Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mike, sorry, I should of have been more specific. I was particularly referring to the ‘revised’ LXX (i.e. Theodotion’s version). It seems, from what I've read the Theodotion’s version is a much more accurate translation. So it seems “Latreuosa’ in the older “LXX” of Daniel is in no way “better” than that of Theodotion.
You missed the point.
As I made clear, the word - DOULEUSOUSIN (or some form of it) used in the Theodotion version in Daniel 7:14 is the same word used in Exodus 20:5 when God commanded the Hebrews not to have any gods before Him. (I provided a link concerning this in the other post).
Yet, that word is used for the worship of and service to the Messiah who is Jesus Christ.
God recognizes that He alone is worthy of 'DOULEUSOUSIN', and in Dan 7:14 in the Theodotion version, the Messiah - Jesus Christ is to be 'DOULEUSOUSIN'.
That should be enough to convince any clear thinking person that Jesus Christ is God.
Quote:
I did
I haven't ignored this fact. ‘Proskuneo’ can be done to anyone considered worthy from human superiors to ‘god’ himself.
OK…
No, that is not my reasoning. Mike I am saying that the “worship” (proskuneo) of Jesus tells us nothing about his nature. The word proskuneo means to bow down in subjection to any higher authority. The use of the word makes no implication as to the perceived humanity or divinity of the object. Performing this act of bowing does not mean the receiver is ‘god’, but that he or she is worthy of great respect. Now the Greek word latreuosa tends to convene more something like a religious act of service (e.g. temple duties), it is used in that sense. And that word specifically refers to the worship of ‘god’ – and this is always applied to ‘god’ and not Jesus in the NT. Mike where in the NT is latreuosa applied to Jesus?
Again ‘proskuneo’ means to bow down in subjection to any higher authority. The Greek word is used throughout the Greek Old Testament and the NT. Mike proskuneo is used for the ‘worship’ of angels (Gen. 19:1-2; 23:7-12 LXX; Rev. 19:10; 22:8), humans (Gen. 33:1-4; 43:26-28 LXX; Rth. 1:10 LXX; Matt. 20:20; Acts 10:25), and false gods or idols (Acts 7:43; Rev. 13:8; 16:2; 19:20; 20:4). So this ‘PROSKUNEO’ is rightly used ONLY for ‘god’ intreptation is not going to fly. There are numerous passages and ample of evidence that this interpretation you are coming up with here is wrong. Proskuneo is not an exclusive term for worship or service to ‘god’.
Mike ‘DOULEUO' can refer to service offered to humans as well as to a deity. The word is not an exclusive term for worship or service to ‘god’ and the Son of Man (Jesus).
As I said, the angel which John atempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' rejected that attempt, because such only God is worthy of such worship. I also told you that when Cornelius attempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' attempted to worship Peter, Peter rejected it because again, he realized that only God is worthy of such worship. And I specified that this was 'PROSKUNEO' in a 'religious' sense. That is, in the sense of worshiping God in contrast to simply being in subjection to a higher authority.
The demons in the possessed man who 'PROSKUNEO' before Christ, would not have 'PROSKUNEO' before a mere man. They knew that Jesus was God. Therefore, 'PROSKUNEO' does indicate that those doing it with regard to Jesus understood that He was not just a man. The disciples 'PROSKUNEO' Jesus when He walked on water, acknowledging that He was the Son of God.
So while 'PROSKUNEO' as shown above, properly means to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior, I have given passages in which this 'PROSKUNEO' is accompanied with the recognition of the fact that Jesus is the Son of God, which is a title that speaks of Christ's deity. Jesus is not a son of God. He is the unique Son of God.
Oh, and the wise men worshipped -'PROSKUNEO' a child. Think about that for a while.
That the word “Latreuosa’ is not used in the New Testament is not an issue.
I am not going to spend any more time on this, as I have made my point. I don't like pointless debating. The following link will provide futher information concerning the worshipping of Jesus Christ.
As I made clear, the word - DOULEUSOUSIN (or some form of it) used in the Theodotion version in Daniel 7:14 is the same word used in Exodus 20:5 when God commanded the Hebrews not to have any gods before Him. (I provided a link concerning this in the other post).
Yet, that word is used for the worship of and service to the Messiah who is Jesus Christ.
God recognizes that He alone is worthy of 'DOULEUSOUSIN', and in Dan 7:14 in the Theodotion version, the Messiah - Jesus Christ is to be 'DOULEUSOUSIN'.
That should be enough to convince any clear thinking person that Jesus Christ is God.
As I said, the angel which John atempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' rejected that attempt, because such only God is worthy of such worship. I also told you that when Cornelius attempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' attempted to worship Peter, Peter rejected it because again, he realized that only God is worthy of such worship. And I specified that this was 'PROSKUNEO' in a 'religious' sense. That is, in the sense of worshiping God in contrast to simply being in subjection to a higher authority.
The demons in the possessed man who 'PROSKUNEO' before Christ, would not have 'PROSKUNEO' before a mere man. They knew that Jesus was God. Therefore, 'PROSKUNEO' does indicate that those doing it with regard to Jesus understood that He was not just a man. The disciples 'PROSKUNEO' Jesus when He walked on water, acknowledging that He was the Son of God.
So while 'PROSKUNEO' as shown above, properly means to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior, I have given passages in which this 'PROSKUNEO' is accompanied with the recognition of the fact that Jesus is the Son of God, which is a title that speaks of Christ's deity. Jesus is not a son of God. He is the unique Son of God.
Oh, and the wise men worshipped -'PROSKUNEO' a child. Think about that for a while.
That the word “Latreuosa’ is not used in the New Testament is not an issue.
I am not going to spend any more time on this, as I have made my point. I don't like pointless debating. The following link will provide futher information concerning the worshipping of Jesus Christ.
We believe all people are born with a knowledge to serve God(swt) This submission is the meaning of the word Islam. A Muslim is one who submits to God(swt) All people are born Muslim.
You may not realize it but you are agreeing with a teaching of Islam. All people are born Muslim, it is through teachings of things other than the submission to God(swt) that they stray from Islam.
No I'm not agreeing with Islam teaching, all people are not born Muslim, all people are born bent away from God, that is why we needed a Savior and His name is Jesus.
As I made clear, the word - DOULEUSOUSIN (or some form of it) used in the Theodotion version in Daniel 7:14 is the same word used in Exodus 20:5 when God commanded the Hebrews not to have any gods before Him. (I provided a link concerning this in the other post).
Yet, that word is used for the worship of and service to the Messiah who is Jesus Christ.
God recognizes that He alone is worthy of 'DOULEUSOUSIN', and in Dan 7:14 in the Theodotion version, the Messiah - Jesus Christ is to be 'DOULEUSOUSIN'.
That should be enough to convince any clear thinking person that Jesus Christ is God.
Mike douleuo is not limited only to Christ Jesus (i.e., the Son of Man of Daniel 7:14) and ‘god’. If we look at the way this Greek word is used in other writings we would come to the conclusion that douleuo can be offered to humans as well. Here are a few examples from the LXX:
Quote:
Genesis 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve (doulwsousin)them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
Genesis 15:14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve (douleuswsin), will I judge: and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
In this example the nation of Israel was supposed to ‘serve’ the Egyptians
Quote:
Gen 29:18 And Jacob loved Rachel; and said, I will serve (douleusw) thee seven years for Rachel thy younger daughter.
Gen 30:26 Give me my wives and my children, for whom I have served (dedouleuka) thee, and let me go: for thou knowest my service which I have done thee.
In these examples Jacob refers to the service or work that he rendered to a human, Laban.
Quote:
Gen 14:4 Twelve years they served (edouleuon) Chedorlaomer, and in the thirteenth year they rebelled.
In this example edouleuon refers to service offered to a human, a king.. Mike from these examples it becomes pretty clear that the Greek word is not used to refer to an act towards ‘god’ ONLY. So Mike your interpretation of Dan. 7:14 and Exo. 20:5 seems to be in conflict with these verses.
As I said, the angel which John atempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' rejected that attempt, because such only God is worthy of such worship.
Again, Mike proskuneo is used for the ‘worship’ of angels (see Gen. 19:1-2 LXX). Lot proskuneo worship the ‘angels’ of ‘god’ . From reading Gen. 19 it seems that was not a problem. Lot even called the angels “Lords”. It seem that the ‘angels’ were perfectly fine with that. So your interpretation of (Rev. 22:8-9) conflicts with Gen. 19:1-2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
I also told you that when Cornelius attempted to worship 'PROSKUNEO' attempted to worship Peter, Peter rejected it because again, he realized that only God is worthy of such worship.
Well that’s your concept on why Peter rejected ‘worship’ [gk. proskuneo].You’re basically reading this extraneous concept into the text.
And I specified that this was 'PROSKUNEO' in a 'religious' sense. That is, in the sense of worshiping God in contrast to simply being in subjection to a higher authority.
The demons in the possessed man who 'PROSKUNEO' before Christ, would not have 'PROSKUNEO' before a mere man. They knew that Jesus was God. Therefore, 'PROSKUNEO' does indicate that those doing it with regard to Jesus understood that He was not just a man. The disciples 'PROSKUNEO' Jesus when He walked on water, acknowledging that He was the Son of God.
Strong's Greek: 4352. ????????? (proskuneó) -- to do reverence to
So while 'PROSKUNEO' as shown above, properly means to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior, I have given passages in which this 'PROSKUNEO' is accompanied with the recognition of the fact that Jesus is the Son of God, which is a title that speaks of Christ's deity. Jesus is not a son of God. He is the unique Son of God.
Oh, and the wise men worshipped -'PROSKUNEO' a child. Think about that for a while.
That the word “Latreuosa’ is not used in the New Testament is not an issue.
I am not going to spend any more time on this, as I have made my point. I don't like pointless debating. The following link will provide futher information concerning the worshipping of Jesus Christ.
From the Beginning only God is to be Worshipped
Refer to post #347.
Mike Jesus being offered proskuneó is not proof that he is ‘god’. Men and ‘angels’ commonly accepted proskuneó (particularly in the OT). No one in the NT “latreuo” — offer divine worship — to Jesus. There is no instance of latreuo [to do religious service to] which has Jesus as its object in the New Testament. And that’s very telling.
Last edited by kids in america_; 08-09-2011 at 09:27 PM..
I trust the inner voice of the Holy Spirit, do you?
Yes I do. I trust that a god who IS Love....is IN a person showing selfless love for another. It touches me to see and a gift of God to receive.
Can you trust your inner voice that the Buddhist showing selfless Love is of God. 1 John 4 says it all!
Yet you condemn them and don't seem to see the "god" (ie Love) within them, all you see (as it appears to me) is the other religious views.
Everyone who loves is "born of God" and "knows God" but everyone who does NOT love "does not know God" because God IS Love.
Recognizing that Love in others seems hard for some. They just can't get past the legalism.
Loving One Another is the 2nd commandment (according to Jesus)... You cannot usurp the 2nd with the 1st!
You must do both, even if that means rethinking your view of the legalism and it's importance.
Love is God.
A new perspective... An exercise in bible reading (kat version).
Paul said:
Therefore, as Love's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds;and to put on the new self, created to be like Love in true righteousness and holiness.
and conversely:
But the fruit of Love's Spirit is joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
In Matthew 12:33 we see: "Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.
In Luke 6:43: "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.
Can you trust your inner Love to recognize the Love in others? Or are you stuck in legalism instead of Love?
Yes I do. I trust that a god who IS Love....is IN a person showing selfless love for another. It touches me to see and a gift of God to receive.
Can you trust your inner voice that the Buddhist showing selfless Love is of God. 1 John 4 says it all!
Yet you condemn them and don't seem to see the "god" (ie Love) within them, all you see (as it appears to me) is the other religious views.
Everyone who loves is "born of God" and "knows God" but everyone who does NOT love "does not know God" because God IS Love.
Recognizing that Love in others seems hard for some. They just can't get past the legalism.
Loving One Another is the 2nd commandment (according to Jesus)... You cannot usurp the 2nd with the 1st!
You must do both, even if that means rethinking your view of the legalism and it's importance.
Love is God.
A new perspective... An exercise in bible reading (kat version).
Paul said:
Therefore, as Love's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds;and to put on the new self, created to be like Love in true righteousness and holiness.
and conversely:
But the fruit of Love's Spirit is joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
In Matthew 12:33 we see: "Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.
In Luke 6:43: "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.
Can you trust your inner Love to recognize the Love in others? Or are you stuck in legalism instead of Love?
Wonderful post!! Still can't rep ya but here's a cutie.
Yes I do. I trust that a god who IS Love....is IN a person showing selfless love for another. It touches me to see and a gift of God to receive.
Can you trust your inner voice that the Buddhist showing selfless Love is of God. 1 John 4 says it all!
Yet you condemn them and don't seem to see the "god" (ie Love) within them, all you see (as it appears to me) is the other religious views.
Everyone who loves is "born of God" and "knows God" but everyone who does NOT love "does not know God" because God IS Love.
Recognizing that Love in others seems hard for some. They just can't get past the legalism.
Loving One Another is the 2nd commandment (according to Jesus)... You cannot usurp the 2nd with the 1st!
You must do both, even if that means rethinking your view of the legalism and it's importance.
Love is God.
A new perspective... An exercise in bible reading (kat version).
Paul said:
Therefore, as Love's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.
You were taught, with regard to your former way of life, to put off your old self, which is being corrupted by its deceitful desires; to be made new in the attitude of your minds;and to put on the new self, created to be like Love in true righteousness and holiness.
and conversely:
But the fruit of Love's Spirit is joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law.
In Matthew 12:33 we see: "Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is recognized by its fruit.
In Luke 6:43: "No good tree bears bad fruit, nor does a bad tree bear good fruit.
Can you trust your inner Love to recognize the Love in others? Or are you stuck in legalism instead of Love?
Kat, couldn't rep you, but I had to say that this is profoundly eloquent and beautiful and really touched me. Thank you for taking the time to share the "kat version".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
