(1)
Study the history of the word
Open Godhead and
you will be enlightened
to the fact that (the word Godhead)
is not an original Bible Manuscript word
(2)
But a Fabrication Open Godhead representatives
of a large class of abstract substantives, Compare (open Implied)
Act 17:29 "Being
then
the children
of God,
we ought
not to think
that the Divine
Nature
is like
gold or silver or stone,
an
image
formed
by the art
and thought
of man.
Godhead is
an mental Image formed by
the art
and thought
of man—Study
Open Acts 17:29
Imaginations of God’s Head Open Image GOD or god-JehovahOrYahweh
Adding words, changes
words or taking anything away from God’s Word Is a
direct violation of the Holy Scriptures. God’s Words are perfect and must stay
that way. Rev 22:18
I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book;
Rev 22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. Who Do You Imitate? Man
Made Traditions --or Jesus’ Teachings and
His Apostles Teachings Open 2 Tim 3:17- 3:16
–Rev - 22:16-6-19 click In
Context
Imitate This
Page --Is Part 3-1 is Mystery
Verses Plus More
2 is Tradition
Plus Verses.
The KJV Strong's
Version
Ac 17:29 - [In
Context For as much then as we are (5723) the offspring of God, we ought (5719) not to think (5721)
that the Godhead is (5750) like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
Enter Godhead into the search engine AT http://www.searchgodsword.org
NASB/W/Strongs – Here’s what you get
Your query
for 'Godhead' in 'The New American Standard Bible' failed to
return any verse results. Please modify your query and try again.
Godhead -A--pro Nicene--Creed- Mental Imaginary-Concept
SBT
Note ---
You get this because the Word Godhead shouldn’t be in any Bible to Explain YHWH— 010.htm
Godhead
means more then One --Yahweh is not a group.
Godhead Is
Intentionally Used By the Trinity/Oneness Movement Theology ---worded as such to promote an
Unbiblical
Word or phase to fit the group of Two or Three in One uncreated beings ---The
Mystery Group--Study AFact.htm & PreExistenceOfChrist.htm.
Divine
Nature-Not Godhead in
NAS-BIBLE and
many other Newly Revised Bibles
open Acts17:29 Divine Nature –not the Word Godhead
"Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone,
an image formed by the art and thought of man---See
more examples below
a. of idolatrous
images -Images
Note That Jesus is the image of God –an
image is not the original
--STUDY -Images &Oneness.htm
As a human
son may closely resemble his father in various ways, this heavenly Son reflectes his Father’s qualities and personality. Col 1:15
He is the “only-begotten Son.” (John 3:16)
This means that Jesus is the only one directly created by God. Jesus is also
the only one whom God used when He
created all other things. (Colossians 1:16
- Prov8-22.htm ) Then, too, Jesus is called “the Word.” (John 1:14)
This tells us that he spoke for God, no doubt delivering messages and
instructions to the Father’s other sons, both spirit and human.
.Begotten
Has Been Removed From Many Newly Revised
Trinitarian/Oneness Bibles
Compare B2.S Bibles
STUDY--ID of Imaginations
of God’s Head--Images.htm
Compare all good Dictionaries---OPEN BestBibleDictionariesPLUS.htm
And Bible
Translations—in BestBiblesPlus.htm ---And See Who is Doing
it Right !!!!
Divine Nature-Not Godhead NASB Acts17:29
"Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man
You can do this with each one of the Bibles in SearchGodsWord.org---
Example (2) Enter Godhead KJV/W/Strongs--And Click on
--Original Greek---and see what you get
Example KJV
http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?l=en&query=Godhead§ion=0&translation=str&sr=1&Enter=Perform+Search
The Dictionary
doesn’t Recognize Godhead as part of |Original Greek]
KJV—Has 3
Verses
Open Ac
17:29 - Ro 1:20 - Col
2:9 –
YOU GET THIS
Changes Form
--
Note --That YHWH
(Jehovah in English) Jehovah can cause 010.htm (accomplish) anything He Wills ---But
It Is Unscriptural
That He Changes Himself (to make Himself) into the Person of Jesus at anytime (
Study AAIsJesusRealToYouPart2.htm & Part 1
in A + SatanAndJesus.htm) that would make Jesus
not a real being of Himself –Jn 5:26.- 010.htm.
Mal 3:16
Then those who feared the (Open) LORD spoke to one another, and the LORD gave attention and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before Him for those who fear the LORD and who esteem His name.
Mal 3:6
"For I,
the (Open) LORD,--(Jehovah) do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.
)l bq(y (8804) eT)w (8804) ytyn$ )l hwhy yn) yK
. etylk
Who is The ALPHAandTheOMEGA.htm
COMPARE The Bible Dictionaries and Encyclopedias--- Open Dictionary-Example.htm
SearchGodsWord.org---Dictionary Reads as Follows
(1)-a general name of deities or divinities as used by
the Greeks
SBT
Note --- as used by the Greeks The
Hebrews—Didn’t use the Word---- Godhead --Pagans Had gods with many heads <
YHWH is One
Head –Undivided
(2)--spoken of the only and true God, trinity -----
- of
Christ
- Holy
Spirit
- the
Father
SBT—Noticed The Accuracy of The Words ***Spoken of*** In No 2
The Question
IS *** Spoken of By Who ?***
The
Same People That Speak These Unscriptural Words
Non-Biblical Words and Phrases –To Try to Control People
with Them-- Here are Some
Spoken of BY
Oneness and Tri-Phantom God --So Called Theologians--- God the
Son,-God-Man,-God begat God ,- Jesus is God, The Holy
Spirit is God in the 3rd Person--Jesus eternally existed as
one with the Father, Not make or Created out of any act
of will by the Father, The Son is equal or co-equal to the Father, God came in
the flesh,. God sacrificed himself to himself. God is three in one, God is two
in One. One and One is One --Three in one
is One. One and One and Onne equals One.
None of these Words or Phases exists in God’s Inspired written Vocabulary Open UnbiblicalWordsThatInvalidateGodsWords.htm
AND BestStatementFound.htm
De 33:26
"There is none like the God of Jeshurun, Who rides the heavens to your help,
And through the skies in His majesty.
eyqx$ wtw)gbW jrz(b eym$ bekr (8802) aWrU$y le)K aye)
http://www.searchgodsword.org/lex/heb/view.cgi?number=0410&l=en
"There is none like the God of Jeshurun,
Strong’s o410
- god,
god-like one, mighty one
- mighty
men, men of rank, mighty heroes
- angels
- god,
false god, (demons, imaginations)
- God, the one true God, Jehovah
- mighty
things in nature
- strength,
power
II) (a) Hence the word was appropriated by Jews and retained by
Christians to denote "the one true God." In the Sept. theos translates (with few exceptions) the Hebrew words Elohim and Jehovah, the former indicating His power
and preeminence, the latter His unoriginated,
immutable, eternal and self-sustained existence. Open http://www.menfak.no/bibelprog/vines?tofrom=G
– Open god
Open the
Links Without links to names]
[Without links to names] [With Easton] [With Nave] [With Torrey] [X]
[With Webster dictionary] [With Roget's thesaurus] [With ->German] [With ->German2] [With ->Russian] [With ->French] [With ->Estonian] [X]
Myths-For The Biggest of Them All --Open-- MythsAndMythology.htm
-Sbt Note –The Christian-Trinity God was Invented—and
Approved—But Not Proved in 381 A.D -and about---292
Years After Jesus’ Death--
Jesus was
Declared BY Man –Not by YHWH to be God.
The word
Godhead is still around today intentionally to promote the Trinity—(OpenTrindirty.htm )
If any modern Bible or Commentator uses the word Godhead he
is most likely
Trinity Bias----Proceed with caution
or find another commentary that doesn’t use that word or explains why he is.OPEN Commentaries.htm
The KJV Bible is Recognized
as being the most inaccurate
English Bible Version in use today—
Introductory remarks: Recognizing the contribution of the
King James Version
Open--http://www.bibletexts.com/kjv-tr.htm
Read the Colwell
Bible Test in-- BestBiblesComingInTheFuture..> and for interested advanced Students who really
care about a list of
verses in most Bibles that have been intentionally rendered in
away to infer the wrong meaning--- you will want to study the following Pages
with a great passion and Compare (all verses listed) with your
Favorite Bible 1Tim316.htm-- BiblePunctuationMarksPLUS.htm
TrinitarianBiasTestPLUSmore.htm --and
Compare what you find with the 1st&ammp;aamp;<
group of Bibles listed in BestBiblesPlus.htm
Repeat-COMPARE The All Good Bible Dictionaries and
Godhead ----- is only another&> way
of saying “God,” a simple meaning
Learn how One God became 3 –to some---Focus on
what Paul was explaining and
How Some
read more in to it—and why most Bibles use
a different WORD
History Lesson
Some Key Points Bolden Underlined .ect We left most for you to
do !!
The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia
ISBE http://studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T3857
(Acts 17:29; Romans 1:20; Colossians 2:9),
god´hed: The word “Godhead” is a simple doublet of the less frequently occurring
“Godhood.” Both forms stand side by side in the Ancren Riwle (about 1225 ad),
and both have survived until today, though not in equally common use. They are
representatives of a large class of abstract substantives, formed with the
suffix “-head” or “-hood”, most of which formerly occurred in both forms almost
indifferently, though the majority of them survive only, or very preponderatingly (except in Scottish speech), in the form
-hood. The two suffixes appear in Middle English as “-hêde” and “-hôd”, and presuppose in the Anglo-Saxon which lies behind them a feminine haéda (which is not actually known) by the side of the masculine hád. The Anglo-Saxon word “was originally a distinct substantive, meaning
'person, personality, sex, condition, quality, rank'” (Bradley, in A New
English Dict. on a Historical Basis, under the
word “-hood”), but its use as a suffix early superseded its separate
employment. At first -hêde appears to have been appropriated to
adjectives, -hôd to substantives; but, this distinction breaking down and the forms
coming into indiscriminate use, -hêde grew
obsolete, and remains in common use only in one or two special forms, such as
“Godhead,” “maidenhead” (Bradley, as cited, under the word “-head”).
The general elimination of the forms
in -head has been followed by a fading consciousness, in the case of the few
surviving instances in this form, of the qualitative sense inherent in the
suffix. The words accordingly show a tendency to become simple denotatives. Thus, “the Godhead” is frequently employed
merely as a somewhat strong synonym of “God” although usually with more or less
emphasis upon that in God which makes Him God. One of its established usages is
to denote the Divine essence as such, in distinction from the three
“hypostases” or “persons” which share its common possession in the doctrine of
the Trinity. This usage is old: Bradley (op. cit.) is able to adduce instances
from the 13th century. In this usage the word has long held the rank of a
technical term, e.g. the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Church of England, 1571,
Art. I: “And in the unity of this Godhead, there be three persons” (compare the
Irish Articles of 1615, and the Westminster Confession, II, 3); Westminster
Shorter Catechism, Q. 6: “There are three persons in the Godhead.” Pursuant to
the fading of the qualitative sense of the word, there has arisen a tendency,
when the qualitative consciousness is vivid, to revive the obsolescent
“Godhood,” to take its place; and this tendency naturally shows itself
especially when the contrast with humanity is expressed. Carlyle, for example (French
Revolution, III, Book vi, chapter iv, section 1), speaking of the posthumous
reaction against Marat, writes: “Shorter godhood had
no divine man”; and Phillips Brooks (Sermons, XIII, 237) speaks of
Christ bridging the gulf “between the Godhood and the manhood.” “Godhood”
seems, indeed, always to have had a tendency to appear in such contrasts, as if
the qualitative consciousness were more active in it than in “Godhead.” Thus,
it seems formerly to have suggested itself almost as inevitably to designate
the Divine nature of Christ, as “Godhead” did to designate the common Divine
essence of the Trinity. Bradley cites instances from 1563 down.
The fundamental meaning of “Godhead”
is, nevertheless, no less than that of “Godhood,” the state, dignity,
condition, quality, of a god, or, as monotheists would say, of God. As manhood is that which makes a man a man, and childhood that
which makes a child a child, so Godhead is that which makes God, God.
When we ascribe Godhead to a being, therefore, we affirm that all that enters
into the idea of God belongs to Him. “Godhead” is thus the Saxon equivalent of
the Latin “Divinity,” or, as it is now becoming more usual to say, “Deity.”
Like these terms it is rendered concrete by prefixing the article to it. As
“the Divinity,” “the Deity,” so also “the Godhead” is only another way of saying “God,” except that when we say “the Divinity,” “the Deity,” “the
Godhead,” we are saying “God” more abstractly and more qualitatively, that is
with more emphasis, or at least with a more lively consciousness, of the
constitutive qualities which make God the kind of being we call “God.”
The word “Godhead” occurs in the King
James Version only 3 times (Act_17:29; Rom_1:20; Col_2:9), and oddly
enough it translates in these 3 passages, 3 different, though closely related,
Greek words, τὸ θεῖον, tó theíon θειότης, theiótēs, θεότης, theótēš.
To theion means “that which is Divine,”
concretely, or, shortly, “the
Deity.”
Among the Greeks it was in constant use in the sense of “the Divine Being,” and particularly as a general term
to designate the Deity apart from reference to a particular god. It is used by
Paul (Act_17:29) in an address made to a heathen
audience, and is inserted into a context in which it
is flanked by the simple term “God” (ὁ
Θεός, ho theós) on both sides. It is obviously deliberately
chosen in order to throw up into emphasis the qualitative idea of God; and this
emphasis is still further heightened by the direct contrast into which it is
brought with the term “man.” “Being, then, the offspring of God, we ought not
to think that it is to gold or silver or stone graven by art and device of man that the Godhead is like.” In an effort to
bring out this qualitative emphasis, the Revised Version, margin suggests that
we might substitute for “the Godhead” here the periphrastic rendering, “that
which is Divine.” But this seems both clumsy and ineffective for its purpose.
From the philological standpoint, “the Godhead” is very fair equivalent for to theion, differing as it does from the simple “God” precisely by
its qualitative emphasis. It may be doubted, however, whether in the partial
loss by “Godhead” of its qualitative force in its current usage, one of its
synonyms, “the Divinity” (which is the rendering here of the Rhemish version) or “the Deity,” would not better convey
Paul's emphasis to modern readers.
Neither of these terms, “Divinity,”
“Deity,” occurs anywhere in the King James Version, and “Deity” does not occur
in the Revised Version (British and American) either; but the Revised Version
(British and American) (following the Rhemish
version) substitutes “Dignity” for “Godhead” in Rom_1:20. Of the two,
“Dignity” was originally of the broader connotation; in the days of heathendom
it was applicable to all grades of Divine beings. “Deity” was introduced by the
Christian Fathers for the express purpose of providing a stronger word by means
of which the uniqueness of the Christians' God should be emphasized. Perhaps
“Divinity” retains even in its English usage something of its traditional
weaker connotation, although, of course, in a monotheistic consciousness the
two terms coalesce in meaning. There exists a tendency to insist, therefore, on
the “Deity” of Christ, rather than his mere “Divinity,” in the feeling that
“Divinity” might lend itself to the notion that Christ possessed but a
secondary or reduced grade of Divine quality. In Act_17:29 Paul is not discriminating between grades of Divinity, but is preaching monotheism. In this
context, then, to theion does not lump together “all that is called God or is
worshipped,” and declare that all that is in any sense Divine should be
esteemed beyond the power of material things worthily to represent. Paul has
the idea of God at its height before his mind, and having quickened his
hearers' sense of God's exaltation by his elevated description of Him, he
demands of them whether this Deity can be fitly represented by any art of man
working in dead stuff. He uses the term to theion, rather than ho theos, not merely
in courteous adoption of his hearers' own language, but because of its qualitative
emphasis. On the whole, the best English translation of it would probably be
“the Deity.” “The Godhead” has ceased to be sufficiently qualitative: “the
Godhood” is not sufficiently current: “the Divine” is not sufficiently
personal: “the Divinity” is perhaps not sufficiently strong: “Deity” without
the article loses too much of its personal reference to compensate for the gain
in qualitativeness: “the Deity” alone seems fairly to
reproduce the apostle's thought.
The Greek term in Rom_1:20 is theiotēs, which again, as a
term of quality, is not unfairly rendered by “Godhead.” What Paul says
here is that “the everlasting power and Godhead” of God “are clearly perceived
by means of His works.” By “Godhead” he clearly means the whole of that by
which God is constituted what we mean by “God.” By coupling the word with
“power,” Paul no doubt intimates that his mind is resting especially upon those
qualities which enter most intimately into and constitute the exaltation of
God; but we must beware of limiting the connotation of the term - all of God's
attributes are glorious. The context shows that the thought of the apostle was
moving on much the same lines as in Act_17:29; here, too,
the contrast which determines the emphasis is with “corruptible man,” and along
with him, with the lower creatures in general (Rom_1:23). How could
man think of the Godhead under such similitudes - the
Godhead, so clearly manifested in its glory by its works! The substitution for
“Godhead” here of its synonym “Divinity” by the Revised Version (British and
American) is doubtless due in part to a desire to give distinctive renderings
to distinct terms, and in part to a wish to emphasize, more strongly than
“Godhead” in its modern usage emphasizes, the qualitative implication which is
so strong in theiotēš. Perhaps, however, the substitution
is not altogether felicitous. “Divinity,” in its contrast with “Deity,” may
have a certain weakness of connotation clinging to it, which would unsuit it to represent theiotēs here. It is
quite true that the two terms, “Divinity” and “Deity,” are the representatives
in Latin Patristic writers respectively of the Greek theiotēs and theotēš. Augustine (The City of God, VII, 1; compare X, 1) tells us that “Deity” was coined
by Christian writers as a more accurate rendering of the Greek theotēs than the
current “Divinity.” But it does not follow that because “Deity” more accurately
renders theotēs, therefore
“Divinity” is always the best rendering of theiotēš. The stress laid by the Greek
Fathers on the employment of theotēs to express
the “Deity” of the Persons of the Trinity was in sequence to attempts which
were being made to ascribe to the Son and the Spirit a reduced “Divinity”; and
it was the need the Latin Fathers felt in the same interests which led them to
coin “Deity” as a more accurate rendering, as they say, of theotēš. Meanwhile theiotēs and
“Divinity” had done service in the two languages, the former as practically,
and the latter as absolutely, the only term in use to express the idea of
“Deity.” Theotēs is very rare
in classical Greek, “Deity” non- existent in classical Latin. To represent theiotēs uniformly by
“Divinity,” if any reduced connotation at all clings to “Divinity,” would therefore
be to represent it often very inadequately. And that is the case in the present
passage. What Paul says is clearly made known by God's works, is His
everlasting power and all the other everlasting attributes which form His
Godhead and constitute His glory.
It is theotēs which occurs
in Col_2:9. Here Paul declares that “all the
fullness of the Godhead” dwells in Christ “bodily.” The phrase “fullness of the
Godhead” is an especially emphatic one. It means everything without exception
which goes to make up the Godhead, the totality of all that enters into the
conception of Godhood. All this, says Paul, dwells in Christ “bodily,” that is
after such a fashion as to be manifested in connection with a bodily organism.
This is the distinction of Christ: in the Father and in the Spirit the whole
plenitude of the Godhead dwells also, but not “bodily”; in them it is not
manifested in connection with a bodily life. It is the incarnation which Paul
has in mind; and he tells us that in the incarnate Son, the fullness of the
Godhead dwells. The term chosen to express the Godhead here is the strongest
and the most unambiguously decisive which the language affords. Theiotēs may mean all
that theotēs can mean; on
monotheistic lips it does mean just what theotēs means; but theotēs must mean
the utmost that either term can mean. The distinction is, not that theotēs refers to
the essence and theiotēs to the
attributes; we cannot separate the essence and the attributes. Where the
essence is, there the attributes are; they are merely the determinants of the
essence. And where the attributes are, there the essence is; it is merely the
thing, of the kind of which they are the determinants. The distinction is that theotēs emphasizes
that it is the highest stretch of Divinity which is in question, while theiotēs might
possibly be taken as referring to Deity at a lower level. It it not merely such divinity as is shared by all the gods
many and lords many of the heathen world, to which “heroes” might aspire, and
“demons” attain, all the plenitude of which dwells in Christ as incarnate; but
that Deity which is peculiar to the high gods; or, since Paul is writing out of
a monotheistic consciousness, that Deity which is the Supreme God alone. All
the fullness of supreme Deity dwells in Christ bodily. There is nothing in the
God who is over all which is not in Christ. Probably no better rendering of
this idea is afforded by our modern English than the term “Godhead,” in which
the qualitative notion still lurks, though somewhat obscured behind the
individualizing implication, and which in any event emphasizes precisely what
Paul wishes here to assert - that all that enters into the conception of God,
and makes God what we mean by the term “God,” dwells in Christ, and is
manifested in Him in connection with a bodily organism.
Godhead
Another Poor Word Choice in the
King James and some others that imitate Kjv
KJV(Act 17:29) Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God,
we ought not to think that the
Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
http://www.searchgodsword.org/desk/?language=en&query=Godhead§ion=0&translation=kjv&oq=Godhead&new=1&sr=1
NAS Strong’s
Version
http://www.searchgodsword.org/isb/bible.cgi?query=ac+17%3A29§ion=0&it=nas&oq=ac%252017%3A29&ot=bhs&nt=na&new=1&nb=ac&ng=17&ncc=17
Some People Think That the Godhead is like --Water --Ice and Steam OR like an Egg
shell - membrane, embryo
THE SHELL
---THE WHITE and The YOKE &nbssp; This
is by
art and man's device.
(CEV) Since
we are God's children, we must not think that he is like an idol made out of gold or silver or stone. He
isn't like anything that humans have thought up and made.
Check
as many Bible as you Desire Open --BestBiblesPlus.htm
http://www.2001translation.com/ACTS.htm
29 ‘So, since we are the offspring of
God, we shouldn’t think of this Divine
One as being like gold, silver, stone, or like anything else that some man
has artistically sculpted.
(Rom 1:20) For
the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,
being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal
power and Godhead; so that they
are without excuse:
http://www.2001translation.com/ROMANS.htm
20 For His invisible things, which
include His eternal power and might, are known and can
be clearly seen in everything He has made from the world’s creation onward, and
that leaves [them] without any defense
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
http://www.2001translation.com/Colossians.htm
9 For the complete Divine body lives in him,
Act 17:29
(CEV) Since we are God's children,
we must not think that he is like an idol made out of gold or silver or stone. He isn't like anything that humans have
thought up and made.
(GNB) Since we are God's children,
we should not suppose that his nature is anything like an image of gold or silver or
stone, shaped by human art and skill.
(GW) So if we are God's children,
we shouldn't think that the divine
being is like an image made from gold, silver, or stone, an image that is the
product of human imagination and skill.
(ISV) So if
we are God's children, we shouldn't think that the divine being is like
gold, silver, or stone, or is an image carved by human imagination and skill.
(KJV) Forasmuch then as we are the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or
silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
(KJV+) Forasmuch then3767 as we are5225 the
offspring1085 of God,2316 we ought3784 not3756 to think3543 that the3588 Godhead2304 is1511 like unto3664 gold,5557 or2228 silver,696 or2228 stone,3037 graven5480 by art5078 and2532 man's444 device.1761
(LITV) Then being offspring of God,
we ought not to suppose that the Godhead is like gold or silver or stone,
engraved by art and the imagination of man.
(MKJV) Then being offspring of God,
we ought not to think that the Godhead is like gold or silver or stone,
engraved by art and man's imagination.
(MSG) Well, if we are the
God-created, it doesn't make a lot of sense to think we could hire a sculptor
to chisel a god out of stone for us, does it?
Diaglot
29 Offspring
therefore being of the God, not we are bound to suppose, gold or silver or
stone, a sculpture of art and device of man, the Deity to be like
Col 2:9
Compare
(CEV) God lives fully in Christ.
(GNB) For the full content of divine nature lives in
Christ, in his humanity,
(GW) All of God lives in Christ's
body,
(ISV) For in
him the whole fullness of God lives in bodily form.
(KJV) For in him dwelleth
all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.
(KJV+) For3754 in1722 him846 dwelleth2730 all3956 the3588 fullness4138 of the3588 Godhead2320 bodily.4985
(MSG) Everything of God gets
expressed in him, so you can see and hear him clearly. You don't need a telescope,
a microscope, or a horoscope to realize the fullness of Christ, and the
emptiness of the universe without him.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Godhead
In Christianity, the Godhead is a unit
consisting of God the Father, Jesus Christ (the Son), and the Holy Spirit. Though often used
interchangeably with the concept of Trinity, the terminology of Godhead
is broader than the idea of Trinity, and includes other ideas of how the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are interrelated. Open Concept.htm
Godhead---No. 1 Improvement in Most all New Bibles---Open-- BadWordsInTheBIBLES.htm
Open Index http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&p=JOHN1onePLUS&xargs=0&pstart=1&fr=slv1-mdp&dups=1
SimpleBibleTruths.net-The
Alternative to Mysticism WHAT IS Mysticism open WHATisMysticism.htm Extended
articles From AGODagod.htm JOHN1onePLUS.htm TrinitarianBiasTestPLUSmore.htm AND Life.htm
The Word- Godhead --The Long Article--->
For The Short one
open BadWordsInTheBIBLES.htm
Latin Vulgate
17:29
genus ergo cum simus Dei non debemus
aestimare auro aut argento aut
lapidi sculpturae artis et cogitationis
hominis divinum esse simile
King
James Version http://www.greeknewtestament.com/B44C017.htm#V29 1O Bibles plus Fur Biblos open http://bible.cc/acts/17-29.htm
17:29 Forasmuch then
as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like
unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
American
Standard Version
17:29 Being then the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or
silver, or stone, graven by art and device of man.
Bible
in Basic English
17:29 If then we are
the offspring of God, it is not right for us to have the idea that God is like
gold or silver or stone, formed by the art or design of man.
Darby's
English Translation
17:29 Being therefore the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that which is divine to be like gold or
silver or stone, the graven form of man's art and imagination.
Douay Rheims
17:29 Being therefore
the offspring of God, we must not suppose the divinity to be like unto gold, or
silver, or stone, the graving of art, and device of man.
Noah
Webster Bible
17:29 Being then the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like to gold, or
silver, or stone graven by art and man's device.
Weymouth
New Testament
17:29 Since then we are God's offspring, we ought not to imagine
that His nature resembles gold or silver or marble, or anything sculptured by
the art and inventive faculty of man.
World
English Bible
17:29 Being then the
offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold, or
silver, or stone, engraved by art and device of man.
Young's
Literal Translation
17:29 'Being,
therefore, offspring of God, we ought not to think the Godhead to be like to
gold, or silver, or stone, graving of art and device of man;
Also Read
TheEVILSideOFTheTRINITY.>