If Jesus is Jehovah (YHVH)

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Mon May 22, 2017 10:03 pm

If Jesus is Jehovah, as some say, what then is the name of the Father?

Presumably He has one, as Jesus teaches us in the Lord's prayer to "hallow" the Father's name.

marco · Post by **marco** » Wed May 24, 2017 10:38 am

Faber wrote: They are not special definitions.
One simply chooses or not chooses to play make believe with how the words of the Bible are properly defined.

And presumably you know the telephone number of the person who makes the correct definitions, as opposed to the silly definitions in standard lexicons?

I suppose if we define the Immaculate Conception as parthenogenesis we can have a few pages of pointless argument. You have used the phrase "play make believe" several times. Is someone selling this cheaply?

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Wed May 24, 2017 5:52 pm

Many lexicons affirm one thing but you (with no Greek expertise) come along and declare them wrong. It's not difficult to figure out which side to believe.

Parthenogenesis is not found in the Bible.

In answer to your question, the reason why I use it is because you keep doing it. Here's a new one:
You can keep supplying fairy tale definitions all you want but that won't change the reality of how the words of the Bible are properly defined.
I can also say that you engage in Humpty Dumptyism.
viewtopic.php?t=32507&start=50

Remember, Humpty Dumpty "had a great fall."

Faber · Post by **Faber** » Wed May 24, 2017 5:54 pm

In terms of you "silly definitions in standard lexicons" assertion I offer the following remedy to aid you in this bewildered state of incoherence:

"No single translation trumps another, and when differences of opinion arise regarding various translations, Hebrew and Greek sources will have a greater authority."
viewtopic.php?t=11496

I think that there might be an ever so slight of a chance that you have seen the above citation before.
The policy of this forum affirms one thing but you come bumbling along attacking it.

Clue up!

marco · Post by **marco** » Thu May 25, 2017 3:20 am

Faber wrote: In terms of you "silly definitions in standard lexicons" assertion I offer the following remedy to aid you in this bewildered state of incoherence:

"No single translation trumps another, and when differences of opinion arise regarding various translations, Hebrew and Greek sources will have a greater authority."
viewtopic.php?t=11496

I think that there might be an ever so slight of a chance that you have seen the above citation before.
The policy of this forum affirms one thing but you come bumbling along attacking it.

You have completely misunderstood my post. And I need no reminding of forum rules.
We are not dealing with "various translations". When you write:

"Many lexicons affirm one thing but you (with no Greek expertise) come along and declare them wrong. It's not difficult to figure out which side to believe "

you know perfectly well that we are dealing with YOUR interpretation of what the English definitions say. It's got nothing to do with Greek or Hebrew sources, nor indeed my competence in understanding them. Before we sprint we should learn to walk, and understanding English is a key factor in debate.

Now let us stick to the topic.

Elijah John · Post by **Elijah John** » Thu May 25, 2017 8:16 am

Faber wrote: I offer the following remedy to aid you in this bewildered state of incoherence:

....but you come bumbling along attacking it.

Clue up!

Moderator Warning

Appealing to the rules is your right, but it is best just to report the variance. However in telling your opponent to "clue up", and that he is in a "bewildered state of incoherence", and that he "comes "bumbling along" you are in the wrong.

Obnoxious and uncivil tone, bordering on personal attack.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

onewithhim · Post by **onewithhim** » Fri May 26, 2017 2:39 pm

Faber wrote: They are not special definitions.
One simply chooses or not chooses to play make believe with how the words of the Bible are properly defined.

Some people choose to ignore all reason, and cast aside any discussion on a subject that they already have their minds made up about. Much has been posted on these threads concerning the questionable state of your teaching. Yet it goes unrecognized. I hope that threads that are so damaging to others' understanding of important issues will readily be relegated to the misty realms of by-gone topics.