djeggnog:
me: "As I laid out in a previous post, the verse without your commentary excludes ANY angel; the verse with your commentary INCLUDES an angel."
you: "This is true."
You mean to say we finally agree on something? :)
What you say is true. My examples weren't very good, that is, if I was talking about the word "ever" as you seem to be (which I wasn't).
Lol. Of course you weren't talking about it; you ignored the word "ever" because it's the negative assertion that makes the sentence a rhetorical. It's what proves that Jesus IS NOT an angel, and kills your theology. Your denial is understandable...
You failed to respond to a question in my previous post. You quoted the KJV at which point I asked you to explain the words "at any time":
5For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
13But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool?
Again, please explain the meaning of "at any time" in the above statements.
On what basis would you be presuming anything as to what I know or don't know? I'll let you grab your Kingdom Interlinear Bible to do whatever comparisons you may wish. You're talking about apples here and I oranges.
Erm, how about on the basis that you're harping on a word in your NWT that doesn't exist in the Greek. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and presumed you didn't realize the word you were building a case around isn't even in the original bible verse. Did I presume incorrectly? Perhaps you did realize what you were doing and were simply being.... dishonest.
Would that be according to the CEV or according to the NWT? I think the former, but in this thread, the focus is on using the NWT to prove that it supports the Trinity doctrine.
Lol. According to both, actually. The NWT and the CEV say the same thing, remember? One is worded as a rhetorical question ("To which of the angels did God *EVER* say...") and the other as an equivalent assertive ("God never said to any angel").
You're still anxious to discuss the CEV here. I'm not.
Red Herring. I couldn't care less what translation we use. As stated, the NWT and CEV (and NIV, KJV, NLT, NASB, etc, etc, etc) all say the same thing in these verses. Some are worded as a rhetorical (negative assertion); others are worded as an equivalent assertive.
Your inability to grasp the basic concept of a rhetorical question is stunning...
so nothing that one reads at Deuteronomy 32:39 affects Jehovah's credibility
Newsflash, Jehovah's credibility is not at issue. The credibility of the WTS and the NWT are.
God said there are no other gods together with him (Deut 32:39). John 1:1 says (in your bible) there was another god with him. Period. Case closed.
Jehovah is referring to Gods like himself
Was he now? And he told you this himself, did he?
I'll stick with what he TOLD us and leave the inferring to you. "There are no gods together with me."
As I see it, what we have here is really just a misunderstanding on your part of what John 2:21 means
John 2:19-21:
1) Temple will be destroyed, 2) temple will be raised in 3 days, 3) he was talking about the temple of his body
My understanding:
Jesus' body would destroyed, Jesus' body would be raised in 3 days. (Oh, and guess what? It happened just so...)
Your understanding:
Jesus gave life to the "lifeless corpse" of the "body" of Christians that had been gathered together in that room, for at John 20:21-23 Jesus animated that "body" when he said the following: "'Just as the Father has sent me forth, I also am sending you.'
"lifeless corpse" of the "body" of Christians..... ?
"Jesus animated that "body" when he said..... ??
Yeah, the "misunderstanding" is all mine and I'm the one who's in "spiritual darkness".... lol
