A Godhead Question

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Chan

Yes, the FORM of God. This passage merely affirms a truth communicated elsewhere in scripture: that Jesus is the image of the invisible God, the express image of God's person. No one can see God and live but Jesus is the means through which God can be seen.

Does the Bible in its entirety support the idea that God is invisible in the sense that He cannot be seen at all, or does the Scripture you reference simply mean that He is invisible in the sense that He is invisible to MAN?

It doesn't make sense to say, "no one can see God and live" if He has no form to begin with. You can't see what's invisible anyway, can you? So what would you be looking upon?

[Rhoni]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Does the Bible in its entirety support the idea that God is invisible in the sense that He cannot be seen at all, or does the Scripture you reference simply mean that He is invisible in the sense that He is invisible to MAN?

It doesn't make sense to say, "no one can see God and live" if He has no form to begin with. You can't see what's invisible anyway, can you? So what would you be looking upon?

duh...the Holy Ghost j/k. The only body/form we will ever see is in the person of Jesus Christ and the evidence of that spirit living in us...I call it the Holy Ghost shine!

Blessings, Rhoni

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Chan

Well, no, the KJV is not the most literal English translation - the NASB is. Also, keep in mind that the KJV was translated for the purpose of being read aloud in churches; thus, the combination of words would not be the most accurate translation of the original texts. It should also be noted that the KJV was not translated from the earliest Greek manuscripts.

I'd have to agree ... with Chan ... just from cursory reading ... and recently examining the IT controversy ... it's apparent that the writers of the NASB do a better job in keeping the Greek texts

I'm thinking of purchasing an NASB study bible.

[sola gratia]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I'd have to agree ... with Chan ... just from cursory reading ... and recently examining the IT controversy ... it's apparent that the writers of the NASB do a better job in keeping the Greek texts

I'm thinking of purchasing an NASB study bible.

I'd love to see something to support this

[Truly Blessed]

Originally Posted by Rhoni

duh...the Holy Ghost j/k. The only body/form we will ever see is in the person of Jesus Christ and the evidence of that spirit living in us...I call it the Holy Ghost shine!

Blessings, Rhoni

Perhaps the reason why a distinction is made between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in Scripture? No question that the Holy Spirit is invisible, but does this mean God the Father is invisible? The Holy Spirit is Christ in us. We can't see Jesus in His indwelling presence, but Jesus certainly is visible in heaven.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Perhaps the reason why a distinction is made between Father, Son, and Holy Ghost in Scripture? No question that the Holy Spirit is invisible, but does this mean God the Father is invisible? The Holy Spirit is Christ in us. We can't see Jesus in His indwelling presence, but Jesus certainly is visible in heaven.

Elder, the Scriptures tell us that God is Spirit and there is one Spirit. As I understand this, the only way the Spirit of God has ever been manifested has been in His glory...for example with Moses on the mountain and in the Tabernacle.

Today, He is visible in His Body...JMO...

Originally Posted by Truly Blessed

Does the Bible in its entirety support the idea that God is invisible in the sense that He cannot be seen at all, or does the Scripture you reference simply mean that He is invisible in the sense that He is invisible to MAN?

Since the passages were addressed to men (e.g. "no man has seen God at any time" and "no man can see me and live") suggests at the very least that God is invisible to man in man's present temporal state or that the nature of God is such that the consequences of temporal man seeing God would immediately result in man's death.

It doesn't make sense to say, "no one can see God and live" if He has no form to begin with. You can't see what's invisible anyway, can you? So what would you be looking upon?

The scripture says that Jesus is the image (form, icon) of the invisible God and it says Jesus is the "express image" (exact imprint) of God's person.

I guess a way to say it would be to say that Jesus is what can be seen of God by temporal man.

Originally Posted by sola gratia

Gee, Chan, I am not sure about that. I would have to research that a little more. NASB? What makes you think that? I would certainly need some additional information on that.... Could you supply me with that? I dont want to hijack this thread... but I have to say I think I would contend your last post

Having read a number of translations and made some comparisons of certain passages (or individual words in certain passages), I've found the NASB to be the most literal. But don't just take my word for it, here's a comparison that someone else has done of different translations: http://faith.propadeutic.com/conclusions.html

Here's what another source says: "This New American Standard Bible is considered by nearly all evangelical Christian scholars and translators today, to be the most accurate, word-for-word translation of the original Greek and Hebrew scriptures into the modern English language that has ever been produced. It remains the most popular version among theologians, professors, scholars, and seminary students today. Some, however, have taken issue with it because it is so direct and literal a translation (focused on accuracy), that it does not flow as easily in conversational English."

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Chan

Having read a number of translations and made some comparisons of certain passages (or individual words in certain passages), I've found the NASB to be the most literal. But don't just take my word for it, here's a comparison that someone else has done of different translations: http://faith.propadeutic.com/conclusions.html

Here's what another source says: "This New American Standard Bible is considered by nearly all evangelical Christian scholars and translators today, to be the most accurate, word-for-word translation of the original Greek and Hebrew scriptures into the modern English language that has ever been produced. It remains the most popular version among theologians, professors, scholars, and seminary students today. Some, however, have taken issue with it because it is so direct and literal a translation (focused on accuracy), that it does not flow as easily in conversational English."

What are your thoughts on the Majority/ Textus Receptus that the KJV translates vs the Wescott Hort text of the NASB?

[sola gratia]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

What are your thoughts on the Majority/ Textus Receptus that the KJV translates vs the Wescott Hort text of the NASB?

great question!