Will believers be judged by the law?

[BibleShockers]

>>>For one thing, when it is translated, "And God was the word," it making God the subject of the sentence, and this is wrong...

No, God is the qualifier of the utterance. You can reverse it if you find it easier:

"and the word was God[utterance]"

The utterance "let there be xxx" was of a certain quality - it was God utterance."

Or "utternence of God quality."

Or "utterance of divine quality."

Not identity: "Every thing that God was, the word was!"

It is saying something about the words "Let there be light." These were special words. How werd they special? They were words that had divine power, authority, command.

[John317]

>>>For one thing, when it is translated, "And God was the word," it making God the subject of the sentence, and this is wrong...

No, God is the qualifier of the utterance. You can reverse it if you find it easier:

"and the word was God[utterance]"

The utterance "let there be xxx" was of a certain quality - it was God utterance."

Or "utternence of God quality."

Or "utterance of divine quality."

Not identity: "Every thing that God was, the word was!"

It is saying something about the words "Let there be light." These were special words. How werd they special? They were words that had divine power, authority, command.

Therefore it seems to me that you would be OK with the following translations:

1) (Revised English Bible)-- "and what God was, the word was."

3) Andy Gaus-- "... and God was what the Word was."

Is this true?

[BibleShockers]

>>>Therefore it seems to me that you would be OK with the following translations:

1) (Revised English Bible)-- "and what God was, the word was."

3) Andy Gaus-- "... and God was what the Word was."

Is this true?

No. This is identity.

The construct relates to the quality of another:

****

Main Entry: 1qual·i·ty

Pronunciation: \ˈkwä-lə-tē\

Function: noun

Inflected Form(s): plural qual·i·ties

Etymology: Middle English qualite, from Anglo-French qualité, from Latin qualitat-, qualitas, from qualis of what kind; akin to Latin qui who — more at who

Date: 14th century

1 a: peculiar and essential character : nature <her ethereal quality — Gay Talese> b: an inherent feature : property <had a quality of stridence, dissonance — Roald Dahl> c: capacity, role <in the quality of reader and companion — Joseph Conrad>

2 a: degree of excellence : grade <the quality of competing air service — Current Biography> b: superiority in kind <merchandise of quality>

3 a: social status : rank b: aristocracy

4 a: a distinguishing attribute : characteristic <possesses many fine qualities> barchaic : an acquired skill : accomplishment

5: the character in a logical proposition of being affirmative or negative

6: vividness of hue

7 a: timbre b: the identifying character of a vowel sound determined chiefly by the resonance of the vocal chambers in uttering it

8: the attribute of an elementary sensation that makes it fundamentally unlike any other sensation

synonyms quality, property, character, attribute mean an intelligible feature by which a thing may be identified. quality is a general term applicable to any trait or characteristic whether individual or generic <material with a silky quality>. property implies a characteristic that belongs to a thing's essential nature and may be used to describe a type or species <the property of not conducting heat>. character applies to a peculiar and distinctive quality of a thing or a class <remarks of an unseemly character>. attribute implies a quality ascribed to a thing or a being <the traditional attributes of a military hero>.

****

There is no idea of EQUIVALENCE.

[BibleShockers]

Consider this from the dictionary explanation:

"...quality is a general term applicable to any trait or characteristic whether individual or generic <material with a silky quality>...."

If there were a term "Gody" I would go with that. "Of a divine quality" gives the idea.

[John317]

John3:17-- >>>Therefore it seems to me that you would be OK with the following translations:

1) (Revised English Bible)-- "and what God was, the word was."

3) Andy Gaus-- "... and God was what the Word was."

Is this true?

Quote:

BILL-- No. This is identity.

The construct relates to the quality of another.

"What God was, the word was,"

and

"God was what the the Word was," are not saying that the Word is the Father.

Those translations are saying that "the word" is of the same nature as God is.

In other words, if God is X, the Word is X.

Like this:

God= xxx

therefore

the word= xxx --- (This is NOT identity)

NOT THIS:

The Word=the God-- (This is Identity)

In that phrase God is the Father. It is not saying the Word is being identified as the Father. The Father and the Word are not one and the same. They are two separate persons. But they are like doubles. One what is like, the other also is.

This becomes important because of what the Bible says about seeing Jesus-- that when we see him (i.e., his character) it is the same as seeing the Father.

[John317]

Consider this from the dictionary explanation:

"...quality is a general term applicable to any trait or characteristic whether individual or generic <material with a silky quality>...."

If there were a term "Gody" I would go with that. "Of a divine quality" gives the idea.

It has been correctly translated as "and the word was deity."

Some have translated it as "the word was divine."

It has also been translated terribly as, "and God was the word."

The Jehovah's Witnesses NWT-- "And Word was a god."

What is wrong with these last two translations?

[John317]

JOHN 3:17-- >>>Therefore it seems to me that you would be OK with the following translations:

1) (Revised English Bible)-- "and what God was, the word was."

3) Andy Gaus-- "... and God was what the Word was."

Is this true?

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- No. This is identity.

Why then did you write:

Quote:

Not identity: "Every thing that God was, the word was!"

That appears to give the impression you do not believe that construction refers to identity. Is that what you mean?

Or are you rejecting it because it is making an identity?

If you reject it for that reason, you would be wrong because Gaus' translation is not identifying the word as being the same one as God in that phrase. Neither does the REB translation. Actually neither is the NASB or KJV. It may cause some people to be confused on that point, but there is no reason to be. "God" is referring to the Father and "the Word" is in reference to the Son who became a man, died for our sins and was raised again and is now in heaven.

[BibleShockers]

"What God was, the word was," and "God was what the the Word was," are not saying that the Word is the Father. Those translations are saying that "the word" is of the same nature as God is.

In other words, if God is X, the Word is X.

Consider a "silky material." If silk is white, but the material is not, is it no longer silky? Does a qualitative remark make something equivalent? NO. That is just not the way language works. When you "my yoghurt was creamy" - does it mean that it is cream? That cream and yoghurt are identical? That is the difference between a qualitative statement and an identity statement. Identity implies equivalence and identical attributes.

>>>>Like this:

God= xxx

therefore

the word= xxx

It is not saying:

The Word=the God

Notice the equal signs you are using over and over! Do you remember the Identity Principle from Algebra?

>>>In that phrase God is the Father. It is not saying the Word is being identified as the Father.

Do you know what the equal symbols signifies? They teach it in like kindergarten now.

>>>The Father and the Word are not one and the same. They are two separate persons. But they are like doubles. One what is like, the other also is.

Doubles? God has a clone?

>>>This becomes important because of what the Bible says about seeing Jesus-- that when we see him (i.e., his character) it is the same as seeing the Father.

Jesus is said to "expound" God. Now if Jesus "expounds" God then

Jesus <> God

But the passage isn't even talking about Jesus but about God's word, ala "Let there be.."

You are arguing in circles, from grade 0 math and language skills.

I knew this was going to happen. You are so bent on reaching the "right" conclusion.

[BibleShockers]

>>>That appears to give the impression you do not believe that construction refers to identity. Is that what you mean?

The English translation, yes.

Learn the difference between quality and identity.

[BibleShockers]

>>>It has been correctly translated as "and the word was deity."

Aggh. You just can't grasp at anything but the straws.

>>>Some have translated it as "the word was divine."

Better, but not quite.

>>>The Jehovah's Witnesses NWT-- "And Word was a god."

What is wrong with that the last translation?

The construction does not necessarily imply indefinitess (however, statisticially, 80% of the time it does) but quality.

[BibleShockers]

>>>What is wrong with that the last translation?

It is wrong for the same reason ALL of your translations are wrong. The JWs are saying that Jesus is "a person in the class of: God." This is profoundly idiotic. God is not a club! Not to Moses! The JWs likewise presume we are not *really* talking about the word at all. We are secretly talking about a cosmic person.

What part of "word" don't people understand?! How exasperating!

People are way too smart for their own good. It says "word" and they read "Jesus." "I-see-Je-sus" not "exegesis."

[John317]

"

JOHN3:17-- >>>The Father and the Word are not one and the same. They are two separate persons. But they are like doubles. One what is like, the other also is.

Quote:

BILL ROSS--- Doubles? God has a clone?

Yes, there is One exactly like Him, except that He volunteered to become a member of the human family and live and die to save us. That is what Jesus is saying when He tells His disciples, "When you see me, you have seen the Father."

I suppose in our day, in regard to the nature of the Godhead, one might say God and Christ are clones of each other, as long as it is understood that God and Christ are eternal and had no beginning. They are of the same essence. Heb. 1: 3 and Col. 1: 9 (not quality but essence spoken of here. See Greek-English Lexicons).

[BibleShockers]

>>>...That is what Jesus is saying when He tells His disciples, "When you see me, you have seen the Father."

So if I can name a way in which Jesus is not like God, does it break your theory? If, for example:

Jesus=God

Jesus=begotten

then

God=begotten

Is that what you understand John 1:1c to mean? Can you see that your math falls flat on its face when tested?

>>>I suppose in our day, in regard to the nature of the Godhead, one might say God and Christ are clones of each other. They are of the same essence. Heb. 1: 3 and Col. 1: 9 (not quality but essence spoken of here. See Greek-English Lexicons).

Heb 1:3 - I've already shown that your understanding is wrong. If you think it is right, show your evidence.

I think you meant 19:

For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

What do you think it means "it pleased the father?" Don't you see that it was God's decision? Note that the context shows he is referring to the assembly of believers, not the trees, not cars, not tractors, nor himself.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence.

19 For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell;

Every verse you touch turns to poison because you are trying to press these verses into decietfulness to promote a lie.

[John317]

>>>What is wrong with that the last translation?

It is wrong for the same reason ALL of your translations are wrong. The JWs are saying that Jesus is "a person in the class of: God." This is profoundly idiotic. God is not a club! Not to Moses! The JWs likewise presume we are not *really* talking about the word at all. We are secretly talking about a cosmic person.

What part of "word" don't people understand?! How exasperating!

People are way too smart for their own good. It says "word" and they read "Jesus." "I-see-Je-sus" not "exegesis."

I believe that Jesus is called the logos or the word or the expression or utterance of God because Jesus Christ has always had the role of God's communication to His creation.

Notice Jesus has this role in Rev. 1: 1; 1 John 1: 1-3; Hebrews 1: 1-3; and John 1:1-18. Think of the pattern of those verses, of Jesus as the expression of God. This pattern goes all the way back into the Old Testament. And it is found in many more places in the NT. He's the One who communicates with the churches in Rev. 1-3. Notice that Jesus is called the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Chief or Prince or Ruler of God creation.

Jesus says, "I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End (Rev. 22: 13). Those are the same words that "God" utters in the OT and in Rev. 1: 8.

Bill, do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Word of God?

[BibleShockers]

>>>Jesus says, "I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End (Rev. 22: 13). Those are the same words that "God" utters in the OT and in Rev. 1: 8.

I'm rethinking Rev 22:13. I think upon reconsidering the matter, that is supposed to be part of the prophecy. I think these are meant to be the words of God himself (via Jesus).

>>>Bill, do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Word of God?

No. Certainly not in any metaphysical sense. Certainly not any more than he is bread, food, a lamb or a door.

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>I suppose in our day, in regard to the nature of the Godhead, one might say God and Christ are clones of each other. They are of the same essence. Heb. 1: 3 and Col. 1: 9 (not quality but essence spoken of here. See Greek-English Lexicons).

[John317]

>>>Jesus says, "I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End (Rev. 22: 13). Those are the same words that "God" utters in the OT and in Rev. 1: 8.

I'm rethinking Rev 22:13. I think upon reconsidering the matter, that is supposed to be part of the prophecy. I think these are meant to be the words of God himself (via Jesus).

>>>Bill, do you believe that Jesus Christ is the Word of God?

No. Certainly not in any metaphysical sense. Certainly not any more than he is bread, food, a lamb or a door.

Do you recall a verse which proves without question that Jesus Christ is the Word of God?

[John317]

JOHN3:17-- >>>Jesus says, "I AM the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End (Rev. 22: 13). Those are the same words that "God" utters in the OT and in Rev. 1: 8.

Quote:

BILL ROSS-- I'm rethinking Rev 22:13.

Who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords?

[BibleShockers]

>>>No, I meant to type Col 2: 9 rather than 1: 9. Col. 2: 9 uses the Greek word, "theothtos." It has to do the essence of the Godhead, or of being God. It is not referring to quality, such as in Col. 1: 19, which uses the term, "plhrwma," a noun that refers to quality of the divine being or nature.

This word is extremely poorly attested. Its meaning has largely been deduced by scholars from its usage here! So you are making what is basically a circular appeal. The word, in this context, CLEARLY refers to wisdom and knowledge ABOUT God. Think "divinity school." What he is saying is that all of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge of God are hid in Christ as a corpus. Note the context:

Col 2:

4 ¶ And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words.

5 For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.

6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:

7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.

8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

In fact, as I mentioned before, he is refuting the idea that Chrisians are dependent in any way on the Jewish torah! So he continues:

10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:

11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

13 ¶ And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.

16 ¶ Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:

17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

So read those verses for the meaning Paul intended and we will kill two seed-devouring birds with one stone (is not my word like a rock?)

>>>1: 19 is saying that Jesus had the full extent of God's divine attributes in him; and 2: 9 is saying that Jesus Christ had the full extent of the very essence of Deity in him bodily.

Get a grip. Look at the context.

[John317]

>>>No, I meant to type Col 2: 9 rather than 1: 9. Col. 2: 9 uses the Greek word, "theothtos." It has to do the essence of the Godhead, or of being God. It is not referring to quality, such as in Col. 1: 19, which uses the term, "plhrwma," a noun that refers to quality of the divine being or nature.

Quote:

BILL-- This word is extremely poorly attested. Its meaning has largely been deduced by scholars from its usage here! So you are making what is basically a circular appeal. The word, in this context, CLEARLY refers to wisdom and knowledge ABOUT God. Think "divinity school." What he is saying is that all of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge of God are hid in Christ as a corpus.

What do the standard Greek-English Lexicons say about the word, theothtos?

[BibleShockers]

>>>Do you recall a verse that says that proves without a question that Jesus Christ is the Word of God?

No. There is none.

But even if there were, are you going to argue that Jesus must have hooves because he is the lamb?!

But you'll want to discuss this:

Re 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

I submit to you that the vesture is named "the word of God." The one on the horse, on the other hand is not known to anyone but himself:

11 ¶ And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his [iTS] name is called The Word of God.

14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.

15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.

16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

So the idea is that Jesus wars with the sword of the breath which is the word of God, sits on the white horse of the word of God, wears white cloathing which is the word of God, but NEVER does the scripture equate Jesus in any metaphysical sense with the word of God:

Joh 12:50 And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

Joh 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.

[BibleShockers]

There isn't just one king of kings. Some kings had dominion over other kings.

Ezr 7:12 Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time.

Eze 26:7 For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I will bring upon Tyrus Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon, a king of kings, from the north, with horses, and with chariots, and with horsemen, and companies, and much people.

Da 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.

1Ti 6:15 Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords;

Re 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

So in Rev 19:16 it is more proper to translate "king of kings" as a **title** rather than a name:

Re 19:16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name [title] written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

And that would be, I would imagine, Jesus, though to be honest, the name is not given.

[BibleShockers]

>>>What do the standard Greek-English Lexicons say about the word, theothtos?

BDAG has "divinity."

But the rule is "context is king." If I remember my studies correctly, and I think I do, this is probably the oldest attested usage of the word, so Paul may have coined the word. It appears Paul coined several new words.

What is clear from the context is that he is talking about true knowledge of God.

This would be a good time for you to revisit Occam's Razor.

[BibleShockers]

No wait, I believe it was used in 3 Maccabees where it was translated by LXXe as "the knowledge of divine matters."

I don't have my hard copy of the LXX so I can't put my finger on it. Right now.

[John317]

>>>What do the standard Greek-English Lexicons say about the word, theothtos?

BDAG has "divinity."

But the rule is "context is king." If I remember my studies correctly, and I think I do, this is probably the oldest attested usage of the word, so Paul may have coined the word. It appears Paul coined several new words.

What is clear from the context is that he is talking about true knowledge of God.

This would be a good time for you to revisit Occam's Razor.

This would be a good time for you to quit trying to dodge the barn because this truth is as wide and obvious as a barn door.

What else did the BDAG have for theothtos?

I am going to give the evidence for this word from the best authorities in Greek:

First of all, I have 65+ translation of the book of Colossians, and the vast majority of those have Deity or Godhead. These include all the standard translations, such as NASB, NKJV, NIV, TINV, RSV, NRSV, RYL, Rotherham, and dozens more. (See next post where many of these are given.)

As might be expected, the Jehovah's Witness translations reads, "divine quality." That is wrong, as we see by an examination of the authoritative sources, but it is understandable why they would translated it that way since they are also trying to avoid any teaching that Christ is God.

1) Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon (p. 288) reads, "deity i.e. the state of being God, Godhead; Col. ii.9." Then it says, "Theoths deity differs from Theioths divinity, as essence differs from quality or attribute."

It is interesting to note that Joseph Thayer was not a Trinitarian but a member of the Unitarian church. Therefore it cannot be said that he was prejudice in favor of the Trinity.

2) A Greek-English Lexicon, Baur Arndt Gingrich,p. 359, "Theoths... to plhrwma ths th. the fullness of deity Col. 2: 9...."

This source give many other extra-Biblical sources, including Plut, Lucia, Icarom., Herm., as Hm 10 and Hm. 11, where the word also means deity.

3) The Dictionary of the New Testament, Ed. Bruce Metzger-- under "Theths, htos deity, godhead."

4) Robert Young's Analytical Concordance gives "Deity."

5) Jamieson, Fausset & Brown's Commentary on the whole Bible, under Col. 2: 9 reads, "The Greek means the essence and nature of the Godhead, not merely the divine perfections and attributes of Divinity(Greek, "theiotes"). He, as man, was not merely God-like, but in the fullest sense God."

6) All 6 of my Greek-English NT Interlinears read either "Godhead" or "Deity."

To summarize, there is evidence for the meaning of the the word, theothtos, outside of the Bible, and this evidence supports the reading of Deity. The evidence supporting this reading both in the Bible and outside the Bible is more than compelling. It is conclusive. That explains why virtually all modern translations read Godhead or Deity at Col. 2: 9. See next post for the proof. .