(1) Study the history of the word 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
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
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.
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
|
What Happened to the Words Only
Begotten in most New Trinitarian/Oneness Bibles –Study the List |
|
In ComputerCheck.htm & JOHN3-16.htm—INCLUDES
Jn1-18 and other verses. |
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
"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
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
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 -----
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
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
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,
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,
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
NAS Strong’s Version
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 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
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
http://www.2001translation.com/Colossians.htm
9 For the complete Divine body lives in him,
Act
(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.
(
(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
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,
(
(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
The Word-
Godhead
--The Long Article---
For The Short one open BadWordsInTheBIBLES.htm