Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

enummaelish

The Image of God

Recommended Posts

Oh Goody, Another Trinity topic !, Yummy !. Sorry I am Late. Which Trinity is being discussed : Western, Eastern, Economic, Essential, Modalistic/Sabellian, Social, Monarch, Trithiestic, ?. And who gets the award for the correct form/version as presented in scripture from immediate post Biblical Times till present ?. Thanks !.

Mormon Cristian you are correct there is no "A" in the greek. No indefinate article in the greek, its describing one of GOD'S Attributes =Spirit, not his totality of Nature/Being. Even the late Catholic Scholar [Recognized as the worlds leading Authority on John's Gospel in his Day] stated as such in his Anchor Bible Commentary on John 4:23-25. Grace.

OOPS, I forgot to give the individuals name, its Raymond Brown.

Share this post


Link to post

Well, here's one that makes it very clear:

Numbers 23:19 - God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?

However, I must warn you that this is the KJV so beware!

Speaking of the KJV, were you aware that some of the same grammatical errors that appeared in 19th century printings also appeared in sections of the Book of Mormon that contained identical passages? In fact, here's an example:

"A serious translation error affects Isaiah 9:1, copied into the Book of Mormon as II Nephi 19:1 `...and afterwards did more grievously afflict by the way of the Red Sea beyond Jordan in Galilee of the nations.' A translation error in this verse of Isaiah has given the text almost the opposite meaning to the original. The phrase `did more grievously afflict' should be rendered as `honour' in English. Thus the New International Version reads `...In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the Gentiles...'.

Pretty interesting that the exact same error occurs in the Book of Mormon don't you think?

Share this post


Link to post

Does anyone know how our Catholic Friend David Waltz Book on the Trinity is comming along ?.

Share this post


Link to post

All these supposed problems have been responded to adinfinentum, check out the topical guide for responses to this.

Share this post


Link to post

Richard Hopkins book " Biblical Mormonism Deals with this and shows that the Hebrew structure in the scripture you presented states that he is a 'Man" in the constuct of the Hebrew. Does not GOD also state that he is a "MAN OF WAR" ?.

Share this post


Link to post

I checked out the topical guide and found nothing in defense of this major problem...please enlighten me Tanyan

Share this post


Link to post

Seek and ye shall find !.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry but I did seek and yet found nothing. Maybe that's because it can't be defended?

Share this post


Link to post

Are you serious ?, THat last portion of your post was obviously not done in the spirit, but with a prideful tone, try again.

Share this post


Link to post

Just as I thought, the problem I presented cannot be defended...

Share this post


Link to post

The first word translated "man" in the verse you quoted comes from the Hebrew word "ish", which is a compararative form of the word "man'. This word is used to compare one type of "Man" with another, not to contrast men with other species of Beings. It is used, for example. to refer to a man as opposed to a woman, a husband as opposed to a wife, a younger man to an older man.

Women, wives, and older men are all beings of the same species. The Hebrew ord "ish" assumes that charactoristic as the point of simularity on which it is used to make comparisons. Those comparisons are made only on the basis of gender,martital status, age ext... not on the basis of species. In this passage, the attribute being compared through use of the word "ish" is the trait of "Honesty", not "Manhood". The verse compares GOD as a Man who does not lie with mortal men who do lie. the passage always assumes that GOD is a Man.

Share this post


Link to post

Actually I was referring to the grammatical errors that appear in both the KJV and the Book of Mormon...this is what I could find no defense of...

Share this post


Link to post

See also Barry Bickmore's book: Restoring The Anchient Church, Joseph Smith and Early Christianity, Pages 75-136.

Share this post


Link to post
Actually I was referring to the grammatical errors that appear in both the KJV and the Book of Mormon...this is what I could find no defense of...

Please be more specific in the future so there is no confusion. Put in a search in the F.A.I.R. search engine for your question. Please try more humility, it goes much better. As one who I take it proclaims Christ Jesus as his Master I was expecting more of a Christlike/Charitable Spirit from you. Your Posting in the Spirit has not been observed, but has been recorded in Heaven of your Pride. I have observe you as one as a " Pratter", "Busybody", as the scriptures point out in the N.T. Grace/Peace.

Share this post


Link to post

I did do a search and found nothing. Also, I apologize for offending you. Please show me the defense of this problem because I cannot find it.

Share this post


Link to post

Apology accepted, To get the best results I suggest that you start a new thread with your question and see what is posted by my LDS Apologest Family.and see what they present. Also I did respond to your GOD IS NOT A MAN comments above. Please be patient, May Grace Rain on you. IN HIS DEBT, Tanyan.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll have to disagree with you that John 4:24 is merely a metaphor. I don't believe that God being described as Love/Light is a metaphor either.

There are several other Bible passages that indicate God is a spirit and not a man.

Share this post


Link to post

That is fine, but I have done my research at my local School of Theology library into what non-LDS Biblical commentaries state and they do not agree with your view, one of which states in the Anchore Bible Commentary on JOHN, page 172 [ Which by the way is one of the premier Bible commentaries out ] and the late Raymond Brown regarded as the worlds best authority on the Gospel of John in his day stated in regards to John 4:24 : " This is not an essential definition of GOD, but a description of GODS dealing with men ; it means that GOD is spirit twards men because he gives the spirit [ xiv ] which begets them anew. There are in fact two other descripions in Johns writtings, "GOD is light " 1 John 1:5, GOD is love 1John 4:8, thou no one has argued that GOD "IS A LIGHT" or that GOD "IS A SPECIES OF LOVE". In short, one must worship the Father "THrough the spirit" which he has given to the Church John 14:16, there being no hint of suggestion that he is himself "a spirit". See Anchore Bible Commentary on JOHN, page 172.

Share this post


Link to post

Added note to John 4:24, The Greek says "GOD is spirit" [ pneuma ho theos] spiritual in nature, the noun being anarthrous [Without the definate article in the greek]. Then there is historical evidence that GOD was Thought/Viewed to be corporeal, in Anthropromorthic Form/Shape but that is another subject all together. Grace.

Share this post


Link to post
Tanyan  writes,

That is fine, but I have done my research

In your research have you discovered that the Holy Ghost is spirit and that the Holy Ghost is God ...

  There are in fact two other descripions in Johns writtings, "GOD is light " 

There are other descriptions where the prophet Hosea reveals that God says " I am God, and not man" (Hosea 11:9)

Then there is historical evidence that GOD was Thought/Viewed to be corporeal, in Anthropromorthic Form/Shape but that is another subject all together. 

Their is evidence in the Old Testament that GOD was thought/viewed not to be bound to a form/shape ... I would suggest you look at Deut 4:15.

Share this post


Link to post
enummaelish  writes,

As witnessed in these two texts, Mesopotamian kings often assumed the image of the gods. This frequently neglected piece of evidence sheds considerable light on Genesis 1:26-27.

How do these texts compare to the fifth lecture Faith which says

Share this post


Link to post
Paul Osborne  writes,

Therefore, God can dwell in me and do his work as he did in Jesus. Your statement simply doesn

Share this post


Link to post
I would like to say to Paul O, that God is not a man, he is an exalted man.  To speak of him blatently as just a "man" imo, is somewhat disrespectful.  It is more proper to refer to him as "Man of Holiness" or an exalted man as He is refered to in the Book of Moses and in the teachings of latter-day prophets.

Yes, he is an exalted Man. The scriptures teach that:

D&C 130: 1

When the Savior shall appear we shall see him as he is. We shall see that he is a man like ourselves.

I

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...