Gods name

[kjw47]

Every bible scholar on earth knows 100% that God put his name --( YHVH(Jehovah) = the tetragramoton) in his bible in over 7000 spots because God wants it there. Thus wicked men by satans will removed Gods name to mislead and replaced it in OT( nearly 6800 spots) with GOD or LORD all capitols--quoted in NT over 200 spots where God willed his name.
Now in light of Jesus, who at the Lords prayer has clearly shown to all that his Fathers name( YHVH(Jehovah) is the #1 most important thing, followed by his Fathers kingdom and will. Thus to a true follower Gods name is #1 most important issue.
So then one must ask why is my religion using altered translations in support of satans will over Gods will on the matter of his name belonging in his bible? Would you say to mislead is the answer? Yes it is.
Here is a prime example of the misleading that it does
Joel 2:21-22--Whoever calls on the name of YHVH(Jehovah) will be saved---quoted 2 x in the NT at Acts 2:21-22--Romans 10:13--But since satan willed translations have LORD at Joel, Lord is at both spots of NT, and all who know Jesus is Lord will call on his name in error because they are being mislead. God is not called LORD in the OT by his will, his name belongs there. it is causing major confusion.
The New world translation corrected that matter, yet every religion using the altered translations condemned the NWT. Why because with that name back in it exposes all of those ones using the altered translations as false religion.
The sad fact is that they know Gods name belongs in all of those spots. So what are you going to do about being mislead?

[Capbook]

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

No, "godhead" is a term made up by translators that already believed that Jesus is God even before embarking on their translation project. It should be "godship" or "divine quality." "All the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily." Jesus was a perfect reflection of God's being, having the fullness of the quality of God. It doesn't mean that Jesus is God.

NASB says: "For in him all the fullness of Diety dwells in bodily form." Not "Godhead." The New American Bible , the James Moffatt Translation, say the same thing. Not "Godhead," but "diety." The 21st Century New Testament uses "Godship" instead of "Godhead." Therefore stalls the idea of a trinity. The passage refers to Jesus being a reflection of his Father, God. No three-headed "Godhead."

Original Greek construction of Col 2:9, you will see the word Godhead and its corresponding Greek word "theotes".
And theotes defined by lexicon as the state of being God.
It is not a term made up by translators and your explanations are all wrong.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G846  dwelleth G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fulness G4138  of the G3588  Godhead G2320  bodily. G4985

Col 2:9 οτι G3754 CONJ  εν G1722 PREP  αυτω G846 P-DSM  κατοικει G2730 V-PAI-3S  παν G3956 A-NSN  το G3588 T-NSN  πληρωμα G4138 N-NSN  της G3588 T-GSF  θεοτητος G2320 N-GSF  σωματικως G4985 ADV 

Col 2:9 ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς,

Not at all. Your sources are wrong. I have shown you that other translators do not render that Greek word as "Godhead," but godship or "divine authority." Jesus is not God but reflects the authority and characteristics of his Father so that he can be said to be the "fullness" of his Father's Godship.

I just believe you really don't know about lexicon.
Lexicon define Bible words at the time of its usage.
It guides you not to fall into eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

[onewithhim]

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

No, "godhead" is a term made up by translators that already believed that Jesus is God even before embarking on their translation project. It should be "godship" or "divine quality." "All the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily." Jesus was a perfect reflection of God's being, having the fullness of the quality of God. It doesn't mean that Jesus is God.

NASB says: "For in him all the fullness of Diety dwells in bodily form." Not "Godhead." The New American Bible , the James Moffatt Translation, say the same thing. Not "Godhead," but "diety." The 21st Century New Testament uses "Godship" instead of "Godhead." Therefore stalls the idea of a trinity. The passage refers to Jesus being a reflection of his Father, God. No three-headed "Godhead."

Original Greek construction of Col 2:9, you will see the word Godhead and its corresponding Greek word "theotes".
And theotes defined by lexicon as the state of being God.
It is not a term made up by translators and your explanations are all wrong.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G846  dwelleth G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fulness G4138  of the G3588  Godhead G2320  bodily. G4985

Col 2:9 οτι G3754 CONJ  εν G1722 PREP  αυτω G846 P-DSM  κατοικει G2730 V-PAI-3S  παν G3956 A-NSN  το G3588 T-NSN  πληρωμα G4138 N-NSN  της G3588 T-GSF  θεοτητος G2320 N-GSF  σωματικως G4985 ADV 

Col 2:9 ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς,

Not at all. Your sources are wrong. I have shown you that other translators do not render that Greek word as "Godhead," but godship or "divine authority." Jesus is not God but reflects the authority and characteristics of his Father so that he can be said to be the "fullness" of his Father's Godship.

I just believe you really don't know about lexicon.
Lexicon define Bible words at the time of its usage.
It guides you not to fall into eisegesis.
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases.

It is no presupposition when I say that the word "Godhead" is not correct. Other versions of the Bible see it as it is---the word is "Godship" or "divine authority." Jesus reflects his Father's Godship. All that fullness resides with him because he is the image of God. He has authority that has been given to him by God. (Col. 1:15; Matthew 28:18)

[Difflugia]

I just believe you really don't know about lexicon.

The word θεότης just means divinity in a broad sense.

[Capbook]

I just believe you really don't know about lexicon.

The word θεότης just means divinity in a broad sense.

Yes, divinity as a state of being divine also support my stand, Strong define "divine" in Greek "theios" in (2 Pet1:3,4) as Godhead, Godlike and divine.
And even Apostolic Bible Polyglot uses "deity" in that verse but Thayer lexicon define it the same, "the state of being God, and Godhead."

Strong θεῖος theios
thi'-os
From G2316; godlike (neuter as noun, divinity): - divine, godhead.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G1473  dwells G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fullness G4138  of the G3588  deity G2320  bodily. G4985 

θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

2Pe 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue.
2Pe 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust

[Difflugia]

The word θεότης just means divinity in a broad sense.

Source please? Lexicon and Strong number?

The link I gave you goes to a page with definitions from multiple lexicons.

Strong's G2320:


In case you're not familiar with Strong's notation, that means that James Strong thought that the word meant "divinity (abstractly)," but the KJV translated it as "godhead."

The BDAG definition is (emphasis in original): "the state of being god, divine character/nature, deity, divinity, used as abstract noun for θεός."

The LSJ definition is "divinity, divine nature."

[Capbook]

The word θεότης just means divinity in a broad sense.

Source please? Lexicon and Strong number?

The link I gave you goes to a page with definitions from multiple lexicons.

Strong's G2320:


In case you're not familiar with Strong's notation, that means that James Strong thought that the word meant "divinity (abstractly)," but the KJV translated it as "godhead."

The BDAG definition is (emphasis in original): "the state of being god, divine character/nature, deity, divinity, used as abstract noun for θεός."

The LSJ definition is "divinity, divine nature."

Sorry, you've read my response before I edited it.
Seems we are of the same definition.
I'll repost my edited reply below;

Peace.

Yes, divinity as a state of being divine also support my stand, Strong define "divine" in Greek "theios" in (2 Pet1:3,4) as Godhead, Godlike and divine.
And even Apostolic Bible Polyglot uses "deity" in that verse but Thayer lexicon define it the same, "the state of being God, and Godhead."

Strong θεῖος theios
thi'-os
From G2316; godlike (neuter as noun, divinity): - divine, godhead.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G1473  dwells G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fullness G4138  of the G3588  deity G2320  bodily. G4985 

θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

2Pe 1:3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue.
2Pe 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust

[Difflugia]

Yes, divinity as a state of being divine also support my stand, Strong define "divine" in Greek "theios" in (2 Pet1:3,4) as Godhead, Godlike and divine.
And even Apostolic Bible Polyglot uses "deity" in that verse but Thayer lexicon define it the same, "the state of being God, and Godhead."

The problem is that you can read Colossians 2:9 as specifically trinitarian if you want, but one doesn't have to. It's therefore useless as a proof text without some other context. Since Witnesses already view Jesus as supernaturally divine, that very clearly overlaps with how the Greek words θεότης and θεότητος were used in ancient Greek literature. The representative text referenced by the BDAG is from Plutarch's Moralia and reads thus:

οὕτως ἐκ μὲν ἀνθρώπων εἰς ἥρωας, ἐκ δὲ ἡρώων εἰς δαίμονας αἱ βελτίονες ψυχαὶ τὴν μεταβολὴν λαμβάνουσιν. ἐκ δὲ δαιμόνων ὀλίγαι μὲν ἔτι χρόνῳ πολλῷ δι’ ἀρετῆς καθαρθεῖσαι παντάπασι θεότητος μετέσχον

The corresponding English reads:

so from humans into heroes and from heroes into demi-gods the better souls undergo their transition; and from demi-gods, a few, after a long period of purification, share totally in divinity

Does the transition from hero to demigod to god ("shar[ing] totally in θεότητος") in a pagan context mean that Jesus must necessarily be a member of the Triune God? I certainly don't think so.

[Capbook]

Yes, divinity as a state of being divine also support my stand, Strong define "divine" in Greek "theios" in (2 Pet1:3,4) as Godhead, Godlike and divine.
And even Apostolic Bible Polyglot uses "deity" in that verse but Thayer lexicon define it the same, "the state of being God, and Godhead."

The problem is that you can read Colossians 2:9 as specifically trinitarian if you want, but one doesn't have to. It's therefore useless as a proof text without some other context. Since Witnesses already view Jesus as supernaturally divine, that very clearly overlaps with how the Greek words θεότης and θεότητος were used in ancient Greek literature. The representative text referenced by the BDAG is from Plutarch's Moralia and reads thus:

οὕτως ἐκ μὲν ἀνθρώπων εἰς ἥρωας, ἐκ δὲ ἡρώων εἰς δαίμονας αἱ βελτίονες ψυχαὶ τὴν μεταβολὴν λαμβάνουσιν. ἐκ δὲ δαιμόνων ὀλίγαι μὲν ἔτι χρόνῳ πολλῷ δι’ ἀρετῆς καθαρθεῖσαι παντάπασι θεότητος μετέσχον

The corresponding English reads:

so from humans into heroes and from heroes into demi-gods the better souls undergo their transition; and from demi-gods, a few, after a long period of purification, share totally in divinity

Does the transition from hero to demigod to god ("shar[ing] totally in θεότητος") in a pagan context mean that Jesus must necessarily be a member of the Triune God? I certainly don't think so.

Are you sure with your response I colored blue above? As I understand JW accept Jesus as God only when He is in heaven.
I'm sorry that Plutarch's Moralia I consider not as authoritative as the Bible.
In the creation week, I see the presence of the Spirit, and God, that says, let us make man in our image.
And the "us" refers to Jesus as the creation is by, in or through him. (John 1:3, Col1:16)

[Difflugia]

Are you sure with your response I colored blue above? As I understand JW accept Jesus as God only when He is in heaven.

Whether that's true or not, when Paul speaks of Jesus in the present tense like in Colossians 2, he's speaking of Jesus in heaven. If Witnesses view Jesus as conditionally divine depending on his current whereabouts, then Colossians is still talking about a divine Jesus.

I'm sorry that Plutarch's Moralia I consider not as authoritative as the Bible.

Since the word in question only appears once in the Bible, that would make your argument completely circular. If the question is what a specific Greek word meant to Greek audiences, then how other Greek authors used that Greek word would be, as you put it, "authoritative."

In the creation week, I see the presence of the Spirit, and God, that says, let us make man in our image.

And the "us" refers to Jesus as the creation is by, in or through him. (John 1:3, Col1:16)

You're welcome to add that to your Bible if you want. I prefer to read the "us" as the council of gods as described in Job 2.

[Capbook]

Are you sure with your response I colored blue above? As I understand JW accept Jesus as God only when He is in heaven.

Whether that's true or not, when Paul speaks of Jesus in the present tense like in Colossians 2, he's speaking of Jesus in heaven. If Witnesses view Jesus as conditionally divine depending on his current whereabouts, then Colossians is still talking about a divine Jesus.

I'm sorry that Plutarch's Moralia I consider not as authoritative as the Bible.

Since the word in question only appears once in the Bible, that would make your argument completely circular. If the question is what a specific Greek word meant to Greek audiences, then how other Greek authors used that Greek word would be, as you put it, "authoritative."

In the creation week, I see the presence of the Spirit, and God, that says, let us make man in our image.

And the "us" refers to Jesus as the creation is by, in or through him. (John 1:3, Col1:16)

You're welcome to add that to your Bible if you want. I prefer to read the "us" as the council of gods as described in Job 2.

Do you mean the word "demi-god" in the Bible?
I do always rely of what is written in the Bible.
Do you consider god the one that God commune in Job 2?