Flee from idolatry, page-313

  1. 27,946 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1
    "For example John 1:1 uses "was" because the translators have determined that is the correct parsing of the root which is basically "am" or exist". In another passage it might be translated as "I exist" but not this one."

    And who are these translators -> trinity family, or anyone that thinks the Word is Jesus.
    You are supposed to use what fits the True context, and what and how I used it, IS the true context.

    They only use "was", as they are trying to place 2 beings in there, when there is clearly one.

    Considering the numerous OT verses, the likes of the word of Yehowah said to me, or the Spirit of Yehowah said to me, WHY do you, not find it fitting to use -> In beginning I am the Word and the Word I am to the God and God I am the Word.
    Considering the Clear language and breakdown I gave you of the logos meanings in there.Part of it's meaning HAS to be included, considered and The Subject, part of follows in 1:3 - creation = expressed logos.

    I keep telling you lot, that God is the Speaker for the first 17 verses, effectively introducing himself, which also aligns with the theme of Mal 3:1, way of Yehowah being prepared first.
    --------------------
    You have totally taken out of context, the meaning that I say, we are deemed as words and are effectively a laptop.
    Re laptop 6, lets just wait and see who is the fool here and what 666 turns out to be eh????????????????rolleyes.png
    -----------------------------
    Now then, your last para, BACK THE F... UP THERE CHUM frown.png
    That is gutter trash and YOU should know better!

 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.