🕯️ Traditions Tanong na wala pang nakasagot tungkol sa bibliya

Status
Not open for further replies.
[XX='Ace106, c: 739603, m: 1382361'][/XX] Paano kung hindi gentil? Did you even read about the 10 plagues sent by your god, so the pharaoh would release the israelis? Ang siste, bakit yung mga mamamayang ehipsyo ang pinapak ng mga salot? Bakit hindi si boss pharaoh? Sige, isip uli kayo ng alibi to justify those atrocities.
 
[XX='asarkanaba, c: 744057, m: 549772'][/XX] ang sakin lang ay mag share ng katotohanan at ituwid ang mga baluktot na paniniwala na hindi ayon sa katotohanan na nasa liwanag ng salita ng Diyos.. hahatulan ng Panginoon ang lahat ng sekta na nagtuturo ng kasinungalingan at pinagkakakitaan ang mga myembro nito.
 
[XX='- srj -, c: 744084, m: 1596530'][/XX] kagaya halimbawa ng pagbibigay ng ikapu obligado mga myembro nila na magbigay para daw sa panginoon.. tas binyag may bayad, yung patay na ipagdarasal daw yung kaluluwa may bayad din pati kuno yung healing na ginagawa ng mga pastor nila para papaniwalain myembro nito para mas marami mag abuloy.. kaya pansinin ninyo halos lahat ng religious leader ngayon ang yayaman.. kasi pinagkakitaan nila ang salita ng Diyos at nagturo pa ng mali sa mga member nila.. lahat ng yan ay hahatulan ng Panginoon.
 
Sabi ko nga sir kung babasahin mo lahat at intindihin malalaman mo.

Kahit taga ibang bayan sumasamba din sa tunay na Diyos, tinatanggap sila nang Israel sa bayan nila at sumasamba din sila katulad nang mga Israelita,

Ang mga taga ibang bayan anong pinagkaiba sa kanila? May sarili silang diyos na hindi naman totoo mga rebulto, example sa egypt madami silang diyos at for info may paraon na sumaba sa tunay na diyos dahil nalaman niya ang totoo at tinulungan pa nga sya nang prophet. (sa panahon pa yan nang Israel di oa dumating si jesus)

Uulitin ko sir dahil sa mga ginagawa nang ibang bayan kaya tinabuy sila, at kahit ang Israel dahil na impluwensyahan sila nang jbang bayan at sumamba na rin sa iabng diyos tinabuy din sila nang diyos, kaya walang favoritism
 
You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.Huwag man lang mabanggit sa gitna ninyo ang seksuwal na imoralidadYou do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. at lahat ng uri ng karumihan o kasakiman,You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. dahil hindi iyan angkop sa mga taong banal.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.Hindi rin angkop sa inyo ang kahiya-hiyang paggawi, walang-saysay na usapan, at malaswang pagbibiro.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now. Sa halip, magpasalamat kayo sa Diyos.You do not have permission to view the full content of this post. Log in or register now.
-Efeso 5:3,4

yung mga ganyan tanong hindi angkop pag usapan dito.. lumalaspatangan yan sa mga bagay na banal.. kahit nga sa tatay mo siguro hindi mo magagawa iopen yan ganyan tanong pag may mga nakaharap na ibang tao eh.. dito pa kaya. isip isip din paps..
 
"Jesus was the first-born (prototokos) of his mother (Mt. 1:25; Lk. 2:7) .... Jesus is also the first-born of his heavenly Father. He is the first-born of all creation...(Col. 1:15-17). Similarly, he is the first-born in the new creation by being raised first from the dead" - New Bible Dictionary, (2nd ed.), 1982, p. 378, Tyndale House Publ.

This respected trinitarian publication clearly admits, then, that "firstborn" is used in the same way ("very first in time") for each of these scriptural uses of prototokos for Jesus: Jesus was the very first child Mary brought into existence (Matthew 1:25); Jesus was the very first person brought into existence in the new creation (Col. 1:18; 1 Cor. 15:20; Rev. 1:5); and Jesus was the very first thing brought into existence in God's first creation!!

Furthermore, these two "first-borns" of Col. 1:15 and Col. 1:18 must closely parallel each other in meaning to make the comparison (or "addition") sensible and complete! They are of like kind (firstborn in time, not "pre-eminence") so they can be added together and summed up: "So that he should be first in everything." - Col. 1:18. It would be inappropriate to have the first use of prototokos (Col. 1:15) mean "pre-eminent" for the first creation and the second use of prototokos (Col. 1:18) mean (as it so obviously does) "first in time" for the "last creation."

So Paul is probably making a play on words with the two definitions of proteuo when he sums up by saying Jesus is "first [proteuo] in everything." He must intend the meaning of `first in time' to agree with the rest of his metaphor.

There is no proper reason to change the intended meaning of prototokos at Col. 1:15 so that it differs from every other Bible use of the word. The only reason that some trinitarians attempt to interpret it as "pre-eminent one" is that they don't like what it actually, literally says!

Finally, notice that even if Col. 1:15 could be properly translated as "the pre-eminent one of all creation," it could only mean one thing: that he is the highest one of all created things (that is, he IS ONE OF THOSE CREATED THINGS)!

It cannot mean that he is the highest individual over all created things. This is an impossible interpretation for two reasons:

(1) The word "pre-eminent" actually rules out the possibility of a double interpretation. For example: "The leader OF the wolves" is capable of a double interpretation: (A) "The Leader" could be one of the wolves himself. And (B), although unlikely, it is possible that the leader of the wolves is not one of the wolves himself. It is possible that he is a dog, coyote, or even a man. However, the phrase "smartest (or `smartest one') OF the wolves" does not allow for such an ambiguity, and it is, therefore, certain that this "smartest one" IS one of those wolves.

"Pre-eminent" (or "pre-eminent one"), like "smartest" (or "smartest one"), also does not allow for that ambiguity. The "pre-eminent one OF creation" has to be a part of that creation himself!

(2) As we have already seen, the Bible clearly and repeatedly states that Jehovah (the Father alone) is pre-eminent over all creation. Therefore Jesus cannot be the pre-eminent one over all creation but is the first creation of God!

We have also seen that in the Bible the term "firstborn of ..." never means "pre-eminent one over ..."! "Firstborn of Abraham" for example never means the "pre-eminent one over Abraham." Even if we could properly allow "pre-eminent" as a meaning for prototokos, it would mean no more than "pre-eminent one of Abraham's creation (or procreation)"! Whenever anyone calls Jesus the firstborn son of God, it plainly means the first of the "children" God has produced. (Obviously it does not mean "the pre-eminent one over God.") Therefore, when Jesus is called the firstborn of creation, it clearly means that he is the first of that creation that God has produced.

And, again, even if "firstborn" could mean "pre-eminent one," Col. 1:15 would still be saying that Jesus is the "pre-eminent one" of creation. In other words, he is part of that creation, albeit the first and highest part!

We should also consider that those whom God calls son are those whom he has created: Luke 3:38; Rev. 21:7; Gen. 6:2; Job 1:6; Ps. 89:6 [f.n. in RSV and compare LB]; Gal. 3:26. Jesus' very title, the Son of God, indicates that he was created. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia tells us that angels are called `sons of God' in the Scriptures. Then it states:
"the creation of angels is referred to in Ps 148 2, 5 (cf Col 1 16). They were present [in the beginning] at the creation of the world ... (Job 38 7)." - pp. 132, 133, Vol. 1, Eerdmans, 1984 printing.
In the very same way, those who are said to be the "image" of God are not God himself (he's obviously not his own image) but a part of God's creation! Notice who the image of God is in these scriptures: Gen. 1:26; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7; 2 Cor. 3:18.

Therefore, when Col. 1:15 says Jesus is "the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (RSV), we know Paul is speaking of someone who is the very first creation made by God (and was created "in his image" long before man was also created "in his image")! - Cf. Gen. 1:26, 27. - See the IMAGE study paper.

There are only two valid, scriptural understandings for "firstborn of ...." If it is used with a single individual (e.g., `firstborn of Moses'), then it means the firstborn has been produced (or created) by that individual. If it is used with a group of individuals (e.g., `firstborn of the herd' - Deut. 12:6; 15:19; `firstborn of our sons' - Neh 10:36), then it always means one who was produced as a part of that group!

That's why, for example, "the firstborn" at 2 Chron. 21:3 may be understood only as either "the firstborn of Jehoshaphat" or "the firstborn of all Jehoshaphat's children." In the first case the firstborn is the first production (or creation) by Jehoshaphat. In the second case the firstborn is the first to be created of all Jehoshaphat's CHILDREN. But in either case it is speaking of the first one created!

Clearly, then, if Jesus is called the firstborn of God, he is being identified as the one first produced by God. And when he is called the firstborn of creation (a group of individuals), he is being identified as one who was produced or created as a part of that group. In other words: Out of all things created by God, Jesus was the very first. [15]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About this Thread

  • 2K
    Replies
  • 50K
    Views
  • 190
    Participants
Last reply from:
Gentleman007

Trending Topics

Online now

Members online
885
Guests online
727
Total visitors
1,612

Forum statistics

Threads
2,279,807
Posts
28,993,327
Members
1,226,094
Latest member
armagedon32
Back
Top