: dressed to kill.
23. Slang. to feel a smarting pain, as from a minor accident; sting: I stubbed my little toe and that really kills.
–noun
24. the act of killing, esp. game: The hounds moved in for the kill.
25. an animal or animals killed.
26. a number or quantity killed.
27. an act or instance of hitting or destroying a target, esp. an enemy aircraft.
28. the target so hit or, esp., destroyed.
29. Sports. kill shot.

But i posted that both words are used in the OT and NT.

[Angryamerican]

No problem with the KJV. I have 2 copies. I also have other versions because sometimes it gives better clarity on what something means. The reason I ask is because your definition of Kill and murder miss one important distinguishing point. Murder is the taking of an innocent life. killing just means the taking of a life. Perhaps looking at other sources will help you in seeing that. When I study I like to use several sources to get a better picture.

BTW: I did not take your comment to be directed at me. But it was not nice.

I also use an online dictionary.

[Angryamerican]

Do you ever use more than 1 source to support what you think? In other words use a different dictionary or concordenace to see if there is another or better definition of a word? Or do you just stick with this one book you are using?

But this has nothing to do with first born or begotten.

[Harmonious]

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.Not directed at you ron.

Murder.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

Kill.

H2026
הרג
hârag
haw-rag'
A primitive root; to smite with deadly intent: - destroy, out of hand, kill, murder (-er), put to [death], make [slaughter], slay (-er), X surely.

The word kill used at Exodus this is the definition.

H7523
רצח
râtsach
raw-tsakh'
A primitive root; properly to dash in pieces, that is, kill (a human being), especially to murder: - put to death, kill, (man-) slay (-er), murder (-er).

The word kill used in the NT means.

G5407
φονεύω
phoneuō
fon-yoo'-o
From G5406; to be a murderer (of): - kill, do murder, slay.

There is no difference i can see.The difference between Harag and Ratzach is that Harag means kill. Ratzach means murder.

There is a serious difference as far as Jewish law goes. Jews are allowed to kill several types of people for several reasons, including someone who is obviously on the path to murdering someone else. (It is in defense of that person who is being chased.)

Murder is never allowed.

That is only one serious difference.

[DRS]

Yeah, I guess God shouldn't have told the children of Israel to kill men, women and children. I guess, by your standards, God is guilty of murder.

God can kill and order the death of people He has judged worry of death.

The time of judgement is coming, in the menatime Christians are to help people reconcile themslves to God to avoid a bad judgement.

[DRS]

Shedding blood under the law code was serious, even the soldiers who did so were considered unclean for a period of time.

God did not allow David to build His temple because he had much blood on his hands.

You could be held guilty if you knew you had a animal that attacked others and did not warn others.

Now if you are killing others because of religion,nationality or you have decided to kill one ahead of time or deem there life worthless you are guilty of murder.

Mark 7:21*for from inside, out of the heart of men, injurious reasonings issue forth: fornications, thieveries, murders, 22*adulteries, covetings, acts of wickedness, deceit, loose conduct, an envious eye, blasphemy, haughtiness, unreasonableness. 23*All these wicked things issue forth from within and defile a man.”

[Constantine the Great]

You don't have a problem with the KJV do you?

Maybe i am wrong maybe i am not.If i am i apologize to butthead.

Wow, in the face of so many, you still want to qualify with the phrase "IF I WAS WRONG", and then provide an underhanded apology with an insult? You are so delusional, self-centered and egotistical to the point you can no longer even follow your own advice, which would be to ACCEPT you were wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence.
To everyone else (RJ, PS, Harmonious, HisServent, et al) thank you for the back up AND the morning's enlightenment to the Angry One.

[Constantine the Great]

On a further note Angry One I will further point out your hypocrisy on this matter.

1) I told you the commandment was not "kill" but "murder"
2) You literally lashed out at me for it, telling me to read Exodus.
3) I recommended you ask someone who spoke Hebrew.
4) You lashed out some more
5) Then, not knowing what else to do, in order to cover yourself you came up with this idiotic spin of how murder and kill are the same.

If that were true, that murder=kill,
then we have some interesting issues
1) I was right. Since murder and kill (according to you are the same).
2) There would have been no reason for you to attack me since we would both have been talking about the same thing. So why did you attack me?
THe reason is simple; because you know there is a distinction and your cover of the two being the same does not fly, no matter how many times you copy and paste the same concordance numbering garbage, murder and kill are not the same. You know this, others have confirmed it, yet all you still have left are your insults and your arrogance and your unending desire to cling on to your mistake and try to pass it off as truth. This whole garbage of "if" is clearly a last act of desperation which only makes you look all the more ridiculous.

[Warrior4God]

Im glad I aint in this fire

[Constantine the Great]

Im glad I aint in this fire

C'mon in, the fire is great today!

[Mathius]

Im glad I aint in this fire

I second that....

[Warrior4God]

C'mon in, the fire is great today!

Thats funny,just got back from our pond, fishing,The bass and bream are fun to catch.
I was bream fishing but my son was bass fishing he caught one about 3 pounds or better,he has caught a few that weigh over 8

[HisServant]

Could it be that law was interpeted that way confusing the definition of both words?

No the law is very clear. God actually goes into details as to how to handle accidents verses intentional and sets up cities of refuge.

[HisServant]

But this has nothing to do with first born or begotten.

Actually it does because you failed to come up with more than one definition. Each of those words had 2 different meanings. If you had an alternative source or a better tool you would have found them.

[Angryamerican]

Wow, in the face of so many, you still want to qualify with the phrase "IF I WAS WRONG", and then provide an underhanded apology with an insult? You are so delusional, self-centered and egotistical to the point you can no longer even follow your own advice, which would be to ACCEPT you were wrong in the face of overwhelming evidence.
To everyone else (RJ, PS, Harmonious, HisServent, et al) thank you for the back up AND the morning's enlightenment to the Angry One.

I am questioning whether you are right or not on the meaning of kill.

But i may be wrong. I will try it again i am sorry for being rude to you. That was a bad apology on my part but what you said i think was not cool nor Christian like either.

But i have some Jewish information i'm gonna look in to it further. If i am wrong i will come back and say so. But if i'm not i will come back and be ready for round two.

No matter what you might think i am a pretty humble guy but i don't take insults very well either.

[Angryamerican]

On a further note Angry One I will further point out your hypocrisy on this matter.

1) I told you the commandment was not "kill" but "murder"
2) You literally lashed out at me for it, telling me to read Exodus.
3) I recommended you ask someone who spoke Hebrew.
4) You lashed out some more
5) Then, not knowing what else to do, in order to cover yourself you came up with this idiotic spin of how murder and kill are the same.

If that were true, that murder=kill,
then we have some interesting issues
1) I was right. Since murder and kill (according to you are the same).
2) There would have been no reason for you to attack me since we would both have been talking about the same thing. So why did you attack me?
THe reason is simple; because you know there is a distinction and your cover of the two being the same does not fly, no matter how many times you copy and paste the same concordance numbering garbage, murder and kill are not the same. You know this, others have confirmed it, yet all you still have left are your insults and your arrogance and your unending desire to cling on to your mistake and try to pass it off as truth. This whole garbage of "if" is clearly a last act of desperation which only makes you look all the more ridiculous.

Show me where i lashed out at you first. By the definitions i gave i was right but i am now saying i could be wrong. I did apologize to you but yet you havn't offered one in return for the word you used and it got by the bypass filter which could be a violation in the religion forum.

Let it go and i will. But i will be a man of my word if you are right. But don't think for a second you have proved your case on the trinity.

[Angryamerican]

On a further note Angry One I will further point out your hypocrisy on this matter.

1) I told you the commandment was not "kill" but "murder"
2) You literally lashed out at me for it, telling me to read Exodus.
3) I recommended you ask someone who spoke Hebrew.
4) You lashed out some more
5) Then, not knowing what else to do, in order to cover yourself you came up with this idiotic spin of how murder and kill are the same.

If that were true, that murder=kill,
then we have some interesting issues
1) I was right. Since murder and kill (according to you are the same).
2) There would have been no reason for you to attack me since we would both have been talking about the same thing. So why did you attack me?
THe reason is simple; because you know there is a distinction and your cover of the two being the same does not fly, no matter how many times you copy and paste the same concordance numbering garbage, murder and kill are not the same. You know this, others have confirmed it, yet all you still have left are your insults and your arrogance and your unending desire to cling on to your mistake and try to pass it off as truth. This whole garbage of "if" is clearly a last act of desperation which only makes you look all the more ridiculous.

I found three arguments that said the same thing and that was as far as i looked there are probably more. All in AGREEMENT read.


The Bible's Command Against "Killing"
James Patrick Holding

To understand this issue -- beyond primitive "arguments by outrage" -- requires not only a study of the Hebrew, but an element of understanding of ANE law codes as well. To begin, the reader should be reminded of a very basic fact about ancient law codes of the Near East, courtesy of Hillers' Covenant: The History of a Biblical Idea:

..(T)here is no evidence that any collection of Near Eastern laws functioned as a written code that was applied by a strict method of exegesis to individual cases. As far as we can tell, these bodies of laws served educational purposes and gave expression to what was regarded as just in typical cases, but they left considerable latitude to local courts for determining the right in individual suits. They aided local courts without controlling them.

At this point some readers might wonder if this implies that the Decalogue or the laws are something less than God's absolute word. The answer is no: But at the same time, it does indicate that these are laws that have to be read in their legal/social context. Some laws, of course, are not open to interpretation: The commands against idolatry, for example, obviously can brook no exception, for no other God (in the modern sense; keep in mind distinction here) than Yahweh exists! But as Jesus made clear, saving a life on the Sabbath was an "exception" to the absolute prohibition of working on the Sabbath (As was, also, priests performing certain duties on the Sabbath!).

That said, can it truly be asserted that there is some discrepancy in the Biblical text on this account of killing? To answer this further and beyond mere social data we need to look at the original Hebrew words involved and figure out what they mean. Let's start with the word ratsach, from the Decalogue commandment in Exodus and Deuteronomy.

1. The original meaning of ratsach. Our modern translations render the word "murder" rather than "kill" -- but is that really a parallel definition? It is absurd to suppose that we have adequately grasped every nuance of this term, and then suppose that we can make it equal exactly some concept of Western jurisprudence!

Studies of the word by Hebrew scholars and historians are equivocal. It does seem to fit well for descriptions of what we would call manslaughter -- killing in anger. Some have suggested that it only applies to "blood revenge" killing. Now uneducated Skeptics of course take this as a victory of some sort and blather endlessly about how scholars can't agree, etc etc etc -- to which I can only say, while they do disagree on some points, there are indeed certain limitations that are agreed upon one way or the other. Figuring these out comes of careful study of the text in its social and legal context -- not from simply reading the text in English and strolling through Strong's concordance, then sitting back and laughing as scholars with more education than you discuss the issue.

Ratsach is used only a few times in the OT. In long passages in Numbers 35, Deut. 19, and Joshua 20-21, it is used to describe the act of someone who has committed what we might call manslaughter, or negligence; but it seems that there is more to the matter. Passing by places where the word is used but there are no contextual clues (Is. 1:21; Jer. 7:9; Hos. 4:2), we have this:
1. In Judges 20:4, it describes the killing of a woman who was in a house that was beset upon by night by a gang of evil men.
2. In 1 Kings 21:19, the Lord rhetorically asks Ahab if he has ratsached. This is after Ahab has concluded a plot to do away with Naboth by having two fellows say they have heard Naboth blaspheme. (This word also describes Ahab in 2 Kings 6:32.)
3. In Job 24:14, it describes one who in the light sets upon the poor and the needy, and is a thief at night.
4. In Ps. 62:3, it describes the fate of someone who is not prepared for what will happen to them, for they have no foundation in God. In Ps. 94:6 it describes the wicked who kill the widow and the stranger -- those who are helpless and disoriented.
5. In Prov. 22:13, it describes something a lion will do to the slothful man. Barker fusses on this verse quite a bit when he tries to debunk the "murder" definition (for of course lions cannot "murder" anyone!), and he has a point; but he misses the more important point. This verse, we shall see, is the key to the whole puzzle!
6. In Hos. 6:9, it is applied to priests who commit iniquity, with a comparison to a troop of robbers waiting for someone.

Taken together, we can discern a simple definition of ratsach: It refers to any killing that is done in the manner of a predatory animal -- which means either 1) as an angry reaction to stimulus; or 2) lying in wait, as one waits for prey. We have no difficulty or contradiction in Scripture with this verse, or with places where God declares judgment of death upon men.

But there is another verse which skeptics makes hash of, Leviticus 24:17. The word here is nakah, and some make much over the fact that though this is forbidden by God, we see the Canaanites getting nakahed, David nakahing Goliath, etc. -- well, nakah occurs in the OT almost 500 times! But it actually would not have taken much to figure this one out, either. Nakah is a word that is used in the sense of striking (Gen. 19:11, where land is nakahed), defeating or conquering (Gen. 14:5, 7, where Abraham nakahs an army). It does not mean "to kill" but is given that definition by context alone. Being that nakah does carry this variety of nuances, it is absurd to allege that there is some contradiction in Scripture over nakah.

But even if the nuances were the same, skeptics should consider a simple fact which they will refuse to accept: God's command not to nakah in Leviticus offers an obvious exception, that God may command others to nakah those deserving judgment -- the prescription is to men, concerning men. God owns His creation; it is His right to do as He pleases with it; and this in no way suggests that God is commanding a breaking of His own rule, since a higher rule -- that of righteous judgment upon those deserving of it -- is in effect, over and against a rule that is part of a "general guidance" law code. Skeptics who complain about "God ordering people to break His own rules" tend to miss this salient point, because they are assuming a 21st-century concept of law upon an ancient law code with a different purpose!

Source.
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nokilling.html

[Angryamerican]

Very interesting EH?

Addendum: Practical Application. In light of the above a reader asked for some commentary on how the command "thou shalt not kill" would apply in various situations today. I will provide a few applications thought of offhand, and any reader may make or request further comment on given situations.

1. Manslaughter. This one is simple enough, for as noted above, this crime of passion continues to this day. Few would dispute that the command applies here or to negligence.
2. Murder. Premeditated killing would come under the rubric of an animal lying in wait as above. Here again few would dispute that the command applies.
3. War. It is here that some difference of opinion arises, and anti-war protesters have at times used this command. In light of the above delineations it appears that such objectors could be right, if a war is pursued under certain conditions. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait would constitute a premeditated act; but our reply war in the Gulf was seen as a matter of liberation and defense, and the current (2002-3) war in Iraq is framed as a war of defense against terrorist elements. While making no statement on that issue, a war waged for such a purpose clearly does not come under the rubric of ratsach, nor would America's War of Independence, nor World War I and II as a whole (though of course individual acts of ratsach may still occur). Animals do not fight for their freedom from tyranny, and they fight to defend themselves, which is neither done in passion nor is it premeditated.
4. Capital punishment. As noted above, acts of judgment do not come under the rubric of ratsach. Despite certain rhetoric, capital punishment is not done for predatory reasons, but is framed as a "war" of its own, a defense for society (assuming it is done properly, which many would say, it is not).
5. Abortion. Polemically abortion opponents have painted abortion as a "predatory" act, and whether they are right is dependent on the identity of the fetus. If a fetus is human, they are right: a life is erased for predatory (that is, personally advantageous) purposes (convenience, for example) barring other circumstances (life of the mother, for example).

Source.

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nokilling.html

[HisServant]

Because we have a failure to communicate here goes again. Short to the point from someone who speaks the language.

The difference between Harag and Ratzach is that Harag means kill. Ratzach means murder.

There is a serious difference as far as Jewish law goes. Jews are allowed to kill several types of people for several reasons, including someone who is obviously on the path to murdering someone else. (It is in defense of that person who is being chased.)

Murder is never allowed.

That is only one serious difference.

[Angryamerican]

Because we have a failure to communicate here goes again. Short to the point from someone who speaks the language.

The difference between Harag and Ratzach is that Harag means kill. Ratzach means murder.

There is a serious difference as far as Jewish law goes. Jews are allowed to kill several types of people for several reasons, including someone who is obviously on the path to murdering someone else. (It is in defense of that person who is being chased.)

Murder is never allowed.

That is only one serious difference.

So you are saying some members here are flawless and don't MAKE MISTAKES ? Maybe they don't realize the word how they used it was wrong?

People that agree with you are brilliant and cannot be mistaken EH?

[HisServant]

Now what this does is really highlight how and why verses are not properly understood. We use the wrong definition for words. Thus it changes the meaning of a verse. Lets get back to topic at hand.

First Born and Begotten when speaking of Jesus. Have we finally come to the conclusion that it does not mean created?

[HisServant]

So you are saying some members here are flawless and don't MAKE MISTAKES ? Maybe they don't realize the word how they used it was wrong?

People that agree with you are brilliant and cannot be mistaken EH?

Actually the only one disagreeing is you. Even in your post it is denoting that there are 2 words for killing. The key is understanding the difference then in the original language making sure we know which word is being used. Thereby when translating to english we use the correct definition. I has nothing to do with agreeing with me. It has to do with accepting the definitions of what the words mean so we can have a meaningful exchange.
If I talk about killing is not a sin and you say it is not because you understand it as murder and not killing we are not talking on the same point. And thus will never come to an understanding. For both of us to say Murder means one thing and Killing means another the we can have a meaningful exchange. The same goes for verses dealing with Begotten and first born. We need to know what the original language means. Then we get the proper understanding and can have a meaningful exchange. So we go to someone who speaks Greek to get a definition. Or you go to a greek dictionary and look up the word prototokos to see what it means. We then use that definition when using verses that use that word.

[Angryamerican]

Now what this does is really highlight how and why verses are not properly understood. We use the wrong definition for words. Thus it changes the meaning of a verse. Lets get back to topic at hand.

First Born and Begotten when speaking of Jesus. Have we finally come to the conclusion that it does not mean created?

I may have said something wrong that made you think that ,but that was not my intention.

The meaning.

First born= one's oldest child or first child.

Begotten = to father a child.

[HisServant]

I may have said something wrong that made you think that ,but that was not my intention.

The meaning.

First born= one's oldest child or first child.

Begotten = to father a child.

Those are the english definition of the words now look at the meanings of the words from their original language.

Another objection might be based on the word “firstborn,” prototokos in Greek. The problem again is that the Greek word is not identical in semantic range to the English rendering. The English “firstborn” usually (though, it must be said, not always) implies the existence of subsequent children, but with prototokos there is no such implication. In Hebrews 1:6, for example, the use of prototokos in reference to the Incarnation of the Word of God cannot mean that there is a “second-born” Word of God! Nowhere is the term used to express merely the order of birth; instead in Romans 8:29, Colossians 1:15, 18, Hebrews 11:28 and 12:23, and Revelation 1:5, the title is applied to Jesus as the privileged and legal Heir of the Kingdom, attesting that He is truly “first in all things.” To the contemporary ear, a better translation might indeed be “heir,” which is similarly silent on the subject of other children and carries the same legal and poetic force that is intended by “firstborn.”

The Greek word for '(only) begotten' is 'monogenes'.
'Mono' translates 'single, unique, sole, singular' and speaks of nature, not birth.
'Genes' (genos) translates clan, offspring, house, genus, class, kind, family, progeny, sort, species, direct/collateral descent, tribe, race, stock, kin, and speaks of nature, not source.

In both words, we see that reference is to nature. Jesus was God in nature (homoousios - being of one substance); not to be confused with the idea of 'homoiousious' (being of a similar substance; being like the Father in substance only, but not in nature). If we look again at the example of Abraham and Isaac, we see that Isaac became Abraham's 'only-begotten son' through birth. This means that, at some time, Isaac wasn't 'only-begotten' since he wouldn't have been born. Jesus never became because Jesus had always been - Jesus IS. We have only to read of Jesus identifying Himself with the Godhead in John 8:58 where He speaks of Himself as the "I am"; a direct reference to Exodus 3:14, identifying Himself totally with God in substance and nature. Benjamin Warfield, stated in his work "The Person and Work of Christ" (p56) that, "The adjective 'only-begotten' conveys the ideas, not of derivation and subordination, but of uniqueness and consubstantiality: Jesus is all that God is, and He alone is this."

[BobB]

The Trinity Father-Son-Holy Spirit

Father- He who created everything
Holy Spitit- He who the Father send to us in great time of spiritual need.
Son- He who was sent by the Father in a Human Form.

I do not find it hard to understand. Just open your heart!

[Harmonious]

Because we have a failure to communicate here goes again. Short to the point from someone who speaks the language.

The difference between Harag and Ratzach is that Harag means kill. Ratzach means murder.

There is a serious difference as far as Jewish law goes. Jews are allowed to kill several types of people for several reasons, including someone who is obviously on the path to murdering someone else. (It is in defense of that person who is being chased.)

Murder is never allowed.

That is only one serious difference.Thank you for understanding.

[HisServant]

Thank you for understanding.

I may not always agree when it comes to Jesus and the NT. But that does not mean you don't know your language. :doh:

[Tucson Jim]

Again, murder is forbidden. Read my post again SLOWLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Make sure to pause, where there is a comma and follow all the other rules of punctuation as well.

I know the feeling CTG, I know the feeling . . . :wall:

[Tucson Jim]

Boy you are esaily mislead. now i know why you believe what you do.

Well, he's not falling for your misinterpretations, so he can't be mislead too easily!

[Tucson Jim]

Shedding blood under the law code was serious, even the soldiers who did so were considered unclean for a period of time.

God did not allow David to build His temple because he had much blood on his hands.

You could be held guilty if you knew you had a animal that attacked others and did not warn others.

Now if you are killing others because of religion,nationality or you have decided to kill one ahead of time or deem there life worthless you are guilty of murder.

Mark 7:21*for from inside, out of the heart of men, injurious reasonings issue forth: fornications, thieveries, murders, 22*adulteries, covetings, acts of wickedness, deceit, loose conduct, an envious eye, blasphemy, haughtiness, unreasonableness. 23*All these wicked things issue forth from within and defile a man.”

Here we go again! What does Mark 7:21 have to do with war???

[Tucson Jim]

You don't seem to care what Jesus say's .

Of course I do. I just feel you routinely misinterpret scripture. Such as scripture relating to the Trinity.

[Tucson Jim]

My love for God is greater than for anyone in this life or the next. If the choice should arise between obeying God and my family's lives I will pick God everytime. You may call me extreme but that is what I believe.

That's what's great about America - you can believe anything you want.

[Tucson Jim]

If there was such a verse you wouldn't listen.

Yeah, I'm the one who doesn't listen!

[Tucson Jim]

I don't know about you ,but if they get past my two rottweilers then they have to deal with my 12 guage shotgun.

We agree on that anyway!

[DRS]

Here we go again! What does Mark 7:21 have to do with war???

The things that cause war and the things that keep wars going are found there, if you honestly wanted to know you could have reflected on what happens in wartime and looked at the scripture.

[Constantine the Great]

Show me where i lashed out at you first.
Sure thing. Remember this?

I'm suppost to trust your biased definition when i find otherwise.

Sorry but it is thou shall not kill.

Read exodus again genious. As well as what scripture i posted.

So there are only two possibilities. You were being insulting, or you think I am a genius. Which is it?



By the definitions i gave i was right but i am now saying i could be wrong. I did apologize to you but yet you havn't offered one in return for the word you used and it got by the bypass filter which could be a violation in the religion forum.
It's not a filter bypass. Either file a mod complaint or stop threatening with one. Apology to you? For what? Responding to your insult?


Let it go and i will. But i will be a man of my word if you are right. But don't think for a second you have proved your case on the trinity.

Let it go? Not until you admit you were wrong.
I don't care whether you accept the trinity or not.

[Constantine the Great]

Very interesting EH?

Addendum: Practical Application. In light of the above a reader asked for some commentary on how the command "thou shalt not kill" would apply in various situations today. I will provide a few applications thought of offhand, and any reader may make or request further comment on given situations.

1. Manslaughter. This one is simple enough, for as noted above, this crime of passion continues to this day. Few would dispute that the command applies here or to negligence.
2. Murder. Premeditated killing would come under the rubric of an animal lying in wait as above. Here again few would dispute that the command applies.
3. War. It is here that some difference of opinion arises, and anti-war protesters have at times used this command. In light of the above delineations it appears that such objectors could be right, if a war is pursued under certain conditions. Iraq's invasion of Kuwait would constitute a premeditated act; but our reply war in the Gulf was seen as a matter of liberation and defense, and the current (2002-3) war in Iraq is framed as a war of defense against terrorist elements. While making no statement on that issue, a war waged for such a purpose clearly does not come under the rubric of ratsach, nor would America's War of Independence, nor World War I and II as a whole (though of course individual acts of ratsach may still occur). Animals do not fight for their freedom from tyranny, and they fight to defend themselves, which is neither done in passion nor is it premeditated.
4. Capital punishment. As noted above, acts of judgment do not come under the rubric of ratsach. Despite certain rhetoric, capital punishment is not done for predatory reasons, but is framed as a "war" of its own, a defense for society (assuming it is done properly, which many would say, it is not).
5. Abortion. Polemically abortion opponents have painted abortion as a "predatory" act, and whether they are right is dependent on the identity of the fetus. If a fetus is human, they are right: a life is erased for predatory (that is, personally advantageous) purposes (convenience, for example) barring other circumstances (life of the mother, for example).

Source.

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nokilling.html

You realize right that what you posted leans more in favor of the Hebrew way of Thou shalt not murder as opposed to your thou shalt not kill? No? Perhaps you should read twice before posting something. There is nothing in this that comes close to refuting what I, Poisonshady, Harmonious, and others have said about the commandment. The article is written by an Irish or Anglo Saxon guy looking to split hairs that the Jews have already split centuries ago. Sorry, I'll take the Jewish interpretation over the Irish/Anglo-Saxon version.
Perhaps you should follow your advice and let it go, because the more you keep at it, the deeper the hole you are digging for yourself. And you were under the impression I would accept my faith vis a vie the trinity from someone who deals in such inaccuracies? Heaven forbid!

[Harmonious]

You realize right that what you posted leans more in favor of the Hebrew way of Thou shalt not murder as opposed to your thou shalt not kill? No? Perhaps you should read twice before posting something. There is nothing in this that comes close to refuting what I, Poisonshady, Harmonious, and others have said about the commandment. The article is written by an Irish or Anglo Saxon guy looking to split hairs that the Jews have already split centuries ago. Sorry, I'll take the Jewish interpretation over the Irish/Anglo-Saxon version.
Perhaps you should follow your advice and let it go, because the more you keep at it, the deeper the hole you are digging for yourself.

:hug:

[Constantine the Great]

:hug:

Hey sweetie :hug: