Imply--The First Implied Lie is what started all mans and angels problems. Implying that Jesus is something
More Then what He Himself said about Himself is comparable to Satan’s first Lie.
your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ. 4 For if someone comes to you and preaches a Jesus other than the Jesus we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it easily enough. 13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ.13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ.14 And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. 15 It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.
Jesus told the Apostles and anyone that wanted to be a true D
The First Implied Lie is as follows--
Satan Implied that His LORD God Had Lied to Eve-then Eve applied the lie to Adam.
Then Satan said in verse- 5- 3:5
and the production of serpents, between whom the antipathy still continues, and mystically the evil angels and also wicked men called
Implying that Jesus is something More Then what He Himself said about Himself is comparable
Note John 1:1-2 Most Bibles Render— 1 2 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with GOD, and the Word was GOD.as set forth in the Chalcedonian Creed. in 451 CE. In Christology, the –open-Conception that Jesus is the Logos Second ID open
Logos (a Greek word meaning "word", "wisdom", or "reason") has been important in establishing the doctrine of Jesus' divinity, Many have seen this as evidence that there was a syncretism between (Christian) Christology and (secular) Platonism. The debate about the nature of Christ from the first century through the Council of Chalcedon in 451 CE must be understood in light of the pervasive world view of Platonic dualism.[not in citation given] Platonism is normally divided into four periods: Old Academy 347-267 BC, New Academy 267-80 BC, Middle Platonism 80BC-250 AD, and Neoplatonism 250 AD through to the Reformation.
The Word was God in Jn 1:1 is not in harmony with Jn & 18 and The Fault belongs to Bible Publishers
Intentional Fallacy To make the proper Foot Note-
Note Facts About the word GOD. in John 1:1 are as follows--
“THEOS” There Is Only One Word for GOD in the Greek Language.
At the time the New Testament was written, Greek manuscripts were written in all capital letters. The upper and lower case letters were not blended as we do today. Thus, the distinction that we today make between “GOD and “god” could not be made, and the context became the judge in determining to whom “THEOS” referred to.
At the time the New Testament was written, Greek manuscripts were written in all capital letters.
Jn 1:1 The last phrase in the verse, which most versions translate as “and the Word was God,” should not be translated that way.
The Greek language uses the word “God” (Greek = theos) to refer to the Father as well as to other authorities. These include the
Open Devil (2 Cor.Open 4:4
It All About The Bible Publisher’s Theology Compare BIG –G or small g Example1Jn1-1.htm--
(KJV+ Strong’s) In1722 the beginning746 was2258 the3588 Word,3056 and2532 the3588
Strong’s G2316 –For Who Was Strong’s Open http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong's_Concordance
Θεός-theos-----GOD, god [-ly, -ward].
Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate;
by Hebraism very: - X exceeding, GOD, god [-ly, -ward].
G3588 ὁ, ἡ, τό ho hē to
ho, hay, to
The masculine, feminine (second) and neuter (third) forms, in all their inflections; the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc.
At the time the New Testament was written, Greek manuscripts were written in all capital letters.
context is the final arbiter, it is almost always the case in the New Testament
that when “God” refers to the Father, the definite article appears in the Greek
text (this article can be seen only in the Greek text, it is never translated
into English). Translators are normally very sensitive to this Open (see
John 10:33). The difference between theos
with and without the article occurs in John 1:1: “In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with “the
theos,” and the
Word was “theos.”
Since the definite article is missing from the second occurrence of “theos” (“GOD,”)
the usual meaning would be “god” or “divine.” The
New English Bible gets the sense of this phrase by translating it, “What
God was, the Word was.” James Moffatt
who was a professor of Greek and New Testament Exegesis at
Main Question To Decide Is. –Did the Nicene Creed Makers know more about Jesus then He did of Himself? (learned intelligence) Did Jesus Lie about what He Learned? Was Jesus a Liar about Who He Said He Was and Is?---Rev-1.1 Versus the incomprehensible Jn 1:1 Rendering –the word was God That Most Modern Bible Publishers Print -Compared (JOHN1onePLUS.htm) to the word was a god----which is comprehensible and in harmony with versesJn 1:14 and Verse 1:18. WhatIsagod.htm) has been changed in many new Bibles. In 58.htm What about John 20:28. GOD
1. Any difficulty in understanding this verse is caused by the translators. Had they faithfully rendered the Greek text in verse 33 as they did in verses 34 and 35, then it would read, “…you, a man, claim to be a god.” In the next two verses, John and 35, the exact same word (theos, without the article) is translated as “god,” not “God.” The point was made under John 1:1 that usually when “God” is meant, the noun theos has the definite article.
Many Bible Publishers Translated- a-god or a-God ---
Long Before Colwell’s Birth. Study JOHN1onePLUS.htm-
Who Is Colwell and What was His Rule
Vine’s Dictionary is not up to speed on this either--–That shows their Bias also to the Nicene Creeds
More References in AllManuscriptsWereWrittenInAllCaps.htm
CONSIDER THE SOURCE: Who wrote the Greek Grammatical Rules?—
For The Bible That You Read? “and the Word was God,”
(2) Experts in Greek Mythology and false religion.
That’s right! The rules of Greek grammar were written by Greek speaking people who did not believe in the true God of the Bible. They did not know about the Son of God, Jesus Christ.
Or if they already knew about Jesus Christ they wrote the grammatical rules after the fact and made them fit their belief in a false (man-made) Trinity.
It is not surprising that they contrived a mysterious
god-head they called the Trinity, after all they believed in fictitious
religious beings such as Zeus, Apollos and Hercules.
Zeus was considered the father of many gods. The Greeks, like the Romans, and
many other heathen societies believed in many “multiples of gods.”
Will you allow men who believed in false gods to dictate how you translate the inspired Word of God at John 1:1?
Will you allow gramatical rules to control your faith?
OR WILL YOU ACCEPT THE PROOF FROM THE CONTEXT OF THE HOLY
CONTEXT… PROVES TWO SEPARATE SPIRIT BEINGS: The context of John 1:1 emphatically indicates that it is talking about Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and God as two separate spirit beings. Bible authorities agree that “the Word” is Jesus Christ. The same verse, John 1:1, indicates that God and Jesus Christ are two separate beings when it says that “the Word was with God.” The Greek “pros” means ‘with,’ ‘by the side of’ and ‘near to” indicating two separate beings. Listen to what Bible scholars say about the Greek word pros:
“This word ‘with’ points out that there is a distinction of persons here.” (Geneva Bible Translation Notes)
“This expression denotes friendship or intimacy. John affirms that he (Jesus) was “with God” in the beginning - that is, before the world was made.” (Albert Barnes Notes on the Bible)
“Though existing eternally with God the Logos was in perfect fellowship with God.” (Robertson’s Word Pictures)
“The preposition “pros” implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. (
“was with God”--having a conscious personal existence distinct from God (as one is from the person he is "with"), but inseparable from Him and associated with Him.” (Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary)
CONTEXT….JESUS CHRIST IDENTIFIED AS THE “
Even Satan knew him as the “Son of God.” (Matthew 4:6)
The demons and unclean spirits recognized him as the “Son of God.” (Mark )
The centurion who guarded him at his death admitted that Jesus was the Son of God. (Mark )
The Gospel writer Mark identified Jesus as the “Son of God.” (Mark 1:1) All of the Gospel writers knew that Jesus Christ was the “Son of God.”
Nathanael called Jesus the “Son of God.” (John 1:49)
Jesus spoke of himself as the “Son of God.” (John 11:4)
Martha knew that Jesus was the “Son of God.” (John 11:27)
John the Baptist proclaimed Jesus as the “Son of God.” (John 1:34)
CONTEXT…APOSTLE PAUL KNEW THE
CONTEXT…APOSTLE JOHN KNEW JESUS CHRIST, THE
APOSTLE JOHN KNEW THAT JESUS HAD A GOD: John was inspired to write Jesus' words at John 20:17 when he told Mary: "Go to my brothers, and say to them, I ascend to my Father and you’re Father, and my God and your God.” Did you get that? Jesus called God...his God! John was also inspired to write Jesus' words at Revelation , "'I will make the one who overcomes, a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will not go out from it anymore. I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is the New Jerusalem. This city comes down out of heaven from my God. I will write my new name on him." Jesus calls his heavenly Father, his God! No, Jesus Christ is not God...he is the Son of God.
“ THE REVELATION GOD GAVE TO JESUS CHRIST, so that he could tell his servants the things that must soon take place. Christ then sent his angel to communicate the symbolic message to his servant John.” (Revelation 1:1) (NSB) It was obvious to John at the time he wrote these words that Jesus and the congregation of believers were united in harmony with the Father. (John 14:10, 20) It was also obvious that God was in charge and that Jesus Christ was subservient to his Father. (John 14:28) (1 Corinthians 11:3) The entire context of the Holy Scriptures shows that John recognized Jesus Christ as the Son of God and not as God.
THE EMBLEMATIC LANGUAGE OF JOHN 1:1: When the apostle John wrote the first verse of his Gospel he was inspired to express a visible symbol for something very abstract…very abstract! He established three basic Biblical facts in that one verse: (1) The Word was alive in the beginning. (2) The Word was with God. (3) The Word was God. John attempted to explain these basic beliefs in the inspired Gospel of John, the three Letters of John, and the book of Revelation. The serious Bible student needs to study and meditate on all of the Bible books written by John in order to understand the Emblematic Language of John 1:1. The entire context of Johns writings show that Jesus Christ is the Son of God…NOT GOD!
What was John talking about when he wrote: “theos en ho logos” God was the Word? According to the context of the New Testament, he was talking about Jesus Christ (the Word) as a member of the God Family. Jesus was a divine spirit actively serving in heaven with his heavenly Father before he came to earth. He is a divine spirit now serving in heaven along side his heavenly Father.
“GOD-LIKE” EXPRESSES ACCURATE MEANING: The New Simplified Bible uses one of the other accurate meanings of the Greek word “theos,” Godly, God-like, or like God. This reference to Jesus Christ, the Word, as being God-like is fitting since he is a member of the God family and is therefore very much like his heavenly Father. It is in a relative sense that Jesus Christ could even be considered God. After all he is not his own Father and his Father truly is God.
THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST:
The debate continues… Is Jesus Christ deity? Or is he not deity? The following Biblical evidence proves that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, spiritually powerful like his Father, and very much qualified to be a deity! But GOD, not Jesus Christ, is the true Deity!
(1) Jesus Christ is a supernatural (spiritual) being. (1 Corinthians 10:4)
(2) He is divine. (Colossians 2:9)
(3) Jesus lives forever. (Revelation 11:15; 22:5)
(4) Jesus is a priest forever. (Hebrews 7:17, 21)
(5) Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (Mark ) (John 1:34) (1 John 5:12)
(6) After living as a man on earth, he is now at the right hand of God. (Acts 7:55) (Hebrews 10:12)
(7) Like his Father, Jesus Christ is the Savior. (2 Samuel 22:2) (Isaiah 43:3) (2 Peter 1:11)
(8) Jesus and his Father are united in thought (purpose) and deed. (John 14:10; 17:21)
(9) Jesus Christ is second in command in the entire universe. (1 Corinthians 15:27)
(10) Jesus has a God. (John 20:17) (Revelation 3:12)
DEFINITION OF DEITY: The Word-Web Dictionary from Princeton University gives the following definition of deity: “Any supernatural being worshipped as controlling some part of the world or some aspect of life or who is the personification of a force.”
Is Jesus Christ God? NO! But using this definition Jesus could be considered a deity. That is why some call him “a god.” And he is truly “God-like” in his nature. (Philippians 2:5, 6) The Holy Scriptures clearly identify the position of Jesus Christ in heaven. He is second in command. GOD is first! (Hebrews 10:12, 13) (Colossians 3:1) (1 John 2:1)
JESUS CHRIST IS THE BEGOTTEN
• (NSB) JOHN 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was like God (God-like). (Greek: Theos: a deity, a god, magistrate, supreme God, God-like).
The transliterated Greek of this verse looks like this:
En arche en ho logos kai ho logos
In beginning was the Word and the word
en pros ton theon kai theos en ho logos
was with the God and God-like was the Word
Reference Open-Trinity, Colwell's Rule
The Greek word logos is often rightly translated as word. However, logos implies a greater meaning than that; it means the expression of a thought. So, Jesus is truly the complete expression of God’s thoughts.
People have often wondered why John used such unusual wording to start this, his literary masterpiece. It is obvious he was explaining Genesis 1:1-3. Notice how that scripture reads, ‘In an ancient time (gr. en arche) God created the heavens and the earth. But the earth was unsightly and unfinished, darkness covered its depths, and God’s Breath moved over its waters. Then God spoke (gr. eipen), saying, May there be light, and light came to be.’
So, you can see that God spoke, and the things came into existence by means of some unnamed person or force.
Now, follow John’s opening words (at John 1:1) and notice how they dovetail with and explain Genesis 1:1: ‘In an ancient time (gr. en arche) there was the Word . . . He was with God long ago. Everything came into existence through him. Life came into existence through him and the life was the light of men.’
As you can see, the account in Genesis says that God spoke things into existence, and John is explaining what God said (what the ‘Word’ or the ‘Expression of the thought’ was). In other words, God ‘spoke’ and the ‘Word’ (Jesus in his prehuman existence) did the work.
So, if John 1:1 appears to support the idea of a trinity to some, this is unintentional. John is simply trying to impress on his readers that, although Jesus isn’t mentioned in Genesis 1:1, he was there with God and was himself a powerful god who actually did the work (with God’s power) when God ‘spoke’ the heavens and earth into existence.
Are we to conclude from John’s writing here that Jesus’ heavenly name is ton Logos (the Word or Expression of a thought)? No! Recognize that John was just employing an inspired play on words to draw attention to the phrasing of Genesis 1:1. Jesus’ prehuman name was likely Michael, which means: Who is Like God (not a question but a statement). And John called him ‘the Word’ to point out Jesus’ most ancient high position as a co-worker with God, who created whatever things God spoke.
Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading
The simple answer is yes… if you understand what the word god means. This idea may be a bit difficult to grasp for people who were raised in a monotheistic society where God refers to just One. However, remember that the Greeks (whose language we are translating) were a polytheistic society (they worshiped many gods), and to them the word theos referred to a large group of individuals who were simply more powerful than men. So, theos just meant powerful one, not Creator (which is what the Hebrew name Jehovah implies – He who causes to be).
To prove that translating the word Theos as powerful is correct, notice how the Bible calls men gods at Psalm 82:6 (which Jesus also quotes at John 10:34-36), where it says, ‘I said You are gods; of the Most High you’re sons!’
Also, notice that at Exodus 7:1, God told Moses, ‘Look! I’ve made you a god to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron is your prophet.’
So, the terms god and gods just refer to the powerful. And even men can be gods… that is, in the truest sense of the word’s meaning (powerful ones). Thus, a word-for-word literal translation of John 1:1 can read, ‘In ancient time was the Word; and the Word was toward the Powerful One; and powerful was the Word.’
Then, why did we use the term God, rather than Powerful One, at John 1:1? We’ve left the first term (God) in place, because that’s what people call the Divine One today.
So, is the Logos the God or just god (powerful)? From the context of John 1:1, it appears as though Jesus (the Logos) is theos – powerful – but not The God (gr. ton Theon). For notice that Jesus described himself as simply God’s son (gr. Uios tou Theou eimi) at John 10:36.
Also notice that (at John 1:1) Logos (λογος) and Theon
(θεον) are both preceded
by the definite article the (ο λογος
and τον θεον),
except in the case where the Logos is referred to simply as theos (θεος).
By employing such wording, John was obviously differentiating Jesus from The
God. You can clearly see the differences in the words when you read John 1:1,
That the early Christians didn’t view Jesus as the God is supported by the fact that Christians still worshiped at the Temple of Jehovah in Jerusalem until shortly before it was destroyed in 70-C.E. (see Acts the Twentieth chapter). This is because Christian Jews didn’t consider Christianity to be a new religion with a new god, but rather, that it was the natural outgrowth of the old, and Jesus was the promised ‘Messiah’ or ‘Anointed One of God’ who was to assume ‘the throne of David his father.’
To see how Jesus was described at John 1:1 in the most ancient Coptic texts, see the link John 1:1-18, and to see why the Coptic texts are relevant, see the link
Use your browser BACK button to return to the text you were reading
Jesus was referred to (herein) as the only-created son at John and as the only-created god at John . However, that isn’t exactly what the scriptures say. The Greek word that is translated only created is monogenea (mono means only; genea means generated). So, the verses literally call him the only generated son or god. However, translating it as only generated could be a bit confusing to readers.
In other Bibles, this word is rendered as only begotten, but begotten isn’t exactly a word that you would read in the newspaper today (where ‘common’ American English may be read), so not everyone will understand what that means either. Remember that the goal of these translators to choose words that are common, easy to understand, and which carry the proper nuance in contemporary American English.
We also might have used the terms only fathered, or, only conceived, or, only born. However, none of those words accurately describes the situation of Jesus. For, while he was the only son ever born through a woman to God, He was also the only creature (son, god, or powerful one) that was directly created by God. For, John went on to elaborate on what he actually meant at Revelation 3:14, where he referred to Jesus as ‘the earliest creation of God’ (gr. he arche tes ktiseos tou Theou – or – the most/ancient creation of/the God). And John wrote of Jesus at John 1:3, ‘Everything [else] came into existence through him’ (gr. panta di autou egeneto – or – all by him generated).
So, although the term only created may not be exactly what was said in a word-for-word translation, it appears to be what John meant in this case.
What does the Bible say about angels?--Open angel
Compare Vine’s On-agodPLUS.htm--
enter Acts 7:40
SAYING TO AARON, 'MAKE FOR US GODS WHO WILL GO BEFORE US; FOR THIS MOSES WHO LED US OUT OF THE LAND OF EGYPT --WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO 41 "At that time they R346 made a calf F174 and brought a sacrifice to the idol, and were rejoicing in the R347 works of their hands
Open and Study
1 Cor 8:5
Another good reference
—Synonyms 3. assume, include.
1. To involve by logical necessity; entail: Life implies growth and death.
3. Obsolete To entangle.
[Middle English implien, from Old French emplier, to enfold, from Latin implicāre; see implicate.]
c.1374, "to enfold, enwrap, entangle" (the classical L. sense), from O.Fr. emplier, from L. implicare "involve" (see ). Meaning "to involve something unstated as a logical consequence" first recorded 1529. The distinction between imply and infer is in "What do you imply by that remark?" But, "What am I to infer from that remark?"
express or state indirectly
suggest as a logically necessary consequence; in logic
have as a necessary feature; "This decision involves many changes"