Do you...........

[manny is the man]

I don't currently go to church... I did in the past... I'd like to find a good church to start going to again, I find it inspirational.

Well I invite youto my church.
New covenant ministries on St. Johns Bluff

[DBK]

right on... is that link you posted info on it? (my work's firewall blocks it)

[Stardust]

not christian!
and not only that but i think that religion is b/w that person and god...i have my beliefs and i dont need someone telling me wut is sinful and wut is good...I know the difference b/w right and wrong and that is solely b/w myself and up above!

Well your half right.
religon is not what I am all about.
I hate religon.
You see religon was not created by God, It was man who created it.
And as for me It's not my place to tell you that your wrong for sinning.
you are right, that is between you and God.
But my question Didn't state you have to go to church Because your wrong. It was simply, Why?

I'm not trying to attack you in any way or to push my belief on anyone.
If you feel this is what I am trying to do, Please Forgive me.

well when i wrote i dont need someone telling me what is sinful and what is not, I was talking about being preached to by someone, who knows nothing of me...besides i am not a church type of person, again I know what i believe in and i know this is enough for me to get me through life....p.s. i know you werent attacking me i am just clarifying this!

[manny is the man]

I'm just saying how do you know this and what do you base this on?

Well, I gotta ask, how do you know? For that matter how do you know what god's word is?

"And the Word was God. . ."

You asked how to understand John 1:1, since some sects claim that this verse should read that the Word was "a God"—or "a god." This claim is based on the fact that in the original Greek text the word theos in the last clause of John 1:1 does not have the definite article as it does in the second clause, which refers to the Father. This entire argument, however, is based on ignorance of Greek grammar and syntax.

It is not true that John 1:1 could be translated: "and the Word was a God." This translation is possible in a pagan Greek work, but utterly impossible in a Christian or Hebrew work. The reason is that the Bible teaches there is only one God. The Jewish and Christian religions have always taught this. The translation "a God" implies polytheism and denies one of the most fundamental teachings of the whole Bible.

The clause "and the Word was God" is translated from the Greek "theos en ho logos." In Greek it is not necessary to use the definite article with a predicate nominative in this kind of sentence. In fact, doing so would change the meaning in a way that would confuse what John was saying. Using the definite article in this case would make the clause mean that the Word was the same person as the Father. However, John wanted to point out that the Word was God, but not the same person as the Father, who is the one commonly referred to when we just use the word God.

Theos in this clause is a predicate nominative coupled to the subject by a form of the verb "to be." An eminent scholar, C. H. Dodd, commenting on John 1:1 explains: "The general rule is that in a sentence containing the verb `to be' as a copula the subject has the article and a predicate noun is anarthrous, even though it be definite. Hence, if theos was to be used predicatively it would be anarthrous, without any necessary change of meaning from the ho theos of the preceding clause." (New Testament Translation Problems II, The Bible Translator 28, 1[January 1977]:103).

There are a number of biblical texts where Christ is referred to as God where the definite article does appear—though with other qualifiers that distinguish him from the Father (John 20:28 and 1 John 5:20, and in most Greek texts, Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1).

Nonetheless, some argue that Jesus was not God, but a creation of God. This is based on the fact that John 1:1 does not have the definite article with God (Greek theos) in the clause "the Word was God." At least one group of Bible students believes that this indicates the Word is a lesser god. They then speculate that the Word was created. This entire notion is dispelled, however, by an expert analysis of the Greek. We quote a brief statement by a scholar on this point:

A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. . . . The opening verse of John’s Gospel contains one of the many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun. The absence of the article [before theos] does not make the predicate indefinite or qualitative when it precedes the verb; it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it. The context makes no such demand in the Gospel of John, for this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas [John 20:28, "My Lord and my God"]. (E. C. Colwell, "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, LII (1933), 12-21. Cf. also B. M. Metzger, "On the Translation of John 1:1," Expository Times, LXIII (1951-52), 125 f., and C. F. D. Moule, The Language of the New Testament, Inaugural Lecture, delivered at Cambridge University on May 23, 1952, pp. 12-14.)

Inasmuch as John 1:1-3 explicitly states that both the Word and God are divine, it is unnecessary to go further to prove that the Word, who became Jesus Christ, is an eternal, noncreated, hypostasis of God.

The King James, New King James, Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, The Jerusalem Bible, Challoner-Douay Version and The New American Bible all have: "and the Word was God." As far as we know, only the New World Translation and a little-known work published in 1808 called The New Testament in an Improved Version read: "the Word was a god."

Greek scholars are in agreement that the wording "The Word was God" or "the Word was divine" is the correct way to understand the last clause of John 1:1. Competent scholarship does not support the argument that the lack of a definite article in a predicate nominative indicates an indefinite reference. "To say that the absence of the article bespeaks of the nonabsolute deity of the Word is sheer folly. There are many places in this Gospel where the anarthrous [used without the article] theos appears (e.g., 1:6, 12, 13, 18), and not once is the implication that this is referring to just `a god’" [Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Frank E. Gaebelein, General Editor, Volume 9, page 30].

If it were true, as the heretic Arius taught in the fourth century, that Jesus Christ is a god but not the God, that he was created and not God from eternity, then Christianity would be a polytheistic religion. However, polytheism is condemned in the Bible. God’s Word says there is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Mark 12:29; Ephesians 4:6; 1 Timothy 1:17; 1 John 4:8; 5:20; Matthew 28:1; 2 Corinthians 13:14; 1 Corinthians 8:6).

Here briefly are some of the reasons we believe that Jesus Christ was "God the Son": he is called "God" (Hebrews 1:8-9) and "Mighty God" (Isaiah 9:6); we are told that "in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" (Colossians 2:9-10). Also, the disciples worshiped him as God (Matthew 14:33; John 20:28).

In the New International Version (and most other translations are equally clear on this point), there are a number of clear statements about the deity of Christ. See for example John 1: 3, 10, 14, 18; 5:18; Revelation 1:13-18; 22:13.

What about Revelation 3:14, however? Is there evidence here that Jesus could have been created? In this verse, the word "beginning" is translated from the Greek arche, which means "chief" (that from which the beginning is generated and flows). Christ is the originating instrument of creation (Colossians 1:15-17). He is the Chief—the Head and Governor of creation. Revelation 3:14, therefore, does not even hint that Christ was created by the Father sometime before the beginning. He has always existed.

Theos in this clause is a predicate nominative coupled to the subject by a form of the verb "to be." An eminent scholar, C. H. Dodd, commenting on John 1:1 explains: "The general rule is that in a sentence containing the verb `to be' as a copula the subject has the article and a predicate noun is anarthrous, even though it be definite. Hence, if theos was to be used predicatively it would be anarthrous, without any necessary change of meaning from the ho theos of the preceding clause" (New Testament Translation Problems II, The Bible Translator 28, 1[January 1977]:103).

There are a number of biblical texts where Christ is referred to as God where the definite article does appear—though with other qualifiers that distinguish him from the Father (John 20:28 and 1 John 5:20, and in most Greek texts, Titus 2:13 and 2 Peter 1:1).

Nonetheless, some argue that Jesus was not God, but a creation of God. This is based on the fact that John 1:1 does not have the definite article with God (Greek theos) in the clause "the Word was God." At least one group of Bible students believes that this indicates the Word is a lesser god. They then speculate that the Word was created. This entire notion is dispelled, however, by an expert analysis of the Greek. We quote a brief statement by a scholar on this point:

A definite predicate nominative has the article when it follows the verb; it does not have the article when it precedes the verb. . . . The opening verse of John’s Gospel contains one of the many passages where this rule suggests the translation of a predicate as a definite noun. The absence of the article [before theos] does not make the predicate indefinite or qualitative when it precedes the verb; it is indefinite in this position only when the context demands it. The context makes no such demand in the Gospel of John, for this statement cannot be regarded as strange in the prologue of the gospel which reaches its climax in the confession of Thomas [John 20:28, "My Lord and my God"]. (E. C. Colwell, "A Definite Rule for the Use of the Article in the Greek New Testament," Journal of Biblical Literature, LII (1933), 12-21. Cf. also B. M. Metzger, "On the Translation of John 1:1," Expository Times, LXIII (1951-52), 125 f., and C. F. D. Moule, The Language of the New Testament, Inaugural Lecture, delivered at Cambridge University on May 23, 1952, pp. 12-14.)

Inasmuch as John 1:1-3 explicitly states that both the Word and God are divine, it is unnecessary to go further to prove that the Word, who became Jesus Christ, is an eternal, noncreated, hypostasis of God.

The King James, New King James, Revised Standard Version, New Revised Standard Version, New International Version, The Jerusalem Bible, Challoner-Douay Version, The New American Bible and other major translations all have: "and the Word was God."

Greek scholars are in general agreement that the wording "The Word was God" or "the Word was divine" is the correct way to understand the last clause of John 1:1. Competent scholarship does not support the argument that the lack of a definite article in a predicate nominative indicates an indefinite reference. "To say that the absence of the article bespeaks of the nonabsolute deity of the Word is sheer folly. There are many places in this Gospel where the anarthrous [used without the article] theos appears (e.g., 1:6, 12, 13, 18), and not once is the implication that this is referring to just 'a god’" [Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Frank E. Gaebelein, editor, volume 9, page 30].

If it were true, as the heretic Arius taught in the fourth century, that Jesus Christ is a god but not the God, that he was created and not God from eternity, then Christianity would be a polytheistic religion. However, polytheism is condemned in the Bible. God’s Word says there is one God (Deuteronomy 6:4; Mark 12:29; Ephesians 4:6; 1 Timothy 1:17; 1 John 4:8; 5:20; Matthew 28:1; 2 Corinthians 13:14; 1 Corinthians 8:6).

Here briefly are some of the reasons we believe that Jesus Christ was "God the Son": he is called "God" (Hebrews 1:8-9) and "Mighty God" (Isaiah 9:6); we are told that "in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form" (Colossians 2:9-10). Also, the disciples worshiped him as God (Matthew 14:33; John 20:28).

In the New International Version (and most other translations are equally clear on this point), there are a number of clear statements about the deity of Christ. See for example John 1: 3, 10, 14, 18; 5:18; Revelation 1:13-18; 22:13.

What about Revelation 3:14, however? Is there evidence here that Jesus could have been created? In this verse, the word "beginning" is translated from the Greek arche, which means "chief" (that from which the beginning is generated and flows). Christ is the originating instrument of creation (Colossians 1:15-17). He is the Chief—the Head and Governor of creation. Revelation 3:14, therefore, does not even hint that Christ was created by the Father sometime before the beginning. He has always existed.

[manny is the man]

right on... is that link you posted info on it? (my work's firewall blocks it)

Yes!

[DBK]

cool... I'll check into it when I get home and I can open up stuff, you guys may be hearing from me, I've been meaning to get involved in a good church again for quite some time.

[manny is the man]

Well I hope you come to my church.
If you do go, look for me, ask anyone where you can find me I'm well known there.

[manny is the man]

not christian!
and not only that but i think that religion is b/w that person and god...i have my beliefs and i dont need someone telling me wut is sinful and wut is good...I know the difference b/w right and wrong and that is solely b/w myself and up above!

Well your half right.
religon is not what I am all about.
I hate religon.
You see religon was not created by God, It was man who created it.
And as for me It's not my place to tell you that your wrong for sinning.
you are right, that is between you and God.
But my question Didn't state you have to go to church Because your wrong. It was simply, Why?

I'm not trying to attack you in any way or to push my belief on anyone.
If you feel this is what I am trying to do, Please Forgive me.

well when i wrote i dont need someone telling me what is sinful and what is not, I was talking about being preached to by someone, who knows nothing of me...besides i am not a church type of person, again I know what i believe in and i know this is enough for me to get me through life....p.s. i know you werent attacking me i am just clarifying this!

Matthew 7: 21-23

True Disciples

21"Not all people who sound religious are really godly. They may refer to me as `Lord,' but they still won't enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The decisive issue is whether they obey my Father in heaven. 22On judgment day many will tell me, `Lord, Lord, we prophesied in your name and cast out demons in your name and performed many miracles in your name.' 23But I will reply, `I never knew you. Go away; the things you did were unauthorized.* '

[Stardust]

since i am not christian it dosent really matter to me...but in my religion it is b/w myself and god and noone else! no worries though!

please dont assume that u know anything bout me or my religion...just b/c i choose not to go to church( esp. since it is not even my religion) does not mean i am not spiritual!

[EWreckedSean]

Thanks for the detailed answer. My question kind of goes beyond that though. You'll have to help me as I am not as up on biblical history as I ought to be, but the old testiment and the new testament were written in...ancient hebrew and latin (maybe some greek?). So immediately any English version of the bible you read is a translation, and not even a direct translation, but a translation from an ancient language to a modern langauge. Languages are constantly changing. What something means today is not neccessarily what it meant 50 year ago. Let's take a really simple example: "That is a bad car." Today, that would mean "Wow you have a really nice car." 50 years ago, it meant "Wow, have have a really awful car." If somebody translated that line a 1000 years from now, which meaning would they chose? So already your room for error in what God was trying to say is huge. Now take the fact that the authors of the bible were men to. Maybe inspired men, but men interpret. So now we have added there interpretation on top of a translation that is at the earliest hundreds of years after the fact. The transition from god to us has so many places to go stray along the way, when people say they know, I always kind of think well you think you know.

[deepfriedtwinkie]

i believe in god-i dont believe in organized religion-i used to go to methodist church but really just drifted away...the thing i think churches are good for is helping community..

[manny is the man]

Fact the bible can be hard to understand.
It is for this reason we are to study the word a little further.

Fact There are Different versions of the Bible, but they all mean the same.

Fact Stardust, I am NOT assuming that I know you simply just reinterating what you said, but I would like to get to know you.

Fact EWreckedSean The Bible Was never inspired It was Created To Help Us In our daily walk with him.

Galatians 5:

Freedom in Christ

1So Christ has really set us free. Now make sure that you stay free, and don't get tied up again in slavery to the law. 2Listen! I, Paul, tell you this: If you are counting on circumcision to make you right with God, then Christ cannot help you. 3I'll say it again. If you are trying to find favor with God by being circumcised, you must obey all of the regulations in the whole law of Moses. 4For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God's grace. 5But we who live by the Spirit eagerly wait to receive everything promised to us who are right with God through faith. 6For when we place our faith in Christ Jesus, it makes no difference to God whether we are circumcised or not circumcised. What is important is faith expressing itself in love. 7You were getting along so well. Who has interfered with you to hold you back from following the truth? 8It certainly isn't God, for he is the one who called you to freedom. 9But it takes only one wrong person among you to infect all the others--a little yeast spreads quickly through the whole batch of dough! 10I am trusting the Lord to bring you back to believing as I do about these things. God will judge that person, whoever it is, who has been troubling and confusing you. 11Dear brothers and sisters,* if I were still preaching that you must be circumcised--as some say I do--why would the Jews persecute me? The fact that I am still being persecuted proves that I am still preaching salvation through the cross of Christ alone. 12I only wish that those troublemakers who want to mutilate you by circumcision would mutilate themselves.* 13For you have been called to live in freedom--not freedom to satisfy your sinful nature, but freedom to serve one another in love. 14For the whole law can be summed up in this one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 15But if instead of showing love among yourselves you are always biting and devouring one another, watch out! Beware of destroying one another.


Living by the Spirit's Power

16So I advise you to live according to your new life in the Holy Spirit. Then you won't be doing what your sinful nature craves. 17The old sinful nature loves to do evil, which is just opposite from what the Holy Spirit wants. And the Spirit gives us desires that are opposite from what the sinful nature desires. These two forces are constantly fighting each other, and your choices are never free from this conflict. 18But when you are directed by the Holy Spirit, you are no longer subject to the law. 19When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, your lives will produce these evil results: sexual immorality, impure thoughts, eagerness for lustful pleasure, 20idolatry, participation in demonic activities, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, divisions, the feeling that everyone is wrong except those in your own little group, 21envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other kinds of sin. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God. 22But when the Holy Spirit controls our lives, he will produce this kind of fruit in us: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness, and self-control. Here there is no conflict with the law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have nailed the passions and desires of their sinful nature to his cross and crucified them there. 25If we are living now by the Holy Spirit, let us follow the Holy Spirit's leading in every part of our lives. 26Let us not become conceited, or irritate one another, or be jealous of one another.

[manny is the man]

i believe in god-i dont believe in organized religion-i used to go to methodist church but really just drifted away...the thing i think churches are good for is helping community..

i dont believe in organized religion either.
I do believe In fellowshiping with others and helping out each other as well as Teaching one another about what we learned.

[debauchery]

HOUSE=GOD

[EWreckedSean]

Fact EWreckedSean The Bible Was never inspired It was Created To Help Us In our daily walk with him.

Arguementative by nature I guess....but I disagree in the fact of this. It was created almost 2000 years ago (and the old testament even longer). How do you know if you weren't there? Oh you can believe in how you think it came about, you can have faith in how you think it came about, but believing and faith are products of the human mind, not truth. I believe Christ was a real person. Son of god? Maybe, I don't know. I believe what he tought inspired the people around him to write the bible to spread that knowledge. Were they guided by god? Well, maybe, but god also gives people free will. With free will comes the ability to translate, or write things how you preceive them.