1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Apologetics - Defending our Faith

Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Tsaphah, Jul 18, 2016.

  1. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here is a very important scripture that Trinitarians will attempt to use to prove their point of Jesus being God. “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: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (Col 1:16-17 KJV)
    They will ask: “Who created all things; the heaven and earth?” They want you to say, “God created the heaven and earth!” There you go! You admit that God created heaven and earth! (Gen 1:1) Isn’t that what Col 1:16-17 says?

    Here’s the correct answer; NO! Here is why: The Greek manuscript has the words, dia in verse 16, where it is mistranslated as by instead of through. So, the correct translation should read; “all things were created through him, and for him:” In verse 17, it should read: “and with him all things consist.” The Greek word here is en = in, with, etc. This is a small word which mistranslated will completely change the meaning.

    A correct translated reads: “For all things were created in Him, the things in the heavens, and the things on the earth, the visible and the invisible; whether thrones, or lordships, or rulers, or authorities, all things have been created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and all things consist in Him.” (Col 1:16-17 LITV)

    This translation makes more sense when reading 1 Cor 15:21-28: “For since death is through man, also through a Man is a resurrection of the dead; for as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ, the firstfruit, afterward those of Christ at His coming. Then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the Father, when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power, for it is right for Him to reign until He puts all the enemies under His feet; (Psa. 110:1) the last enemy made to cease is death. For ‘He subjected all things under His feet;’ but when He says that all things have been subjected, it is plain that it excepts Him who has subjected all things to Him. (Psa. 8:6) But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who has subjected all things to Him, that God may be all things in all.”

    Correct translation is mentioned by Jesus when he said: “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.” (Mt 5:18 KJV) Tittle was used by grammarians of the accents and diacritical points. Jesus used it of the little lines or projections, by which the Hebrew letters in other respects similar differ from one another; the meaning is, “not even the minutest part of the law shall perish.”

     
  2. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In the last few years, I have spent time trying to learn and understand the Greek, and Hebrew languages. In the process, I have learned that it is not as simple as it would appear. First of all, before I can understand Biblical Hebrew and Greek, I must understand my own countries language. There are many aspects of what is called/titled, American English. There is the written form and spoken form. The difference is that the written form is more formal than the spoken form. The spoken form has many dialects, pronunciations of words, and slang.

    American English is quite different from what some of us call the “King’s English” spoken in England. That brand of English also has it’s many dialects depending on where the person lives. We may even ask for a translator when and American is speaking to, or writing to an “Englishman”. It is called Semantics: the study of linguistic development by classifying and examining changes in meaning and form. It is also called significs, the branch of semiotics dealing with the relations between signs and what they denote.

    If I hold out either of my hands straight out, with my palm up, it signifies STOP! A person from another culture may not understand its meaning. Again, if I were to tell an American that I need to find a loo, they would likely not know what I mean. If they are British they would know. Then, if I used the word in 1920 England, they still would not know what I meant. The word didn’t exist at that time. Why is knowing the true meaning of certain words whether written or spoken? What about English and British? Do they mean the same thing? Maybe. It depends on how it is used in a sentence.

    There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning.
    If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me
    .” ( 1 Cor 14:10-11 NASB )

    Ahhh, why did Paul use “barbarian”? Was he making fun of people who were different? No! The word “barbaros”, “used by the Greeks of any foreigner ignorant of the Greek language, whether mental or moral, with the added notion after the Persian war, of rudeness and brutality. The word is used in the N.T. without the idea of reproachfulness.” (Strong’s definition)

    Another example of hearing, listening, reading, and understanding what is said and meant is what Jesus said to his followers. “Then He took the twelve aside and said to them, ‘Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and all things which are written through the prophets about the Son of Man will be accomplished. For He will be handed over to the Gentiles, and will be mocked and mistreated and spit upon, and after they have scourged Him, they will kill Him; and the third day He will rise again.’ But the disciples understood none of these things, and the meaning of this statement was hidden from them, and they did not comprehend the things that were said.” ( Lu 18:31-34 NASB )

    Did ancient Hebrew use a form of slang in the Bible?
    https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-439803424/hebrew-slang
     
  3. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What is the significance of “Son of Man”? Who is the “Son of Man”? Be careful about your answer. The reason I say this is because it is an appellative; as a noun, it is “a descriptive name or designation”, or as a noun, “an identifying name or title.”

    The word appellative (adj.) is from appellat which has the meaning of: “address, name, appeal to”, and as a noun, “common name”, and from the 1630’s as “title, descriptive name”.

    In this case we are using the Bible to determine the answer. This title, or name, was given, used as a name, or description, or designation 93 times in Ezekiel. This term is used 220 times in the Bible, 136 in the Hebrew scriptures and 84 times in the Greek scriptures. For example, here is one from Jeremiah. “And Hazor shall be a dwelling for jackals, a ruin forever. No man shall live there, nor any son of man (hebrew = ben adam) stay in it.” (Jer 49:33 LITV) In this case, it is referring to all mankind.

    Another example is from Daniel. It is in aramaic and says; “I was looking in the night visions. And behold! One like the Son of Man came with the clouds of the heavens. And He came to the Ancient of Days. And they brought Him near before Him.” (Dan 7:13 LITV) Notice the difference in the capitalization of “Son” and “Man”. This is a choice by the publishers to indicate that Jesus is being called the son of man (aramaic = bar 'enash). Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek do not use capitalization or marks of punctuation. The NWT does not use capitalization, of “son of man”, in Daniel.



     
    Regent Lessard likes this.
  4. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    “The Watchman’s Post” has a question/answer about “Jehovah’s Witnesses - What is the truth?”
    The truth is; Yes, they are a cult. And, so are ALL organizations claiming to be Christians.

    cult (n.)
    1610s, “worship,” also “a particular form of worship,” from French culte (17c.), from Latin cultus “care, labor; cultivation, culture; worship, reverence,” originally “tended, cultivated,” past participle of colere “to till” (see colony). Rare after 17c.; revived mid-19c. with reference to ancient or primitive rituals. Meaning “a devotion to a person or thing” is from 1829.

    Cult. An organized group of people, religious or not, with whom you disagree. [Rawson]

    culture (n.)
    mid-15c., “the tilling of land,” from Middle French culture and directly from Latin cultura “a cultivating, agriculture,” figuratively “care, culture, an honoring,” from past participle stem of colere “to tend, guard; to till, cultivate” (see colony). The figurative sense of “cultivation through education” is first attested c. 1500. Meaning “the intellectual side of civilization” is from 1805; that of “collective customs and achievements of a people” is from 1867.

    For without culture or holiness, which are always the gift of a very few, a man may renounce wealth or any other external thing, but he cannot renounce hatred, envy, jealousy, revenge. Culture is the sanctity of the intellect. [William Butler Yeats]

    colony (n.)
    late 14c., “ancient Roman settlement outside Italy,” from Latin colonia “settled land, farm, landed estate,” from colonus “husbandman, tenant farmer, settler in new land,” from colere “to cultivate, to till; to inhabit; to frequent, practice, respect; tend, guard,” from PIE root *kwel- (1) “revolve, move round; sojourn, dwell” (source also of Latin -cola “inhabitant”). Also used by the Romans to translate Greek apoikia “people from home.” Modern application dates from 1540s.

    Slang culture vulture is from 1947. Culture shock first recorded 1940. Ironic or contemptuous spelling kulchur is attested from 1940 (Pound), and compare kultur.

    kultur (n.)
    1914, originally, “ideals of civilization as conceived by the Germans,” a word from the First World War and in English always at first ironic, from German Kultur, from Latin cultura

    kwel- (1)
    *kwelə-, Proto-Indo-European root meaning “revolve, move round; sojourn, dwell.”

     
  5. 2,136
    516
    113
    SingleCell

    SingleCell Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,136
    Likes Received:
    516
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Sciences
    Location:
    Lala Land, Israel
    Great example, and think of the implications regarding the Bible ...

    We can grasp the mechanics, but not necessarily the meaning!
     
    Tsaphah likes this.
  6. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    :) Oooohhh, That chick is hot!! :rolleyes: Are we talking about some Colonel Sanders Hot Wings? :p
     
  7. 2,136
    516
    113
    SingleCell

    SingleCell Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,136
    Likes Received:
    516
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Sciences
    Location:
    Lala Land, Israel
    Sorry, I'm from 1100s Germany, I meant this:

    [​IMG]

    Hopefully that isn't as inappropriate as I think it might be :)
     
  8. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I believe I know of her. It looks like . . . .Umm, Joan of Ark? There may be a few bleeding hearts and artists that will think it inappropriate, but I think that chick’s a bit over done. Can I get a refund? :eek:
     
  9. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I had the opportunity to witness to a person I've been working with. They are not very familiar with the Bible. I was able to start with the creation, to Adam and Eve, explaining "free will", Satan's influence over Eve, how Adam was also deceived. The explanation about the meaning of day. The difference between translations, etc. They want to continue next week. Am I happy? Oh yeah!!:)
     
  10. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Here is a question for those who believe that Jesus is also God Almighty; a part of the Trinity.

    The mother of the sons of Zebedee [James and John] came to Jesus with her sons, and asked him “. . . ‘Command that in Your kingdom these two sons of mine may sit one on Your right and one on Your left.’” ( Mt 20:21b NASB ) Jesus answered her, “. . . but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father.’” ( Mt 20:23b NASB )

    If Jesus is GOD, why would he make this distinction? If, at that time, He was not GOD, who was in charge of Heaven? Who would prevent Satan from taking over?

     
  11. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113

    This person also asked me; “If God is Almighty, why doesn’t he stop all the bad and cruelty that occurs”? Today, another person asked me the same thing.

    What is your best answer for this? I’ll tell you later, how I replied.

     
  12. 3,335
    561
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,335
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I usually respond with "who has the right to rule", that question raised in the garden, whether Eve had the right to choose for herself right and wrong. This is sin, to think that we are missing out on something that God is keeping from us, and then acting on that...

    A length of time was given to man in order to prove that we do not have the right to make our own choices on what is right or wrong, and the solution in Gen 3:15 was set out from the very beginning, and we are just waiting on it's fulfillment...

    At least that's my first go too...
     
  13. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    We think alike! That's where I started. Then I used the time explanation; a thousand years is like a day, etc. Then I added the Einstein theories, big bang, along with the thought of reversal of time. I told them that this world is only temporary. God has promised to "make all thing new", death as we know it is temporary. And, people don't go immediately to heaven. There is no instantaneous resurrection, etc.
     
    Joshuastone7 likes this.
  14. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    “Although the exact theological definition of the doctrine of the Trinity was the result of a long process of development, which was not complete till the fifth century or even later, the doctrine itself underlies the whole New Testament, which everywhere attributes divinity to the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, and assigns to them distinct functions in the economy of human redemption” The New Testament mainly contemplates the relations of the Divine Persons to man and the universe, regarding the Father as Creator, the Son as Mediator and Redeemer, and the Spirit as Sanctifier (the ‘economic’ Trinity: but hints are not wanting that this threefold function in creation and redemption is an outward manifestation of certain inward and eternal distinctions in the Godhead Itself (the ‘essential’ Trinity). In the early Church the Monarchians, and especially the Sabellians, laid such exclusive stress upon the ‘economic’ Trinity, that they denied that there are any real distinctions in the Godhead at all, and taught that Father, Son, and Spirit are only three different modes in which the One Personal God reveals Himself to and acts upon man. The main current of Christian thought, however, has always held firmly to the belief that the terms Father, Son, and Holy Spirit represent eternal and necessary distinctions, and those of a personal and ethical as well as of a merely metaphysical kind, within the Divine Substance. Christians have seen in the doctrine of the Trinity not only an intellectual, but also a moral and spiritual revelation of the highest importance.”
    (A Commentary on the Holy Bible by Various Writers, Edited By The Rev. J.R. Dummelow M.A.: 1920 The Trinity, Introduction, pg. 113)

    Monarchianism
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/Monarchianism

    Sabellianism
    https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sabellianism

    Christianity in the 5th century
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_the_5th_century


     
  15. 3,335
    561
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,335
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    We do think alike brother, and this no doubt is do to the gifts that Jehovah has given us both. We have both grown over the years, but I'm hesitant to say the most growth has probably been on my part, for I had the further to go, simply because I was so crude, and so sure of myself all those years ago when we originally met on Roberts forum. I've learned allot from all of our friendships here online...

    You and I share a lot of interests, not the least of which our Fathers creation, this universe. I often imagine how mankind from the past will be granted entry into the rest, and by simply a guess, I imagine it may be the 144k including our Lord who will be the ones making those decisions, and hence the very reason for their being there, and the total of their work during that time...

    Now, with that said, imagine this brother. Imagine If I had the opportunity to walk down the streets of Mesopotamia circa 2200 BCE, and get to know individuals while they are alive? Meaning, that since we know time is relative, surely a spirit being would be able to adjust it... Why not these 144,001 go back in time and pick out these ones before they die? That way, everyone in the New World would enter having never experienced their last hour.

    How amazing would that be?
     
    Tsaphah likes this.
  16. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Brother, that brought tears to my eyes. What a wonderful future we have in store for us. I so look forward to meet those faithful persons of long ago. Just imagine setting with Joshua, Ezekiel, Moses, etc., sharing their experiences with us face to face.

    A few years back, I started writing a screen play based on the thought of “the first being last and the last being first”, in the resurrection. But, about half way through, a person I knew died in an auto accident very similar to the opening scene. It freaked me out. I couldn’t go any further with it. I also felt that I may influence others to think it to be true. I didn’t want that burden. I’ve had several people try to encourage me to finish it, but the answer is still No.
     
    Joshuastone7 likes this.
  17. 3,335
    561
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,335
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    Well, just brainstorming here but, the first being last and the last first as far as the resurrection is concerned, would allow the continuity of the timeline. Think about it, if you start at the end of days and work your way back through time then there is no effect on the timeline, you just completely unravel it backwards, and everyone who died before their family members would have them there waiting for them when they reach the New World!

    :)
     
  18. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Exactly my thoughts on the scripture. In my script, the main character welcomed his little sister who had been killed in an auto accident. He then brings her to meet their parents who were already resurrected. A family reunion. As Jesus said, “But many who are first will be last and the last first.” (Mt 19:30, Mt 20:16, Mk 10:31, Lu 13:30 NWT)

    The account in Luke has Jesus comparing those unbelievers whom he rejects; those who will be thrown outside. Then says, “There is where your weeping and the gnashing of your teeth will be, when you see Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all the prophets in the Kingdom of God, but you yourselves thrown outside. Furthermore, people will come from east and west and from north and south, and will recline at the table in the Kingdom of God. And look! there are those last who will be first, and there are those first who will be last.” (Lu 13:28-30 NWT)

    For Jehovah, the family structure was, and is, very important. The last, in time, to die will be the first resurrected, and the first, in time, to die will be the last resurrected. There will be a future time when we can learn from first hand witnesses, of events recorded in the Bible.
     
  19. 3,335
    561
    113
    Joshuastone7

    Joshuastone7 Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2013
    Messages:
    3,335
    Likes Received:
    561
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Home Page:
    I've actually come to understand a pre-Megiddo interpretation of this text, where there is a wedding feast with the originally invited failing to show. All prophesy indicated a failure of the invited, when our Lord presents a small group of outcasts that will be established instead.

    Mth 22:4-6 "Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those invited: “Look! I have prepared my dinner, my bulls and fattened animals are slaughtered, and everything is ready. Come to the marriage feast.”’ But unconcerned they went off, one to his own field, another to his business; but the rest, seizing his slaves, treated them insolently and killed them."

    Mth 22:7-9 "The king grew wrathful and sent his armies and killed those murderers and burned their city. Then he said to his slaves, ‘The marriage feast is ready, but those invited were not worthy. Therefore, go to the roads leading out of the city, and invite anyone you find to the marriage feast."

    I have come to understand there is a fall of the constant feature in which those leading men will fall from their responsibilities, bringing about the lowly of the earth, those weak and considered less in the kingdom taking control of the work of gathering Jehovah's people back to him. Hence the last becoming first, and the first becoming last.

    1Cor 1:27 "But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong."

    Simply put, the Two Witnesses will be the last that become first, while the established elders will be the first that become last...
     
  20. 2,025
    572
    113
    Tsaphah

    Tsaphah Experienced Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2013
    Messages:
    2,025
    Likes Received:
    572
    Trophy Points:
    113
    “In The Name Of GOD”

    And when they entered into the nations, there where they went, they even profaned My holy name,” (Eze 36:20 LITV) Again, “Therefore say to the house of Israel, Thus says the Lord God, ‘It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. Then the nations will know that I am the Lord, declares the Lord God, when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight.’” (Eze 36:22-23 NASB) “Lord,” “Lord God” ??

    That example speaks loudly of what has happened to His Holy Name! It has been removed, and replaced with a nondescript “Lord, LORD, God, GOD”! It begs the question: What is His Holy Name? The answer is quite simple. In English, it is, Jehovah. It is not yahwah, Yahovah, Lord God, or LORD GOD. It is pronounced Jah-ho-vah. Is that correct? Well, yes, it is. Why? Because that is how English speaking people pronounce it. Every name in the Bible is pronounced as they are spelled/spelt. How do we pronounce Jesus, Jeremiah, Judah, Jude, Ezekiel, etc? In the Hebrew language the “J” is actually a “Y”. But, in English and German it is spelled/spelt, and pronounced as a “J”, as in Jar. In Greek, Jesus is pronounced; Iesous = ee-ay-sooce'. For some people, if you don’t say it like they do, you are wrong.

    There was a saying used by police; “Stop! In the name of the law!” What is meant by; “In the name of the law”? It is referring to the power behind a particular law established by a government authority. In the case of the police, they have the authority to stop you because of a perception of a person breaking a law. Along those same lines, what is meant by; “In the Name Of God?” Which God is being spoken of? The apostle Paul said to the Corinthians; “For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things and we exist for Him; and one Lord, Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we exist through Him.” (1 Co 8:5-6 NASB ) Which God was he speaking of, as “the Father”?

    The Greek people of the city of Corinth worshipped “many gods and many lords”. The Greeks had what is called a “pantheon” of gods, separated into various categories, such as, Olympian, Titan, Primordial, Underworld, Sea, Sky, Etc. Within each category there were other divisions. http://www.theoi.com/

    Do you believe God’s name is important to Him? Is Your name important to you? How would you like to be addressed as “Guy”, “Girl”, “Man”, “Woman”, or how about “Boy”? How about, “Oh Boy! I would like you to help me.” “Hey Man, get me out of here!” Is this a respectful way to address the creator of everything? Finally, is Jehovah God’s name important to YOU?

     
    Regent Lessard likes this.

Share This Page