what would they mean from a
nonsectarian, nonreligious under standing.?
i see many bibles dont use the term Godhead, there for, there must be other
under standings of there definitions.
i see many bibles dont use the term Godhead, there for, there must be other
under standings of there definitions.
cataway;Does the New World translation use the term "Godhead"? What are some of the bibles that choose not to use the "Godhead" term?
I use the KJV so I don't know what the other versions have chosen to use.
i see many bibles dont use the term Godhead, there for, there must be other
under standings of there definitions.
cataway;Does the New World translation use the term "Godhead"? What are some of the bibles that choose not to use the "Godhead" term?
I use the KJV so I don't know what the other versions have chosen to use.
no it does not
Colossians 2:9(New International Version)9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,
Colossians 2:9(New American Standard Bible 9 For in Him all the (A)fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form,
Colossians 2:9(New Living Translation)9 For in Christ lives all the fullness of God in a human body.[a]
Colossians 2:9(English Standard Version 9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,
Colossians 2:9(Holman Christian Standard Bible 9 For in Him the entire fullness (A) of God's nature [a] dwells bodily, [b]
Colossians 2:9(New International Reader's Version)9 God's whole nature is living in Christ in human form.
Colossians 2:9(New International Version - Uk 9 For in Christ all the fulness of the Deity lives in bodily form,
Colossians 2:9(Today's New International Version) 9 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form,
cat; Thanks. That is great! Every single one of those versions declare that there was no diety outside of the bodily form of Jesus. That can only mean that the KJV was correct in qouting Jesus when he said, "he that hath seen me hath seen The Father". Jehovah being diety was said in every translation to be in the body of Christ. Jesus was Jehovah manifest in the flesh!! Jesus was right when he said, "I and my Father are one".
cat; Thanks. That is great! Every single one of those versions declare that there was no Deity outside of the bodily form of Jesus. That can only mean that the KJV was correct in quoting Jesus when he said, "he that hath seen me hath seen The Father". Jehovah being Deity was said in every translation to be in the body of Christ. Jesus was Jehovah manifest in the flesh!! Jesus was right when he said, "I and my Father are one".
31Once more the Jews lifted up stones to stone him. 32Jesus replied to them: "I displayed to YOU many fine works from the Father. For which of those works are YOU stoning me?" 33The Jews answered him: "We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy, even because you, although being a man, make yourself a god." 34Jesus answered them: "Is it not written in your Law, "I said: "YOU are gods""? 35If he called "gods" those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scripture cannot be nullified, 36do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, "You blaspheme," because I said, I am God"s Son? 37If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me. 38But if I am doing them, even though YOU do not believe me, believe the works, in order that YOU may come to know and may continue knowing that the Father is in union with me and I am in union with the Father."
the word union here means a: a confederation of independent individuals (as nations or persons) for some common purpose v
yes snooky Jehovah and Jesus are in agreement and are working together to a common purpose.
Alex your answer is in here to, Jesus is a god ,the son of god .yes thats right he is a god .but he is not God thee almighty ,only Jehovah can claim that.
At Colossians 2:9 the word in the Greek that the NewWorldTranslation renders "divine quality" is theótes, and this is the only use of the word in the Christian Greek Scriptures. The same is true of a similar Greek word, theiótes, which appears only at Romans 1:20, and which the NewWorldTranslation there renders "Godship," as follows: "For his invisible qualities are clearly seen from the world"s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."
The way these two words have been rendered in the NewWorldTranslation has given rise to the charge that the New World Bible Translation Committee let their religious beliefs influence them. That charge is true, but they did not do so wrongly, or unduly. The meaning that is to be given to these two Greek words depends upon what the entire Bible has to say about Jehovah God and Jesus Christ.
How so? In that there is basis for translating these words either as "Deity," "Divinity" or "Godhead" and so attributing personality to them, or as "Divine Nature," "divine quality," "Godship," and having them merely denote qualities. Thus those who believe in the trinity will attach personality to these words, whereas those who do not will render them as qualities in view of the way God and Christ are described in the Scriptures and so as to harmonize the words with the rest of God"s Word. This emphasizes the fact that one simply cannot properly and accurately translate the Bible unless one clearly understands its teachings.
That the New World Bible Translation Committee were perfectly right in rendering these words the way they did is apparent from what Greek authorities have to say about them. Thus Parkhurst"s AGreekandEnglishLexicon (1845) defines theiótes as "Godhead" (page 261) and theótes as "Deity, godhead, divine nature" (page 264). Note the definition "divine nature" as well as "Godhead."
Liddell and Scott"s AGreek-EnglishLexicon, in its new ninth edition, completed in 1940 and reprinted in 1948, Volume I, defines the two terms in the light of ancient usages apart from the Scriptures. Theiótes it defines as "divine nature, divinity" (page 788). Theótes it defines in exactly the same way, as "divinity, divine nature," and then cites as an example Colossians 2:9. In this connection it shows that the similar Greek expression, diatheóteta, means "for religious reasons" (page 792).
Thus the NewWorldTranslation is fully justified in rendering Colossians 2:9 to show that Christ has in him all the fullness, not of God himself, the Deity, the Godhead, but of the divine quality dwelling bodily, and this in behalf of the spiritual body of Christ, so that this body of Christ"s followers is possessed of a fullness by means of him: "It is in [Christ] that all the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily. And so you [Christians] are possessed of a fullness by means of him, who is the head of all government and authority.""Col. 2:9, 10.
It is also of interest to note that both Weymouth and AnAmericanTranslation render the passage, "the fullness of God"s nature."
To get an objective view of the matter, in exploring questions such as these it is best to use the nonsectarian and nonreligious Hebrew-English and Greek-English dictionaries, instead of those that have been produced by some religious denomination.
yes snooky Jehovah and Jesus are in agreement and are working together to a common purpose.
cat; In spite of your long copy and paste, all the bible versions, including your own Watchtower version, does not say what you sayhere. Nothing was said about "agreement", or "working together". It said plainly that ALL the Diety dwelt bodily in Jesus. It this isn't true, then every version you quoted was in error and should be dismissed as the word of God.
alex what do these words mean?
