- Topic
Originally posted by John on Changes in the Green Book – Part 1 – Removal of “Second Coming” References
Are you serious? You think that those two writings are different? First one says what Christ will do in the future, AND even the appointed time of His second coming. Second one you use say the eact same thing. You have very poor grammar skills or english is not your first language. Oh wait, people whose english is not their first language translated those books, and now you who cannot read or understand english (obviously) try and dicfer why they change the working of the books.
Those two books say the excact same thing. Jesus coming is obvious ly His second coming. I truly see no difference in the MEANING of the two examples you have shown.
Jesus Coming = His 2nd coming. There is no difference. You all need to stop this. Whoever has made this website is a liar, and has no understanding of basic english and grammar.
You are making it seem like Ahnsahnghong said the 2nd coming Christ would come in the future in the first example/writing, when thats not what the writing says. It says what Christ will do in the future. Not that he will come in the future. By studying the works of Moses we can also understand the appointed day of His second coming. It does not say that day is in the furtue though. You are a liar for saying that it says like that, or you do not understand english. Either way people should not listen to you.
Second writing/example says by studying works of Moses we can understand everything Christ WILL do (future tense for all of you who failed grammar), IN addition to the time of His (Jesus’s) coming (which would obviously His second coming. There is no difference in the two writings.
originally posted by admin:
Hello John and thank you for commenting. I understand English perfectly thank you. If the two writing examples are the same and mean the same thing, as you claim, then why change it? Why would the WMSCOG delete the words “future” and “second” if there is no difference? Do your research.
well guys sorry to cut into this conversation but it was very interesting. I always read your guys arguments from both side of the field. like I said before I believe in some of doctrines of the church of god becuase is evident and can be proven like sabbath and the veil among aothers.but concerning the green book. Today I was watching on you tube this guy Bart D.ehrman and how he explained to his class how words scriptures changed over time since the bible was created or inspired by god. He went on to say how back in the first century there was not any printable mechanism to re write a book and how people had to copy things word to word. He went on to say that at that time about 90 percet of the population were not capable to write or read so when they copied the works of mark ,luke or paul they made mistakes and those mistakes were copie by other people addind there own mistakes. Thats why we have now so many bibles with different wording. his question was which is really valid not that I go with but (if this is gods work why would he not protect it and have people change it over time). The same thing in reference to the green book if god wrote it meaning ahn why change the wording from future to will do. God is perfect ,so that being said his wording is perfect so why change it. I believe that most of the people here have a problem with this is because ahn never said he was god .and since he never said he was god changing the scriptures from future (meaning something to be done further down in time) to will do meaning something you can do in an hour or the next day is very meaning full. In other words child of zion this website is not made up of liers like you said and that is pretty offensive. Most of the people here are not trying to batch your church but we are trying to understand it or at least i am.
actually the scriptures are not very different from there oldest forms we have available. The reasons we have different versions is translating texts into english isn't an exact science and different people have different ideas of the best way to convey an entirely different language and cultures wording. While some differences between what the books say is minimal some is also major like removing entire sections, also if you notice they change the original korean not just the translations so it is more than nuance in translation.
Yeah thats true I agree with you there. Even the new testament was written in greek and in the translation may things get left out. So are you really getting the word of god ? or are you getting part of it ? Thats why when you make changes in the books that ahn wrote just to make more apealing to this time arent you taking away just a little of gods words?
king34 wrote:
well guys sorry to cut into this conversation but it was very interesting. I always read your guys arguments from both side of the field. like I said before I believe in some of doctrines of the church of god becuase is evident and can be proven like sabbath and the veil among aothers.but concerning the green book. Today I was watching on you tube this guy Bart D.ehrman and how he explained to his class how words scriptures changed over time since the bible was created or inspired by god. He went on to say how back in the first century there was not any printable mechanism to re write a book and how people had to copy things word to word. He went on to say that at that time about 90 percet of the population were not capable to write or read so when they copied the works of mark ,luke or paul they made mistakes and those mistakes were copie by other people addind there own mistakes. Thats why we have now so many bibles with different wording. his question was which is really valid not that I go with but (if this is gods work why would he not protect it and have people change it over time). The same thing in reference to the green book if god wrote it meaning ahn why change the wording from future to will do. God is perfect ,so that being said his wording is perfect so why change it. I believe that most of the people here have a problem with this is because ahn never said he was god .and since he never said he was god changing the scriptures from future (meaning something to be done further down in time) to will do meaning something you can do in an hour or the next day is very meaning full. In other words child of zion this website is not made up of liers like you said and that is pretty offensive. Most of the people here are not trying to batch your church but we are trying to understand it or at least i am.
I understand what you are saying, but Christ Ahnsahnghong didn't write the books in english. There fore the english version changing is not changing the perfect word of God is it?
Ahnsahnghong did say He was God. He said so by saying only God can reveal the 7 Thunders, and then by revealing the 7 Thunders, he declared He is the 2nd Coming. He told about the prophecy of King David, and then fufilled the prophecy, delcaring He is Christ. Would you have beleived Him if He wrote in a book, "Iam the 2nd Coming Jesus?" Probably not. Thats one reason I do believe Him to be Christ, b/c He never shouted that He was the Christ. he just revealed prophecy and fufilled it.
changing the Korean text is however.
Well that is true as well but dont you think that if a person is translating the perfect word of god they will get it right the first time ? I am pretty sure that in 1993 the church had some really good people translating or they had sufficient money to pay for a professional translation. By changing it now in 2010 it leaves questions in the minds of people . Why change it now? and not in 1994 or so on?
shimon wrote:
changing the Korean text is however.
Not if it was God who said to change it
oh you are gving me the same answer a decond gave me when I asked about why is ahn god "cause he revealed the 7 thunders" Did you know that there are 100s of churches with many of the same studies as you guys have and they dont have ahn as their messiah. Oh and by the ways ahn never said he was god thats why he never wrote it on his books .saying it is actually saying it "i am god " not by leaving things to the imagination or living riddles for people to decifer and say of yea he is god. not every one is as smart as most members in the cog.
king34 wrote:
by the ways ahn never said he was god
according to the only english translations of the green book yes he did.
in what page he specically says I am god..pray in my name ..or anything similar to that?
shimon wrote:
ChildOfZion wrote:
shimon wrote:
changing the Korean text is however.
Not if it was God who said to change it
That isn't what Ahnsahnghong wrote or taught.
I'm not sure what you mean, but Ahnsahnghong did teach to follow Mother. So if Mother, who is God, said to change something, then it must be changed.
So why do you all say God's word cannot change? God told Jonah He was going to destroy Nineveh, but He changed His word. So it is incorrect to say that God's word cannot change.
Nineveh God did NOT change his word his intention was ALWAYS to get nineveh to repent so he wouldn't have to destroy them
If God can change his words the Bible is useless.
Ahnsahnghong taught that the Bible as God's word is the measuring rod for truth so God's word CANNOT be changed or no one can be blamed for failing to believe because we cannot know God if he and his word are not immutable.
nice I totally agree with shimon.
Hey ChildOfZion, I did answer your question and even though you don’t accept what I said I feel very judged by you. I’m a liar because you don’t accept what I responded with? It’s ok, I forgive you and I understand. This is not the first time someone from this group has called me names mostly because I cannot read the Bible and agree with the WMSCOG’s doctrine. Nor can I ignore what the Bible says and justify the idea that a Pastor from Korea who never said he was god and actually stated that he was not God could be the second coming Jesus Christ. Everything I have read about Ahn up to this point tells me that he believed and taught about Jesus Christ. Although I don’t agree with all of his teachings I can tell that he was a believer of Jesus and was looking forward to Jesus coming the second time. Ahn also taught that there can be no god the mother. You and your group spit on the teachings of the one you claim to be god the father. Ahn seems to have been a good man but he was only a man.
It would be nice to see what he actually wrote to know whay he actually believed and taught we seem to only have WMC authorized translations NCPCOG seems to have decided not to even though they said at one point they would. But then they don't have money like WMC to spend on this stuff.
Joshua wrote:
You and your group spit on the teachings of the one you claim to be god the father. Ahn seems to have been a good man but he was only a man.
Ran around Korea with girlfriends, fathered kids by more than one wife …. uh, I don't agree with the Ahn seems to have been a good man statement …
Sueno Maruyama wrote:
Joshua wrote:
You and your group spit on the teachings of the one you claim to be god the father. Ahn seems to have been a good man but he was only a man.
Ran around Korea with girlfriends, fathered kids by more than one wife …. uh, I don't agree with the Ahn seems to have been a good man statement …
Cite evidence before posting personal attacks over and over and over. You love to post argumentum ad hominem. A fallacy is a fallacy even when trying to argue the correct side of an issue so avoid them.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.