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

[Matthias]

Trinitarians living in “the dark ages” did not believe that God is an “it”.

How any trinitarian could even entertain the idea that they did is mind-blowing.

 

[civic]

Then stop calling the Word ( WHO WAS GOD ) an it and start calling Him - HE not it.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Matthias]

no you ned to understand the truth that the Word ( Jesus who is God ) is not an it but a who…

You need to understand that Tyndale and the others whom you’ve trashed understood that that is “the truth”.

he ,him ie a PERSON and not a thing.

You need to understand that Tyndale and the others understood that God is three persons and not a thing.

 

[civic]

You need to understand that Tyndale and the others whom you’ve trashed understood that that is “the truth”.



You need to understand that Tyndale and the others understood that God is three persons and not a thing.

then they were wrong translating autos as it instead of He.

its as simple as that.

hermenuetics 101

hope this helps !!!

 

[Matthias]

Then stop calling the Word ( WHO WAS GOD ) an it and start calling Him - HE not it.

hope this helps !!!

You need more help than I can give you. You should speak with a trinitarian pastor - like the one I spoke with - who understands that the trinitarians who produced the English Bibles in the Protestant Reformation period were not calling God an “it,” did not believe God is an “it,” and were not grammar illiterates.

 

[Matthias]

then they were wrong translating autos as it instead of He.

its as simple as that.

hermenuetics 101

hope this helps !!!

They were not wrong. They were right. John is speaking about God’s creative word in his prologue; God’s davar.

 

[civic]

You need more help than I can give you. You should speak with a trinitarian pastor - like the one I spoke with - who understands that the trinitarians who produced the English Bibles in the Protestant Reformation period were not calling God an “it,” did not believe God is an “it,” and were not grammar illiterates.

I'm talking to you not them- you are the one promoting the " it " instead of the who/He in John 1:1-4 and using tyndale as your scapegoat.

I don't need any "pastor " to tell me I'm right or wrong, I know I'm right. I have 99% of the Bible translations to support me that I'm right.

 

[civic]

They were not wrong. They were right. John is speaking about God’s creative word in his prologue; God’s davar.

no thats greek philosophy you are promoting. sorry but that is not what John is promoting platonic thought( impersonal logos) in the Prologue.

 

[APAK]

I’ve been having this conversation with trinitarians for three decades. None of those trinitarians did to Tyndale (and the other trinitarian translators) what these trinitarians have done to them.

I mentioned this to a trinitarian pastor and he just shook his head and told me I was wasting my time talking with these people. He had no issue with the Geneva Bible and had nothing but high praise for Tyndale.

There is no defense required for the truth.

If for once, those with a major bias who constantly read their doctrine into scripture can just somehow, even for just one time, forget they carried these beliefs, and with a near unbiased view, then and only then can it be possible for a breakthrough and a eureka, haha moment.

And then for example in John 1:1-4 forget the subjects and just rename all players, nouns and make it into a tale of a different subject that a child might read and understand.

In the beginning was THE THING and this THING came from and was always with or a part of the King of the land. They were inseparable. And what or who the King was THE THING was also. The THING was a reflection of the King. In THIS THING that was also of the King, was life for the people.....

Now if that type of THING does not work, then I would say get it over with, and for those that still insist the word is a person and also their savior just replace 'the word' with Jesus as some outrageous Bibles have done already.

So why are they not confident is doing it... In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was WITH GOD...

....oops Jesus is not GOD then...it does not work, aye....

 

[Matthias]

I'm talking to you not them ….

You trashed them.

... you are the one promoting the " it " instead of the who/He in John 1:1-4 ….

I see what Tyndale and the other trinitarian translators of his day saw in John’s prologue.

... and using tyndale as your scapegoat.

Scapegoat - a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes or faults of others, for reasons of expediency.

That‘s you, not me.

I don't need any "pastor " to tell me I'm right or wrong, I know I'm right.

You have a blind spot. That blind spot has caused you to disparage the trinitarian translators of the English Bibles published prior to 1611, as well as trinitarian translators who render the prologue in John’s Gospel as they day after 1611.

I have 99% of the Bible translations to support me that I'm right.

Those translation present the bias of the trinitarian translators who produced them.

 

[civic]

You trashed them.




I see what Tyndale and the other trinitarian translators of his day saw in John’s prologue.




Scapegoat - a person who is blamed for the wrongdoings, mistakes or faults of others, for reasons of expediency.

That‘s you, not me.



You have a blind spot. That blind spot has caused you to disparage the trinitarian translators of the English Bibles published prior to 1611, as well as trinitarian translators who render the prologue in John’s Gospel as they day after 1611.




Those translation present the bias of the trinitarian translators who produced them.

The Word is WHO/HE and not it. The Word was God.

Is God an it or a who ?

that is the million dollar question here.

end of discussion.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Matthias]

no thats greek philosophy you are promoting.

I’m not promoting Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy is what lead theologians to formulate the doctrine of the Trinity

sorry but that is not what John is promoting platonic thought( impersonal logos) in the Prologue.

John is not promoting platonic thought. That’s what the trinitarian theologians did and do.

 

[civic]

I’m not promoting Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy is what lead theologians to formulate the doctrine of the Trinity



John is not promoting platonic thought. That’s what the trinitarian theologians did and do.

sure you are with your impersonal logos in Johns prologue. that comes from plato and greek pagan philosophy.

 

[Matthias]

The Word is WHO/HE and not it. The Word was God.

Is God an it or a who ?

What have I said, over and over and over again?

God is not an it. God is a who.

that is the million dollar question here.

end of discussion.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Matthias]

sure you are with your impersonal logos in Johns prologue. that comes from plato and greek pagan philosophy.

It’s trinitarianism that comes from Greek philosophy.

 

[civic]

What have I said, over and over and over again?

God is not an it. God is a who.

and the WORD ( Jesus, the Son ) was God. A who not an it.

The WORD( GOD) became flesh, a man. That is not an it but a WHO.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Matthias]

and the WORD ( Jesus, the Son ) was God. A who not an it.

You’re reading Jesus into the text, not out of the text. That, again, is what Dr. Brown called “a patent misreading of scripture.”

The WORD( GOD) became flesh, a man. That is not an it but a WHO.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

You’re reading Jesus into the text, not out of the text. That, again, is what Dr. Brown called “a patent misreading of scripture.”

No the Word who was God became flesh, a man. Its called the Incarnation. The Word is a Person not some thought, idea or concept. The Logos is Theos.

hope this helps !!!

 

[civic]

There was no words in the beginning- there was God.

In the beginning God.....................................
God is a Person not a thought,idea or concept. God is the Creator not an it.

It did not create anything, He created everything.

 

[Fred]

BDAG (3rd Edition): John 1:1abc, 14...It is the distinctive teaching of the Fourth Gospel that this divine 'Word' took on human form in a historical person, that is, Jesus (logos, page 601).