Why do triniterians claim to belive in christ when they really do not ?

[Nihil Obstat]

Actually i was not quoating from the NWT at all. My text were from Youngs Literal Translation ! Do you have objections about this version too ?

I'm not sure what you're talking about here, sorry. I made no mention of the NWT or Young's, but made a point to only address the Greek.

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;
1 εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος ην ο λογος

Notice in John 1 There are 2 diffrent forms of theo here. THEON θεον and THEOS θεος

As you can see there are two seperate forms used here, see the problem ?

I suppose the only problem here is your lack of understanding foundational Greek grammatical principles. The Greek word for "God", when "God" is the subject of the sentence, is "theos". When it is the object of the sentence, it is "theon". That's how the Greek language works. Their sentence structure usually thrusted the most important word to the front, and the verb usually went last, with the subject and object nouns mixed in the middle. The only way to make sense of it all is to note the endings of the nouns and verbs and whatnot. (A sentence of theirs might literally translate, "Hard the Dave the ball hit." The only way to know if it was Dave who hit the ball or if the ball hit Dave would be by the endings used in "Dave" and "ball".) When a masculine, singular noun was the subject of the sentence, it ended a certain way, and when it was the object it ended in another way (and there were different endings for the indirect object, for showing possession, and for formal addresses as well). So the "two separate forms used here" isn't a "problem" at all. I hope you don't think I'm being harsh here - it's just that you're making a big deal out of something that gets covered in the first chapter of any ancient Greek grammar textbook, revealing to me that you haven't studied (properly, anyway) the language enough for you to be making such drastic conclusions and loud demands.

Peace.

[X-Rez]

I'm not sure what you're talking about here, sorry. I made no mention of the NWT or Young's, but made a point to only address the Greek.



I suppose the only problem here is your lack of understanding foundational Greek grammatical principles. The Greek word for "God", when "God" is the subject of the sentence, is "theos". When it is the object of the sentence, it is "theon". That's how the Greek language works. Their sentence structure usually thrusted the most important word to the front, and the verb usually went last, with the subject and object nouns mixed in the middle. The only way to make sense of it all is to note the endings of the nouns and verbs and whatnot. (A sentence of theirs might literally translate, "Hard the Dave the ball hit." The only way to know if it was Dave who hit the ball or if the ball hit Dave would be by the endings used in "Dave" and "ball".) When a masculine, singular noun was the subject of the sentence, it ended a certain way, and when it was the object it ended in another way (and there were different endings for the indirect object, for showing possession, and for formal addresses as well). So the "two separate forms used here" isn't a "problem" at all. I hope you don't think I'm being harsh here - it's just that you're making a big deal out of something that gets covered in the first chapter of any ancient Greek grammar textbook, revealing to me that you haven't studied (properly, anyway) the language enough for you to be making such drastic conclusions and loud demands.

Peace.

I suppose the only problem here is your lack of understanding foundational Greek grammatical principles.

I undersatand that there are 2 DIFFRENT GREEK EXPRESSSIONS for God here. and that you cant think of away to explain it, so you are dismissing it
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;
1εν αρχη ην ο λογος και ο λογος ην προς τον θεον και θεος/B] ην ο λογος

There is a clear difference here in the types of theo. the first is THEON which as i said only refers to Jehovah

In addition, even without the "a" argument as you say, the entire chapter contradicts the trinity.

look...

18God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare.

So even without the A argument, the trinity is still false. Because NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN GOD, and 1 is in an inferior postion to the other

You still have to show me where, Jesus is called THEON, now either you can or you cant. Which is it ?

[Nihil Obstat]

There is a clear difference here in the types of the.

Of course there's a difference in the endings, because the word is used in this sentence first in the accusative (it is the object of the clause) and then as a predicate noun (it has the same referent as the subject of the verb, and therefore is in the nominative case). This is an elementary rule of Greek grammar. That you don't know or understand this tells me you have no idea what you're talking about when you ask me to provide you an instance where Jesus is called "theon", and yet readily admit that He is called "theos". They are both the same word, but when used in different parts of a sentence the word has different endings. Lots of languages, ancient and modern, have this kind of pattern.

[Nihil Obstat]

In addition, even without the "a" argument as you say, the entire chapter contradicts the trinity.

look...

18God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare.

So even without the A argument, the trinity is still false. Because NO ONE HAS EVER SEEN GOD, and 1 is in an inferior postion to the other

For the third time, I'm not Trinitarian either. Jesus openly admits that He is inferior to His heavenly Father. What does that have to do with Him being God or not? My daughters are inferior to me, but they are equally human as I am. The same is true of God the Father and His only begotten Son Jesus. Not too complicated, right?

[X-Rez]

Of course there's a difference in the endings, because the word is used in this sentence first in the accusative (it is the object of the clause) and then as a predicate noun (it has the same referent as the subject of the verb, and therefore is in the nominative case). This is an elementary rule of Greek grammar. That you don't know or understand this tells me you have no idea what you're talking about when you ask me to provide you an instance where Jesus is called "theon", and yet readily admit that He is called "theos". They are both the same word, but when used in different parts of a sentence the word has different endings. Lots of languages, ancient and modern, have this kind of pattern.

If their both the same word show me where THEON refers to jesus. Their the same word right ? No big deal right ?

[X-Rez]

For the third time, I'm not Trinitarian either. Jesus openly admits that He is inferior to His heavenly Father. What does that have to do with Him being God or not? My daughters are inferior to me, but they are equally human as I am. The same is true of God the Father and His only begotten Son Jesus. Not too complicated, right?

Umm yea its VERY complicated, because you just told me 1 is inferior, then in the same breath, you telling me their the same person.

You may not be triniterian, but you belive what triniterians belive ! If you know 1 is inferior, why are you telling me they are the same ? Is it even possible for you to be inferior to yourself ?

Are you and your daughter the same person ?

[Nihil Obstat]

Umm yea its VERY complicated, because you just told me 1 is inferior, then in the same breath, you telling me their the same person.

You may not be triniterian, but you belive what triniterians belive ! If you know 1 is inferior, why are you telling me they are the same ? Is it even possible for you to be inferior to yourself ?

Are you and your daughter the same person ?

Huh? I never said that Jesus and the Father were one person. I feel like you're not taking time to read what I'm writing. Slow down when you come to read, that way I don't have to continually repeat myself, and we can actually progress this conversation instead of going in little circlets.

[Nihil Obstat]

If their both the same word show me where THEON refers to jesus. Their the same word right ? No big deal right ?

I think that you should drop it until you become a bit more educated. "Theon" is used for whoever / whatever is being called "God / god" when it is the object of the sentence. The ending of the word doesn't determine if who / what is being spoken of is God; that's what the root of the word does. Seriously, this is Greek 101.

For homework, fully decline theos for me (there are twenty five different endings). Until you can do this, I won't discuss this with you any further. And when you can do this, you'll drop it, because you'll see how silly it was that you brought it up at all.

Peace.

[X-Rez]

I think that you should drop it until you become a bit more educated. "Theon" is used for whoever / whatever is being called "God / god" when it is the object of the sentence. The ending of the word doesn't determine if who / what is being spoken of is God; that's what the root of the word does. Seriously, this is Greek 101.

For homework, fully decline theos for me (there are twenty five different endings). Until you can do this, I won't discuss this with you any further. And when you can do this, you'll drop it, because you'll see how silly it was that you brought it up at all.

Peace.

Tell you what, I can produce text that refer to Jehovah as theon. Can you provide texts that show Jesus is THEON ? John 1 :18

18 θεον( jehovah) ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ( Jesus ) ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο

18 God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare.

You probably should drop the subject till you can hold up your end of the bargain !

[IMINXTC]

Jehovah does not appear in the text you cite.

θεον: Theos.

[Nihil Obstat]

Tell you what, I can produce text that refer to Jehovah as theon. Can you provide texts that show Jesus is THEON ? John 1 :18

18 θεον( jehovah) ουδεις εωρακεν πωποτε μονογενης θεος ( Jesus ) ο ων εις τον κολπον του πατρος εκεινος εξηγησατο

18 God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare.

You probably should drop the subject till you can hold up your end of the bargain !

Ironically, you also provided a text where Jesus is called "God" as well. Brilliant. Listen, until you are able to grasp that theon and theos are the exact same word, I can't continue this discussion with you. I'll start declining theos for you, in the hopes that you'll see what I mean:

masculine, singular, nominative (subject): theos
masculine, singular, accusative (direct object): theon
masculine, singular, genitive (possessive): theou
masculine, singular, dative (indirect object): theoy

There's twenty one more (for feminine and neuter, plural, and the vocative), but this ought to be sufficient for you to begin to get what I'm saying here. Most all nouns decline similarly (though proper nouns are often only partially declinable, or are indeclinable altogether).

So, if one were to say in Greek "God came down to the mountain", they'd use theos. If one were to say "Moses went up the mountain to speak with God", they'd use theon. And if they wanted to say "We are now the people of God", they'd use theou. Finally, if they wanted to say "Let us praise Jesus, that we might bring glory to God", they'd use theoy. They're all the same word, "God", but the different endings tell us whether "God" is the subject, is being addressed, is showing possession, is the direct or indirect object, is singular or plural, or is masculine, feminine, or neuter gender.

Considering Jesus is only called "God" a handful of times, it's not all that surprising that He is not called so in the accusative case. But, for the third time, the presence of "theos" (or "theon" for that matter) is of little to no importance in determining whether Jesus is God or not, because they called Him "God" for specific reasons. You'll have to wrestle with those reasons if you're going to prove your point or disprove mine. (I've succinctly titled these reasons "creation", "covenant", and "courtroom", though I might add "class" given the verse you provided is one of many which calls Jesus "God" because He was born of God.)

Peace.

[X-Rez]

Jehovah does not appear in the text you cite.

θεον: Theos.

That because in greek jehovah or yaweh is spelled as the tetragrammaton, which is a dffrent word entirely, and would not resemble the greek word for God Theon.

[gringo300]

I've tried studying Greek, but I'm far from fluent in it.

I'm currently putting a lot more effort into studying Spanish.

I think there are a lot more Hispanics/Latinos around where I am that Greeks.

[John 8:32]

Christ was NOT resurrected by a human. Period. That is pure blasphemy, and I can guarantee that any other
believer in the Trinity (which is a basic pillar of orthodox Christianity, by the way.) would agree with me on this.

Tertullian, who is believed to have been converted to Christianity by 197 CE, introduced the term Trinity to the Christian vocabulary and also probably the formula "three Persons, one Substance".

The Holy Trinity, as a formal doctrine, was adopted by the Council of Nicaea in 325 CE.

Just sayin...

[David Taylor]

Tertullian, who is believed to have been converted to Christianity by 197 CE, introduced the term Trinity to the Christian vocabulary and also probably the formula "three Persons, one Substance".

History records things a little bit differently, if you dig into the research of early Christian writers.

While the term 'Trinity' was first showing up in writing around the end of the 2nd century, the formula of 'three persons, one substance' or better stated, the equal divine deity and godhood of the Father, Son, and H.S.; is recorded much, much earlier than the writings ot Tertullian.

circa 45 A.D. Clement of Rome
"Have we not one God and one Christ? Is not the Spirit of grace, which was poured out upon us, one?"
"For, as God lives, and as the Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost live"
"I Clement" 46, 58

circa 50-150 A.D. The Didache
"After the foregoing instructions, baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living [running] water. If you have neither, pour water three times on the head, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."
"Didache" 7:1

circa 110 A.D. Ignatius
"There are not then either three Fathers, or three Sons, or three Paracletes, but one Father, and one Son, and one Paraclete. Wherefore also the Lord, when He sent forth the apostles to make disciples of all nations, commanded them to "baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," not unto one person having three names, nor into three persons who became incarnate, but into three possessed of equal honour."
"Epistle to Philippians", C 2

"there is but One that became incarnate, and that neither the Father nor the Paraclete, but the Son only"
"Epistle to Philippians", C 3

"according to God. Be ye subject to the bishop, and to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh, and the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit"
"Epistle to Magnesians", C 13

circa 150 A.D. Justin Martyr
"the most true God, the Father of righteousness and temperance and the other virtues, who is free from all impurity. But both Him, and the Son (who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and the host of the other good angels who follow and are made like to Him), and the prophetic Spirit, we worship and adore, knowing them in reason and truth"
"First Apology" C 6

"(Jesus Christ) is the Son of the true God Himself, and holding Him in the second place, and the prophetic Spirit in the third"
"First Apology" C 13

"gives praise and glory to the Father of the universe, through the name of the Son and of the Holy Ghost"
"First Apology" C 35

circa 170 A.D. Athenagoras
"we acknowledge a God, and a Son his Logos, and a Holy Spirit, united in essence, - the Father, the Son, the Spirit"
"A Plea for Christians", 2:18

circa 180 A.D. Irenaeus
"the baptism of our regeneration proceeds through these three points: God the Father bestowing on us regeneration through His Son by the Holy Spirit. For as many as carry (in them) the Spirit of God are led to the Word, that is to the Son; and the Son brings them to the Father; and the Father causes them to possess incorruption. Without the Spirit it is not possible to behold the Word of God, nor without the Son can any draw near to the Father: for the knowledge of the Father is the Son, and the knowledge of the Son of God is through the Holy Spirit; and, according to the good pleasure of the Father, the Son ministers and dispenses the Spirit to whomsoever the Father wills and as He wills"
"The Apostolic Preaching", C 7

circa 180 A.D. Theophilus of Antioch
"God always abide perfect, being full of all power, and understanding, and wisdom, and immortality, and all good. But the moon wanes monthly, and in a manner dies, being a type of man; then it is born again, and is crescent, for a pattern of the future resurrection. In like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of the Trinity, of God, and His Word, and His wisdom."
"To Autolycus", Book 2, C 15

circa 202 Clement of Alexandria
"I understand nothing else than the Holy Trinity to be meant; for the third is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the second, by whom all things were made according to the will of the Father"
"Stromata" 5:15


And if you want to dig into the Pre-Nicene Scripture references that reveal the divine deity of Jesus Christ Himself, you can easily present 5-10 fold more references. The idea that the Trinity and/or deity of Jesus Christ was originated anywhere near the 3rd century and Nicea is not historically accurate at all.