Place your banner ad here.          See all banner ads

|| ConcernedMembers.com || About || Links Library || Help Warn Others ||
|| Madison Church of Christ || Richland Hills Church of Christ || Hillcrest Church of Christ || More Churches || Sunday School in Exile ||

Where is my NewThisWeek Email subscription?Click Here

Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  

Is Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?

January 4 2017 at 12:01 AM
Dave  (no login)
from IP address 66.112.162.15

Dr. John Bechtle
Adjunct Professor
Degrees:
D.Min., NT Greek Instruction
M.Div., New Testament
Teaches Greek Language

Should John 1:1 be translated, “The Word was God” or “The Word was a god”? Jehovah's Witnesses deny the deity of Christ, and claim that John 1:1 merely calls him “a god,” but not full deity. They rest their case on three facts of Greek grammar: There is no such word as “a” or “an” in Greek, so we sometimes have to add “a” to translate into English, (Acts 28:6). The Greek word used here (theos) has two meanings: usually the supreme God revealed in Scripture, but sometimes lesser beings like the gods of Greek mythology. The Greek word “the” is often attached to the word “God” or theos, but it does not appear in John 1:1. Hiding behind the Witness rendering of the verse is an unspoken equation: God + “the” (ho theos) = Jehovah, the Almighty God, God - “the” (theos) = a created being with divine qualities. Witnesses claim that the apostle John deliberately omitted a “the” in the final phrase to show the difference between God and the Word. As the New World Translation (p. 775) explains: John's inspired writings and those of his fellow disciples show what the true idea is, namely, the Word or Logos is not God or the God, but is the Son of God, and hence is a god. That is why, at John 1:1,2, the apostle refers to God as the God and to the Word or Logos as a god, to show the difference between the Two. Is this the proper translation? No. The equation underlying the Witness rendering breaks down within a few verses. John 1:18 contains theos twice, without “the” either time. According to Watchtower assumptions, we would expect to translate both as “god” or “a god.” Instead, the New World Translation says “God” the first time and “god” the second time. The context overrules their rule. Why did John choose not to put “the” on the word “God”? To show which word was the subject of the sentence. In English, we can recognize the subject of a sentence by looking at word order. In Greek, we must look at the word endings. John 1:1 is trickier than most verses, because both “God” (theos) and “Word” (logos) have the same ending. The usual way to mark off the subject clearly was to add “the” to the subject and leave it off the direct object. That is precisely what John did here. To conform to standard Greek grammar. E.C. Colwell demonstrated in an article in the Journal of Biblical Literature in 1933 that it was normal practice to omit “the” in this type of sentence. John was simply using good grammar, and making it clear that he intended to say, “The Word was God” rather than “God was the Word,” a statement with some theological drawbacks. John constructed his sentence in the one way that would preserve proper grammar and sound doctrine, declaring that “the Word was God.” Author: Dr. John Bechtle

Dr. Bechtle is either a Calvinist, a Trinity teacher, or what Donnie?

But Donnie and Ken, the REAL question is.....are you two just a closet Jehovah Witness?


Take your time boys. He is probably from a denominational background, or a Calvinist, or with Trinity background. One thing I know is this. Donnie, he put your work to and end. You are the ONE who has not been truthful.


 
 Respond to this message   
AuthorReply
Donnie
(Login Donnie.Cruz)
ConcernedMembersMadison
23.127.32.146

Nope: Donnie and Ken Quote the Scripture

January 4 2017, 2:11 AM 

Nice try, Dave.

Your fallacious analogy is this: Since the Roman Catholic Church, with its papacy, invented and teaches the pagan-influenced Trinity Creed, and Protestant Churches and Dave believe in the Catholic dogma, then, the Protestant Churches are also the Roman Catholic Church and Dave is a Roman Catholic. See the fallacy of your accusation?

1. I have no idea where the Greek professor derived his N.T. Greek text of John 1:1. I've already explained this numerous times that the original text (without the English capitalization) is as follows: "in the beginning was the word and the word was with the god and the word was god.""

The expression the god in the 2nd clause IS IN THE TEXT. That refers to God the Father [as in "the God of Abraham ... Isaac ... Jacob"]. The 3rd clause does not have the definite article "the" in the N.T. GREEK TEXT. Thanks to the Greek text! That "the Word" is NOT "the God."

2. John 1:2 is correctly translated: "The same was in the beginning with God." At least, Trinitarian translators did not substitute "He" or "Him" for "the Word."

3. In the following 3 verses Trinitarian translators "genderized" "the Word" by using "he" or "him" instead of "the same."

4. I have no idea where the Greek professor derived his N.T. Greek text of John 1:18 -- "No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." The KJV translation is fine in that regard. So, why is the Greek professor complaining about that?

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
23.117.130.209

Re: Nope: Donnie and Ken Quote the Scripture

January 4 2017, 8:37 AM 

Maybe a better title:

Rather than "Are Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?"

"Are Donnie and Ken just Jehovah's Witnesses in Disguise?" or

"Is Donnie-and-Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?"

Wouldn't these be better grammar?

"Donnie and Ken" is plural nominative. So you would need a verb to carry the plural.

"Donnie-and-Ken" is singular. "Donnie-and-Ken" make them a singular entity so the singular verb will carry it.

However, Donnie and Ken are not singular in their points of view, because they use different knowledge bases.

So I would opt for "Are Donnie and Ken just Jehovah's Witnesses in Disguise?"

Maybe Dr. Bill can stop attacking them, and help with the English construction.


 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
24.151.202.16

Re: Nope: Donnie and Ken Quote the Scripture

January 4 2017, 9:32 AM 

I missed out on grammar 101a so I protect myself by cutting and pasting. At least I can read the punch line:

John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory,
the glory as of the only BEGOTTEN OF the Father,) full of GRACE and TRUTH (the Word).

John 1:17 For the law was given by Moses,
but grace and truth [Thy Word] came by Jesus Christ.
John 1:18 No man hath seen God at any time;
the only begotten SON,
which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath DECLARED him.

Jesus is the GRACE of God (not the 3 graces of ugliness) but GRACE or LIGHT are not separate god people.
The Word AND Grace AND Light and all we need is by the ONLY BEGOTTEN SON which they could see, hear and handle because, says Jesus, a spirit hath not flesh and bones.

Titus 2:11 For the GRACE of God that bringeth salvation HATH APPEARED all men,
Titus 2:12 TEACHING us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
Titus 2:13 Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of
the great God AND our Saviour Jesus Christ;
Titus 2:14 Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity,
and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.


    
This message has been edited by Ken.Sublett from IP address 24.151.202.16 on Jan 4, 2017 9:58 AM


 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
99.179.116.207

Re: Nope: Donnie and Ken Quote the Scripture

January 4 2017, 9:46 AM 

There's a vast difference between being "attacked" and being "challenged." It's natural for overly sensitive religious fanatics to imagine themselves as martyrs and "attacked" when others challenge their peculiar and controversial theology.

Let not Donnie and Ken boast too much that they "quote the Scripture" (to suit their own agenda), because Satan can also "quote the Scripture" even better than those two can.

The grammatically correct title for Dave's post would be "Are Donnie and Ken Just Jehovah's Witnesses in Disguise?"
happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
24.151.202.16

Re: Nope: Donnie and Ken Quote the Scripture

January 4 2017, 10:01 AM 

" because Satan can also "quote the Scripture" even better than those two can. " Quoteth Shakespeare

 
 Respond to this message   
Dave
(no login)
162.229.29.37

Good Path is Blocked by Your Selfish Interpretations/Traditions

January 4 2017, 11:22 AM 

Proverbs 14:12New King James Version (NKJV)

12 There is a way that seems right to a man,
But its end is the way of death.
New King James Version (NKJV)


Thanks for the help with the grammar guys. Actually I asked an english teacher (family) if it looked right. I was told that I would get some odd "looks"s but since I used "Is" I therfore put both/either Donnie and/or Ken to be in the distinctive singular position of A Jehovah's witness.

happy.gif Nice try boys and thanks for the help.

Donnie, are you a Greek Language teacher?

Than is why 'you have no idea' of where he got this info.

Not that I don't trust you on your word andstudy alone, but you have been proven to be a false teacher before.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sarge
(no login)
68.74.186.218

Bill vs Script

January 4 2017, 12:23 PM 


May the best "person" whin(sic)




[linked image]


[linked image]

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
24.151.202.16

Re: Bill vs Script

January 4 2017, 12:37 PM 

Thanks! I always knew that you were a QUACK doctor!

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
99.179.116.207

Re: Bill vs Script

January 4 2017, 2:04 PM 

And I always knew that you were a senile old reprobate! LOL happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Ken Sublett
(Login Ken.Sublett)
ConcernedMembersMadison
24.151.202.16

Re: Bill vs Script

January 4 2017, 2:36 PM 

You should keep up with me landscaping a new house!

As long as I can find the coffee pot and the commode I'll be just fine.

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
99.179.116.207

Re: Bill vs Script

January 4 2017, 1:58 PM 

Yes, the duck is the doctor's mascot. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Sarge
(no login)
68.74.186.218

There is Poop on the Floor!

January 5 2017, 9:23 AM 



Bill, you are a real gentleman to let Script degrade you with the "anal" comment.

Perhaps, a GRAMMAR thread is needed? Ze has been flaunting "Its" knowledge of adjectives and verbs.

Somebody needs to give Script a good spanking. Bill, you are the MAN that can get it done.

Donnie, what do you think? happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
23.117.130.209

Re: There is Poop on the Floor!

January 5 2017, 11:56 AM 

Sargeant,

You need to look "anal" up in the dictionary.

If anybody can appreciate the word, surely a doctor can. . . .

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
99.179.116.207

Re: There is Poop on the Floor!

January 5 2017, 12:00 PM 

Since Script doesn't seem to be able to do much more than hurl insults, I don't see much point in bothering with him. happy.gif

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
23.117.130.209

Re: Bill vs Script

January 5 2017, 5:48 PM 

Sargeant,

The duck at the top doesn't seems to look as intelligent as the second duck.

 
 Respond to this message   
Sarge
(no login)
68.74.186.218

Re: Is Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?

January 5 2017, 8:07 AM 

Ken is in the rear, huffing and puffing.happy.gif


[linked image]


 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
68.52.166.3

Re: Is Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?

January 5 2017, 3:06 PM 

Just trying to level playing field by giving CM critics some sucker punches!

 
 Respond to this message   
Bill
(no login)
99.179.116.207

Re: Is Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?

January 5 2017, 4:18 PM 

Those who are unable to withstand criticism of their controversial theology end up hurling insults and sucker punches.

 
 Respond to this message   
Scripture
(no login)
23.117.130.209

Re: Is Donnie and Ken just a Jehovah's Witness in Disguise?

January 5 2017, 4:49 PM 

If they weren't suckers then they would not be punched.

If there is a response to this, just label that person as one "who has to have the last word!"

 
 Respond to this message   
 
< Previous Page 1 2 3 4 511 Next >
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Place your text ad here.           See all text ads

This web site is not part of or approved by any Church!

...........................THE BOOK

What Happened at the Madison Church of Christ?


There are thousands of churches being taken over across America.

This book is only about one of those churches. It's about the Madison Church Of Christ. By studying the methods used here along with the resource references you might be able to inoculate your church. At the very least you will recognize the signs early on.

Many of the current members of the Madison Church of Christ still don't know what happened.
Some never will know! This book is for them as well.

Madison Church of Christ was a 60 year old church. At one time it was one of the largest churches in the US, and the largest Church of Christ.

It thrived for many years on the vision of it's elders and those of it's ministers. Those visions undoubtably came from the the inspired word of Jesus Christ.

At sometime in the last 10 years there was a deliberate plan by a majority of the elders to take the Madison Church of Christ into a more worldly realm.

They used secrecy, covert planning, and outside sources to scheme and to change the format and direction of the Madison Church of Christ.

The Elders knew that the membership would never approve such a plan. Using the tools of the "Community Church Movement"(consultants, books, seminars, meetings,planters,seeders) they slowly started initiating change so it was never noticed by the members until it was too late.....

At the heart of the plan was the fact that old members were going to be driven off so new techniques could be used to go out and reach the unchurched through new "Contemporary Holy Entertainment" methods developed by the "Community Church Movement"

Old members had to be kept on board long enough to get their plans ready, or the funds would not be there to pay for the new building. So by the plans very nature, it had to be secret.

The church had no plan in effect to renew or approve elders. There was never any need. The elders had always been "as approved by God". 10 of the last 15 elders would begin to shed some doubt on that.

The Elders did not even need a majority at first, because some of the elders went along unwittingly.

This edition starts shortly after some of the members begin to smell something strange in January 2001. Later editions may go back and fill in some of the timeline.

To even start to understand whats happening here, you must read the background materials in the first of the book.

This is only the first edition, and not the end. New editions will be printed as needed. To keep abreast of current changes, please visit our web site; http://www.concernedmembers.com/madison

Here is the list of players;

5 Godly Elders
10 Not so Godly Elders
120 "Deacons" (allegiance unknown)
2,800 - 4,000 church "members"
2 "teners" (people who have publicly confessed to have broken all ten commandments)
Unknown number of "sinners" (This is what the 10 elders call us.)
Unknown number of "demons" (Flying everywhere, to many to count)
 

Click Here......The Book is Available Now FREE

Place your banner ad here.           See all banner ads

...ConcernedMembers.com ...About ...Links Library ...Sunday School in Exile ...Help Warn Others


FastCounter by bCentral

CM Visit Counter as of 6/25/2015
2,101,394

Site Visits Since 6/30/2015
page counter