Those who deny the Lord Jesus is God (=YHWH) are not saved (2 Corinthians 11:4)

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was toward God, and God was what the Word was. It was with God in the beginning. All things happened through it, and not one thing that has happened, happened without it. Within it there was Life, and the Life was the light of the world. And in the darkness the light is shining, and the darkness never got hold of it.”

(John 1:1-5, The Unvarnished New Testament, 1991)
 
Last edited:
“In the beginning was the plan of Yahweh, and the plan was with Yahweh, and the plan was Yahweh’s. The same plan was in the beginning with Yahweh. The same plan was in the beginning with Yahweh. All things were done according to it, and without it nothing was done, that was done. In this plan was life, and that life was the light to mankind. Now that light shines in the darkness, but the darkness does not take hold of it.”

(John 1:1-5, The Book of Yahweh: The Holy Scriptures, 1987)
 
“In the beginning there was the divine word and wisdom. The divine word and wisdom was there with God, and it was what God was. It was there with God, from the beginning. Everything came to be by means of it; nothing that exists came to be without its agency. In it was life, and this life was the light of humanity. Light was shining in darkness, but darkness did not master it.”

(John 1:1-5, The Complete Gospels: Annotated Scholars Version, 1991)
 
Last edited:
“so My word that comes from My mouth will not return to Me empty, but it will accomplish what I please and will prosper in what I send it to do.”

(Isaiah 55:11, HCSB)

God’s word is here called “it”. Who among the trinitarians is shocked and outraged at this?
 
dizerner said:
Please notice this bolded sentence from Tyndale's Prologue to John. ( https://godrules.net/library/tyndale/19tyndale13.htm )

"In that he saith that it was from the beginning, and that it was eternal life, and that it was with God, he affirmeth him to be very God"​

Notice something very interesting about these pronouns—they all clearly have the same referent in the same context. There is not some dramatic change or shift or circumstance where the "it" is no longer being referenced. The "it" is called a "him" concurrently within the exact same context.

Tyndale literally called the man Jesus both "God" and "it."

Need a new appeal to authority somewhere I guess.
Click to expand...
It gets even worse!

I thought Tyndale was just Greek language illiterate only at John 1:1-2. What you revealed about him is that he's also English grammar flawed as far as John 1:1-2 is concerned. Switching between different pronouns for the same one subject in the same one sentence would drop you back a grade or two in school.

I don't care if it was Tyndale or Uncle Shmedrick who produced that flaw. A flaw is a flaw. @Matthias thinks that our world crashes because of that. That's hilarious because our world is based on the Bible and not on what Tyndale or even what Uncle Shmedrick says.

Thank goodness that flaw was corrected by dozens of subsequent Bible versions, all agreeing to the same fix.
 
“So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.”

(Isaiah 55:11, KJV)

Once again, the word of God is called “it”.

Think about the Genesis creation with this thought in mind.
 
synergy said:
It gets even worse!

I thought Tyndale was just Greek language illiterate only at John 1:1-2. What you revealed about him is that he's also English grammar flawed as far as John 1:1-2 is concerned. Switching between pronouns for the same subject in the same sentence would drop you back a grade or two in school.

I don't care if it was Tyndale or Uncle Shmedrick who produced that flaw. A flaw is a flaw. @Matthias thinks that our world crashes because of that. That's hilarious because our world is based on the Bible and not on what Tyndale or even what Uncle Shmedrick says.

Thank goodness that flaw was corrected by dozens of subsequent Bible versions, all agreeing to the same fix.
Click to expand...

What did Protestant English readers do before then? You seem to think that they all wandered around thinking that God is an “it”.
 
Matthias said:
What did Protestant English readers do before then? You seem to think that they all wandered around thinking that God is an “it”.
Click to expand...
You don't get to tell me what I think.

Europe has an entire Latin/Greek history with Latin/Greek Bibles hand-copied and distributed across the Monasteries and Churches of Europe. We can all see that the Greek version where John penned οὗτος (He) instead of αυτό (it). Whoever understands Latin can tell us about the Latin Bible, which I think was the Vulgate.
 
synergy said:
You don't get to tell me what I think.
Click to expand...

But you take it upon yourself to tell me what I think. There’s a name for that.


synergy said:
Europe has an entire Latin/Greek history with Latin/Greek Bibles hand-copied and distributed across the Monasteries and Churches of Europe. We can all see that the Greek version where John penned οὗτος (He) instead of αυτό (it). Whoever understands Latin can tell us about the Latin Bible, which I think was the Vulgate.
Click to expand...

Did you miss my post about autos being translated as “he, she or “it”?
 
synergy said:
You're getting snarky again. No need for that.
Click to expand...

I wasn’t being snarky. As you know from reading my post, the Geneva Bible is the English translation which William Shakespeare used.

So I ask again: Do you believe that Shakespeare was also grammar illiterate?
 
Matthias said:
But you take it upon yourself to tell me what I think. There’s a name for that.

Did you miss my post about autos being translated as “he, she or “it”?
Click to expand...
You asked me about the history of the Protestant English readers. What does your post reveal about that history?
 
Matthias said:
I wasn’t being snarky. As you know from reading my post, the Geneva Bible is the English translation which William Shakespeare used.

So I ask again: Do you believe that Shakespeare was also grammar illiterate?
Click to expand...
Did he quote Tyndale's version of John 1:2?
 
synergy said:
You're not answering my question.
Click to expand...

I answered your question to the best of my ability. The Bible which William Shakespeare used is the Geneva Bible.

You haven’t answered my questions. All English translations which they had available to them and used before 1611 called the word of God “it” in John’s prologue.
 

Similar threads

T
"Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord” (Romans 10:9–13)
5 6 7
Replies
122
Views
1K
Keiw1
K
T
CONFESS WITH YOUR MOUTH THAT JESUS IS LORD” (ROMANS 10:9–13)
Replies
0
Views
48
TomL
T
John Evens
There is only one Gospel
Replies
14
Views
233
jeremiah1five
jeremiah1five
F
'Priests' who 'come near' to 'minister' unto the Lord Jesus (cf. Ezekiel 44:15-16)
Replies
1
Views
66
civic
civic
P
The false Gospel that the Jewish religion is the "root" of the vine.......
Replies
0
Views
9
praise_yeshua
P
Back
Top Bottom