I am a JW, why should I consider becoming a C

[Bronzesnake]

I'll ask it again.
Why was Jesus crucified? What was the accusation against Him that got Him killed?

The J.W. and the Muslims think Jesus was merely an angel (J.W.) or a prophet (Islam)
The message on the golden dome of the rock reads "God has no son"

Right from the beginning in Genesis the scriptures say...
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Now I know the J.W. have added "a" to this verse.
Now let's analyze this. The J.W. have gone out of their way to dethrone Jesus by removing all references in the scriptures which corroborate His Holy Title...God.
They do this because they believe in "one" God. Now I'll leave the facts out for a moment and for argument's sake let's just say this is true even though we know it isn't.
Now if Jesus is "a" God isn't that going directly against their own beliefs?
If there's only "one" God how can Jesus be "a" God?

Now back to the facts... The oldest original manuscripts all agree that the scriptures state...

Jhn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

I'm a son and a brother and a father and a grandfather and a husband and a brother in law and a cousin, and yet I am one.
Jesus is a man and God and a Holy Spirit, and yet He is one...Why is this so difficult?

In this verse the scriptures tell us not only that Jesus is God, but it corroborates it by stating that Jesus was responsible for all creation!!

Hbr 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Okay the J.W. tell me that Jesus is "a" God but they also tell me He's an angel.
Well if that's true then why does God say this?...

Hbr 1:3 Who being the brightness of [his] glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Hbr 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

So Jesus is in fact not an angle. Very interesting no? OK so He's not a mere human, and he's not an angel...that only leaves one possibility and the scriptures scream it out to us...He's God in the flesh!!!

Hbr 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Hbr 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.
Hbr 1:7 And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

OK here's an extremely powerful verse...

Hbr 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, [is] for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness [is] the sceptre of thy kingdom.

Wow! Here we have God the Father calling Jesus God!!!
And as if to hammer the truth into our hearts God the Father continues...

Hbr 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, [even] thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.

Once again God our Heavenly Father addresses Jesus as God!

Here again God our Holy Heavenly Father addresses Jesus as not only God, but reaffirms that it was Jesus who created the universe...

Hbr 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

Here's what awaits the good people who reworked His original scriptures...

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

There it is my friends, and yet some have chosen to take the most serious of all chances and they have added and have taken away from God's Holy word. May God have mercy.

John Bronzesnake

 

[Mike]

Bronzesnake, thank you for bringing this back to topic. We'll see how long this lasts.

The term "Godhead" is an English variant of the word "godhood" and was first introduced by John Wycliffe (1330-1384 C.E.) in English Bible versions as godhede. The word "Godhead" is a translation of three different Greek words, theion (meaning "divinity, deity", # 2304 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Acts 17:29, theiot?s (meaning "divinity, divine nature", # 2305 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Romans 1:20, and theot?s (meaning "deity", # 2320 in Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament) at Colossians 2:9.

To translate three different Greek words as one word and deviously incorrect at that in the King James Bible, is no different than translating in the King James Bible, the Hebrew word she’ohl´ with three different English words of "hell" (10 times), "grave" (31 times), and "pit" (3 times).

This is not unlike having three different names for one street on a map (with the real name hidden), so that when a person used it, he wound up lost. Likewise of those who read Bibles with "Godhead" in it, thereby misleading a person that the trinity is "real".

Hence, the need for an accurate Bible, one that renders Hebrew and Greek words and phrases with a high degree of precision, just as a map that can be counted on to provide exact information. Unfortunately, many Bibles follow the lead of the King James Bible, or is otherwise biased, because the trinity, along with a host of other religious teachings that are not true, has such a strangle hold on so many.

nadab, as a JW, I wonder if you would consider yourself a Christian. In you opinion, what makes a person a Christian? I'm guessing you'll say you are, and that following the teaching of Jesus to be the answer. If you've read my earlier posts, I would say not. Dethroning Him by stripping Him from His divinity in would exclude you from the Body of Christ. Or else, why don't you call yourself a "Michaelist" or more appropriately a "Russellist"? There is no theological way to assume the arch-angel Michael could atone for our sins by taking them upon himself upon the cross.

 

[Mysteryman]

Quote Free: "And yet you ignore the verses where Jesus accepts worship (all from the ESV):

Mat 2:2 saying, "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him."

Mat 2:11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

Mat 14:33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God." "


Hi Free

No, in no way have I ignored anything. This part of the subject matter has not been brought up within the discussion as of yet. At least not with myself.

Translations are just one way in which the adversary of God , will try by any means to deceive.

The word "worship", means reverance or respect, which can be given to someone with knowledge or authority of position. Without disrespect to the one and only true God, the Lord God Almighty, others can be worshipped, or given reverance or respect.

The definition of "worship" is thus -- "A feeling of respect or reverance for power, position, merit, virture, etc. Again , a King is given respect or reverance for the postion or power of position. The same holds true with a Lord, or a Prophet of God, as well as the "Son of God".

The greek word here in these verses you used, is the greek word - "proskun" which means , to kiss, or give reverance. Jesus Christ did not take all the glory, for he knew that his glory was given him by his Father. When they called Jesus good, Jesus asked , why call me good, for there is none other good, but my Father in heaven. This same greek word "proskun" is used in John 4:24 - "they that worship him must worship him in Spirit and in truth " < This means to give reverance unto God who is Spirit, in Spirit and in truth. This is not bowing down, nor is it worshipping the pages of your bible as a holy book. We are to reverance God , who is Spirit, in Spirit and in truth. Our spiritual walk is what gives reverance to God, who is Spirit.

For instance, by speaking in tongues, we are reverancing God in Spirit. < I Corinth. 14:2 - "speaking in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto men, but unto God" - "for no man understandeth him ; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries"

So there is nothing wrong with the wise men giving respect/recognition, to the Son of God, the messiah.

 

[Mysteryman]

We also must worship God in truth. John 4:24

If we call Jesus Christ, God, are we worshipping God in truth ? God is our dear heavenly Father. Even Jesus said why do you call me good, there is none other that is good, but my Father in heaven. Why would Jesus not want us to call him good ? If Jesus is God and God is Jesus, then they would be both in the same. No difference whatsoever.

We know that God is a God that changes not. We also know that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. Which means, that he was the son of God, is the Son of God, and will always be the Son of God. God does not change. He has always been the one true God, and Father of all. He never changes ! He does not become one thing one moment, and something else at a different time. This would imply change.

God created the heavens and the earth, not Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ had a beginning, but God never had a beginning. God created man in His own image and likeness. God never had a mother, yet Jesus Christ called Mary, mother. Adam did not have a mother, so Adam never called any woman mother. Adam and Eve were at one time - One. Adam was created both male and female in the one man Adam. This is because God is ONE ! He is not two, nor is he three, nor is he interchangable.

When God talked to Moses, God told Moses that he was the - I AM that I AM. < God always establishes twice, by two. Hence - I AM that I AM. God always establishes His Word.

No man has seen God at any time. If man saw God in his corruptible body, he would be consumed by the brightness of God. Only the High Priest could go into the Holy of Holies. And God even then , didn't allow the High Priest to see the fullness of God.

The Word of God never contradicts itself. There are certain places where we read, that might give us the impression that the Word contradicts itself. But that is only because of the reasoning of mankind and lack in ability to understand the scriptures.

God was in Christ, and God dwells in us also , as Christians. Only a seed portion of the Spirit of God was in Christ. The same holds true in Christians. ( Christ IN us )

Jesus Christ was deity, in that he had the seed portion of his Father in him. We give respect and reverance to both God, who is his Father, and his Son Jesus Christ. God is Spirit -- The Holy Spirit, and we must worhsip him in Spirit and in truth. < John 4:24

 

[Bronzesnake]

Hello mysteryman

Even Jesus said why do you call me good, there is none other that is good, but my Father in heaven. Why would Jesus not want us to call him good ? If Jesus is God and God is Jesus, then they would be both in the same. No difference whatsoever

.
Jesus was not saying He was not God... He was challenging the man to think about what he had said. Jesus asked, "why do you call me good, since there is none good but God?" The man was compelled to conclude 1 of 2 things; either Jesus was not good, or He was God.
Hope this helps you out brother.

We know that God is a God that changes not. We also know that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. Which means, that he was the son of God, is the Son of God, and will always be the Son of God. God does not change. He has always been the one true God, and Father of all. He never changes ! He does not become one thing one moment, and something else at a different time. This would imply change.

Wee bit convoluted but your bible the N.W.T. does state that Jesus is "a god" which does conflict with your stance that there is only "one' God.
The thing is, that there is in fact only "one" God however He has three titles.
He has different titles for different tasks...for Example; Jesus /God had a plan of redemption for man before He ever created us. Yes, He knew exactly what was going to happen before it happened, and so He had a plan that included His own death.
Now we all know God cannot be killed, so He came in His flesh incarnation so that He could actually be killed. Also Jesus did in fact create the entire universe and everything in it and everything outside of it.
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. All things were created through Him, and apart from Him not one thing was created.

Listen brother. This isn't really that difficult.
I am a son - a brother - a father - a grandfather - an uncle - a cousin - a brother in law - etc.
And yet I am one. God the Father - God the son - God the Holy Spirit - is one.

The people who mistranslated the Holy Scriptures into the Koran and the N.W.T. are going to suffer the same fate as satan and his buddies.
How do I know this?
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

So tell me. Was God wrong when He wrote this warning?
Because if he was; then you have it in your translation as well.

I don't know how anyone who professes a love of God could be arrogant enough to assume God was not capable or powerful enough to get His book completed the exact way He intended it to be the first time. Because God would surely know that if His scriptures were wrong the first time, then He could NEVER judge any man for any sin because of His incorrect word in the first place.

We are talking about God here...God is all powerful and all knowing (let that reality sink in for a moment). God created the entire universe and all life in 6 days. He could have done it all in a nano second, but He had a specific plan in mind and 6 days fits in perfectly. So you would have me believe that God, the same God who created everything was not capable of getting His book to mankind in the exact way He wanted it? Sorry but my God is not a failure.

Some arrogant people could not fathom how God could be so complicated as to be three in one. And they were confounded because they couldn't pigeon hole God into a nice tight box that would be easy for them to comprehend and so they ignored God's specific warning from Revelation 22, and they went ahead and added and took away from God's word.
Take a look at the exact punishment for a moment.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
This verse clearly tells us that any man who adds to the scriptures will be left on earth during the seven year tribulation period. Just read the words God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book He's talking about This book, the book of Revelations. Just read what happens to people left behind in Revelations and ask yourself if you really want to be on earth during this period?

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Now this verse is even more terrifying because it clearly says anyone who takes away from His book will go to Hell!
Is it really worth taking the chance that Mr. Franz was somehow smarter than God, and got the Bible out correctly when God Himself could not?
You're gambling your eternal soul on a guy who couldn't translate a tiny verse in Hebrew or Greek.

God created the heavens and the earth, not Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ had a beginning, but God never had a beginning.

Not true according to the original unadulterated scriptures brother.

God created man in His own image and likeness. God never had a mother, yet Jesus Christ called Mary, mother. Adam did not have a mother, so Adam never called any woman mother. Adam and Eve were at one time - One. Adam was created both male and female in the one man Adam. This is because God is ONE ! He is not two, nor is he three, nor is he interchangable.

Convoluted, irrelevant thinking.
Stick to God's original Bible and you'll be fine brother.

Take care

John Bronzesnake

 

[Mysteryman]

Hello mysteryman

Even Jesus said why do you call me good, there is none other that is good, but my Father in heaven. Why would Jesus not want us to call him good ? If Jesus is God and God is Jesus, then they would be both in the same. No difference whatsoever

.
Jesus was not saying He was not God... He was challenging the man to think about what he had said. Jesus asked, "why do you call me good, since there is none good but God?" The man was compelled to conclude 1 of 2 things; either Jesus was not good, or He was God.
Hope this helps you out brother.
[quote:1asuygkb]We know that God is a God that changes not. We also know that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever. Which means, that he was the son of God, is the Son of God, and will always be the Son of God. God does not change. He has always been the one true God, and Father of all. He never changes ! He does not become one thing one moment, and something else at a different time. This would imply change.

Wee bit convoluted but your bible the N.W.T. does state that Jesus is "a god" which does conflict with your stance that there is only "one' God.
The thing is, that there is in fact only "one" God however He has three titles.
He has different titles for different tasks...for Example; Jesus /God had a plan of redemption for man before He ever created us. Yes, He knew exactly what was going to happen before it happened, and so He had a plan that included His own death.
Now we all know God cannot be killed, so He came in His flesh incarnation so that He could actually be killed. Also Jesus did in fact create the entire universe and everything in it and everything outside of it.
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. All things were created through Him, and apart from Him not one thing was created.

Listen brother. This isn't really that difficult.
I am a son - a brother - a father - a grandfather - an uncle - a cousin - a brother in law - etc.
And yet I am one. God the Father - God the son - God the Holy Spirit - is one.

The people who mistranslated the Holy Scriptures into the Koran and the N.W.T. are going to suffer the same fate as satan and his buddies.
How do I know this?
Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.

So tell me. Was God wrong when He wrote this warning?
Because if he was; then you have it in your translation as well.

I don't know how anyone who professes a love of God could be arrogant enough to assume God was not capable or powerful enough to get His book completed the exact way He intended it to be the first time. Because God would surely know that if His scriptures were wrong the first time, then He could NEVER judge any man for any sin because of His incorrect word in the first place.

We are talking about God here...God is all powerful and all knowing (let that reality sink in for a moment). God created the entire universe and all life in 6 days. He could have done it all in a nano second, but He had a specific plan in mind and 6 days fits in perfectly. So you would have me believe that God, the same God who created everything was not capable of getting His book to mankind in the exact way He wanted it? Sorry but my God is not a failure.

Some arrogant people could not fathom how God could be so complicated as to be three in one. And they were confounded because they couldn't pigeon hole God into a nice tight box that would be easy for them to comprehend and so they ignored God's specific warning from Revelation 22, and they went ahead and added and took away from God's word.
Take a look at the exact punishment for a moment.

Rev 22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
This verse clearly tells us that any man who adds to the scriptures will be left on earth during the seven year tribulation period. Just read the words God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book He's talking about This book, the book of Revelations. Just read what happens to people left behind in Revelations and ask yourself if you really want to be on earth during this period?

Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and [from] the things which are written in this book.
Now this verse is even more terrifying because it clearly says anyone who takes away from His book will go to Hell!
Is it really worth taking the chance that Mr. Franz was somehow smarter than God, and got the Bible out correctly when God Himself could not?
You're gambling your eternal soul on a guy who couldn't translate a tiny verse in Hebrew or Greek.

God created the heavens and the earth, not Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ had a beginning, but God never had a beginning.

Not true according to the original unadulterated scriptures brother.

God created man in His own image and likeness. God never had a mother, yet Jesus Christ called Mary, mother. Adam did not have a mother, so Adam never called any woman mother. Adam and Eve were at one time - One. Adam was created both male and female in the one man Adam. This is because God is ONE ! He is not two, nor is he three, nor is he interchangable.

Convoluted, irrelevant thinking.
Stick to God's original Bible and you'll be fine brother.

Take care

John Bronzesnake[/quote:1asuygkb]

Hi John

I am not JW, nor do I use the N. W. Translation. I use the KJV bible.

Quote John B. "Jesus was not saying He was not God... He was challenging the man to think about what he had said. Jesus asked, "why do you call me good, since there is none good but God?" The man was compelled to conclude 1 of 2 things; either Jesus was not good, or He was God."

The quote from Luke 18:19 points to the "One God" ---- "And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good ? none is good, save one God"

Bless

 

[JudaicChristian]

There sure is a lot of mangling of scriptures going on here. I am worn out from correcting everyone. I think I need a vacation. You guys need to focus on the difference between translation and interpretation. Also be on guard for textual corruptions. Have fun.

 

[Free]

Quote Free: "And yet you ignore the verses where Jesus accepts worship (all from the ESV):

Mat 2:2 saying, "Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him."

Mat 2:11 And going into the house they saw the child with Mary his mother, and they fell down and worshiped him. Then, opening their treasures, they offered him gifts, gold and frankincense and myrrh.

Mat 14:33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, "Truly you are the Son of God." "


Hi Free

No, in no way have I ignored anything. This part of the subject matter has not been brought up within the discussion as of yet. At least not with myself.

Precisely, not with you. I was responding, as my post shows, to someone else who did bring this up in the discussion.

 

[Mohrb]

Who's back?

Sorry... work's been crazy. I've been exhausted, and my car just got stolen.. haven't had any time for the forums in nearly a week and I see there's been a lot of discussion going on. I'm gonna try to run through and respond to the main comments real quick without turning it into a giant wall o' text. So I'll take a couple hours to respond to what I can, and if I've missed something that someone wants me to respond to, please feel free to restate it and I'll address the issue. That said: here I go. (Now, where did I leave off?)

 

[Mohrb]

Most of Jehovah 's Witnesses are not "born again"

You're welcome to this opinion. However, the steps most "born again Christians" take to be considered "born again" are also taken by anyone even considering baptism as a JW. Baptism is specifically used to publically declare one's self "born again." You can deny it just as much as I can deny that you're born again just cuz I say so. However, my opinion of your faith or your opinion of my faith are rather irrelevant.

However, I specified that "firstborn" wasn't really the point of "Firstborn of creation." Being the "preeminent of creation" still makes one part of "creation."

Not at all. It is the same as saying preeminent over creation." This is especially apparent when the verses following state that Jesus made everything that has been made.

Look up the greek:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInte ... f/col1.pdf
Pases does not mean "over" creation as if one is not part of it. Pases would be literally translated as "of every." The word specifically indicates that the subject is part OF creation... not "over (and outside of)" creation.

Considering the translation you cited uses the word "over" which has an exact opposite connotation of the original word "Pases" ("of every", or "from among")... what makes you so sure that this translation is accurate? Do you have any reference for that greek word being translated to mean "outside of" or "over" (apart from a biased group translating it to mean the opposite of it's literal meaning for the sake of supporting their presuppositions?)

I've already addressed the use of "begotten" in a previous post.

I didn't see that. Would you mind quoting it or linking me to a post where you explained how an uncreated being can be a "Begotten" son? Considering that to "beget" explicitly denotes a creation?

when you accept or deny the trinity you change how the whole picture comes across.

And when you accept or deny monotheism, the whole picture comes across also. The difference is, monotheism is directly taught throughout the bible, and explicitly taught by Jesus himself. Meanwhile, you just got a feeling that there was a trinity in spite of Jesus directly saying that his Father is the only true God (John 17:3).

I have told you many times that I am a Judaic Christian

Oo! Do you actually know much hebrew? If so, I'd love to discuss the implications of some of the hebrew texts. I'm OK with greek, but I'd love to expand my knowledge of the hebrew language.

 

[Mohrb]

The thing is, we have plenty of scripture in this thread alone that points toward Jesus acknowledging His deity and writers referring Him as God.

Where?

In areas where you are putting aside this evidence or where the NWT rewords it to dethrone Him, what can I say?

What can I say where translations like the KJV have reworded verses to enthrone Jesus? Intentionally replacing the name of YHWH as the title "lord" in order to confuse people with Jesus' title of Kurios? "translating" verses like Hebrews 1:9 to mean something entirely opposite to the original translation? Changing Colossians 1:15 to the firstborn "over" creation instead of the firstborn "Of" creation in order to completely change the meaning? Are you sure that the KJV has the proper translation simply because it's the KJV? Is the NWT necessarily the one that translated it improperly simply because it doesn't agree with the preconceptions pushed by the KJV?

It seems you might be toggling between what I am saying defines a Christian and who will be spend eternity in the presence of God. I believe very much that you need to accept that God lowered Himself and made the ultimate sacrifice for your sins to find salvation

Likewise I believe that you should accept that God can not die, and therefore sent his Son. This was foreshadowed when God asked Abraham to sacrifice his son, Isaac. It wasn't Abraham that sacrificed himself. Likewise, God sacrificed his Son.

Why should I ignore 1 Corinthians 8:6 "There is for us only one God, the Father" ... it's the same in every translation I've read. Do you consider it a mistranslation? is there any other interpretation beyond the obvious? Or should I ignore the bible's teachings because of your gut feeling?

Thanks for responding! I know every time you log on, you have a number of responses from different directions. And you're always pleasant to engage with.

Thanks again Mike. You're always pleasant as well. Trust me, your appreciation is one of the major reasons I'm able to try to stay so civil. (although this clump of posts are getting a bit rushed, so they may end up sounding more "blunt." ... I really don't intend them to be so if they seem gritty)

 

[Mohrb]

I thought you may have been making that point but I didn't want to jump to a conclusion since it really has no merit. There is no decision on whether or not to use the article--if the article is there it is used. In John 1:1, the article just isn't there, just as it isn't there over 280 times in the NT.

You might want to check the early coptic manuscripts. Greek has a specific definite article... "ho logos" was with "ton theon" and "(no definite article) theo" was "ho logos." ... the definite article appears everywhere ELSE in the verse, therefore it's absence isn't an accident. However, you're right, there isn't an indefinite article there... but that's because greek has no indefinite article. However, coptic does have an indefinite article. And Coptic manuscripts (I believe from the 1st century) specifically has an indefinite article, and specifically uses the indefinite article in John 1:1c.

That is the problem. Everyone thinks they have the True Truth, and condemns everyone else for not having the same truth as they do. Truth is individual.

I don't agree that different things can be "true" for different people... that invalidates the concept of "truth." Only the truth is "True." The trick is how to figure out what is "true" and what isn't. The argument that "I believe this, therefore it's true" is fallacious. The argument "The majority of people believe this, therefore it's true" is fallacious. The argument that "we've believed this for 1870 years, therefore it's true" is fallacious. If we're to assume that Jesus taught the truth... the only thing that should matter is what Jesus actually taught.

As long as Jesus said "The Father is greater than I" and that the Father is "The only true God" and that he does nothing by his own will, but only does the will of the Father and that the Father is the only one deserving of praise... it really doesn't matter how many people "have a feeling" that he's wrong. Truth isn't defined by people's feelings. If Jesus said that the Father is the only true God... I believe him.

You guys have got Mormans and JW's on the brain. There are about 8 to 10 denominations that do not believe in Trinitarianism. P.S. The word "Godhead" was added to scriptures, it was not in the original text.

That's because this thread is originally specifically about JWs. Specifically why JWs should "convert to Christianity" because the original poster did not believe that JWs were Christians. Which is why I came in, to defend us... just because we don't believe that Jesus is the same being as his Father doesn't mean we don't do our best to follow Jesus' teachings. I really do think it would be prudent for this group to begin a separate "trinity" discussion, since so much of this topic is dedicated to that. Then I'd also like to see another thread for the rest of the questions/comments people would like to make about JWs, and have this thread die. It was just started on bad terms (although the conversation's been just fine since then).

But, yea, MDO, I definitely would like to talk to you more.

 

[Mohrb]

The following is from
http://www.everystudent.com/wires/whodoyousay.html

:biglol

Based on 0 comprehension of the phrase "ego eimi."

Note John the Baptist's quote at Matthew 3:11 "I, for my part, baptize YOU with water because of YOUR repentance; but the one coming after me is stronger than I am, whose sandals I am not fit to take off. That one will baptize YOU people with holy spirit and with fire"

... is this a claim to be Ayah Asher Ayah? (proper capitalization?)

Honestly... the "I am" argument is EASILY in the top 5 worst pro-trinitarian arguments I've ever seen. Quite possibly the worst one period considering that "ego eimi" is such a common phrase used throughout the bible... but this ONE time, it must mean a claim of divinity... yet it never means it any other time anyone else says it.

 

[Mohrb]

Eherm... So, what do you say, guys? almost 20 pages in and there's a bunch of conversations going on all over the place. Would you guys be OK if we split this off into a couple different threads to keep the thoughts a bit more organized?

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=47705
Thread for the basic "Are JWs Christian/what defines Christianity" conversation (minus the legitimacy of the trinity itself)

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=47706
Thread to discuss the trinity's legitimacy.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=47707
Thread for the cross/idolatry/saints discussion.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=47708
Thread for when people find a difference in translation and would like to discuss which translation is most appropriate (for example John 1:1, hebrews 1:9/psalms 45:6, colossians 1:15 discussions)

Were there any other major conversations that wouldn't fit in the above threads?

 

[Mike]

And when you accept or deny monotheism, the whole picture comes across also. The difference is, monotheism is directly taught throughout the bible, and explicitly taught by Jesus himself. Meanwhile, you just got a feeling that there was a trinity in spite of Jesus directly saying that his Father is the only true God (John 17:3).

Chris, it's good to see you back.

The Trinity is not polytheism. It's difficult enough to get your arms around as a Christian, but this isn't a stumbling block. I don't know if I could worship a god that was so simple, even I in my human condition could understand Him completely. For someone like yourself who hasn't accepted it, I imagine it's so much more difficult. This is 1 God in three persons. They are All One in and with Each Other.

Isaiah wrote about the Trinity.
Isaiah 48 "16 Come ye near unto me, hear ye this; I have not spoken in secret from the beginning; from the time that it was, there am I: and now the Lord GOD, and his Spirit, hath sent me. 17 Thus saith the LORD, thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel"

The thing is, we have plenty of scripture in this thread alone that points toward Jesus acknowledging His deity and writers referring Him as God.

Where?

Come, now Chris. There have been very many examples given, but your translation has altered the text. But I'll give a few.

Take for example Jesus’ words in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.†When first encountered, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, when we look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement, “For a good work we stone thee not; replied the Jews, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makes thyself God.†(John 10:33). Now we see an actual claim. The Jews understood Jesus’ statement to be a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews by saying, “I did not claim to be God.†That indicates Jesus was truly saying He was God by declaring, “I and the Father are one†(John 10:30).

John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, "I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. " Again, in response, the Jews take up stones in an attempt to stone Jesus (John 8:59). Why would the Jews want to stone Jesus if He hadn’t said something they believed to be blasphemous, namely, a claim to be God? John repeatedly tells us of the Lord's connection to "I Am". See John: 4:26, 8:24, 8:28, 8:58,and 13:19. The Apostle Paul tells us that Jesus "..is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." (Colossians 1:15-17)

What can I say where translations like the KJV have reworded verses to enthrone Jesus? Intentionally replacing the name of YHWH as the title "lord" in order to confuse people with Jesus' title of Kurios? "translating" verses like Hebrews 1:9 to mean something entirely opposite to the original translation? Changing Colossians 1:15 to the firstborn "over" creation instead of the firstborn "Of" creation in order to completely change the meaning? Are you sure that the KJV has the proper translation simply because it's the KJV? Is the NWT necessarily the one that translated it improperly simply because it doesn't agree with the preconceptions pushed by the KJV?

The translation you are questioning was painstakingly translated. I personally use the NIV, but both were carefully sculpted. It wasn't until the 1800's that Russel made the changes to His status.

Why should I ignore 1 Corinthians 8:6 "There is for us only one God, the Father" ... it's the same in every translation I've read. Do you consider it a mistranslation? is there any other interpretation beyond the obvious? Or should I ignore the bible's teachings because of your gut feeling

Paul draws a contrast between false deities and the Father and Son. Whereas the pagan deities are false, there is to us “one God, the Fatherâ€, and “one Lord, Jesus Christâ€.
He maintains a distinction of Personality between the Father and Son by assigning a different title of Deity to each, while at the same time distinguishing both from all creation, each in a different way. Whereas the Father is portrayed as the source of all things, Jesus Christ, the Logos, operates in an intermediate role in both the original creation (John 1:3) as well as the new creation. Jesus said that, “no man comes to the Father, but by me†(John 14:6), thereby portraying himself as the intermediate agency of true Deity.

(although this clump of posts are getting a bit rushed, so they may end up sounding more "blunt." ... I really don't intend them to be so if they seem gritty)

Not gritty at all. Good to have you back.

Mike

 

[nadab]

Most of Jehovah 's Witnesses are not "born again"

You're welcome to this opinion. However, the steps most "born again Christians" take to be considered "born again" are also taken by anyone even considering baptism as a JW. Baptism is specifically used to publically declare one's self "born again." You can deny it just as much as I can deny that you're born again just cuz I say so. However, my opinion of your faith or your opinion of my faith are rather irrelevant.

To be "born again" means that a person has been selected for the heavenly calling by Jehovah God.(Matt 20:23. 2 Thess 2:13; see the 2/8, 1988 Awake!, pg 26, The Bible's Viewpoint - Who Are "Born Again"?) Jesus used this expression twice in speaking with Nicodemus, at John 3:3 and 7 and said that "unless anyone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."(John 3:3)

Jesus further said that "unless anyone is born from water and spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."(John 3:5) The apostle Paul calls it a "new creation" (2 Cor 5:17) and the apostle Peter a "new birth."(1 Pet 1:3, 23) These are the ones that Jesus made a "covenant for a kingdom" with on the night of Nisan 14, 33 C.E.(Luke 22:28, 29)

The vast majority of Jehovah's Witnesses have not been chosen for the heavenly calling as "partakers".(Heb 3:1) Of over seven million Witnesses around the earth, only a little over ten thousand partook of the emblems at the Memorial in 2009. Apart from Jesus Christ, only 144,000 individuals are "bought from among mankind as firstfruits to God and to the Lamb" (Rev 14:4) and are thus "born again".

And when you say "the steps most "born again Christians" take to be considered "born again" are also taken by anyone even considering baptism as a JW ", clearly indicates that you are not fully inline with the "truth" if you consider yourself as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. This is what the churches teach and is definitely part of false religious teachings.

These teach that all Christians are "born again", and will go to heaven. This is not what the Bible teaches. Anyone teaching contrary to what is the "truth" is subject to being reproved by the local body of elders, for the apostle Paul wrote to Timothy to "command certain ones not to teach different doctrine."(1 Tim 1:3)

And to say that "my opinion of your faith or your opinion of my faith" is a dead give-away that you are only associated with Jehovah's Witnesses, but is not one who fully understands what the Bible teaches. This borders on what the churches teach as to each one having their own "faith". Jehovah's Witnesses are not divided, as the churches are. Those who are truly loyal to Jehovah God are members of the "one faith."(Eph 4:5)

Baptism does not cause one to be "born again," but is the "request made to God for a good conscience."(1 Pet 3:21) This means that a person is now asking Jehovah God to forgive them for past sins, clearing the slate, and wish now to have a clean conscience before him by adhering to his holy laws and principles as one of Jehovah's Witnesses. These have left behind their "former course of conduct" and have been "made new in the force actuating your mind."(Eph 4:22, 23)

 

[jasoncran]

thanks nadab i was wondering if he was actually fully commited as a jw . his comments made me doubt. i used to be one.

i always suspected that he wasnt fully immersed in the truth. i wasnt alone in seeing that.

 

[nadab]

thanks nadab i was wondering if he was actually fully commited as a jw . his comments made me doubt. i used to be one.

i always suspected that he wasnt fully immersed in the truth. i wasnt alone in seeing that.

Hello Jasoncran,

You use the expression "fully immersed in the truth". Am I to understand that you feel that Jehovah's Witnesses have "the truth" ?(John 8:32) Was there something that "unsettled" you, causing you to "leave" Jehovah ?(Jer 2:13)

 

[jasoncran]

no, i am speaking in your terms.

i do that so that you will understand as that is merely a habit. mohrb denies that pov when he is here. as if you take note that he never calls the jw's as the truth. i do it more then he does.

odd for a beleiver in the jw doctrine

he is the only one that doenst call the jw as the "truth". and has some more liberal and less dogamtic approach to the jw.

that is what i was commenting on.

all others that are baptized say that that have the truth , and that comment you made is what the tract society preaches, all those that believe in jehovah are united.

mohrb has never stated that.

 

[Mohrb]

Take for example Jesus’ words in John 10:30, “I and the Father are one.†When first encountered, this might not seem to be a claim to be God. However, when we look at the Jews’ reaction to His statement, “For a good work we stone thee not; replied the Jews, but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makes thyself God.†(John 10:33). Now we see an actual claim. The Jews understood Jesus’ statement to be a claim to be God. In the following verses, Jesus never corrects the Jews by saying, “I did not claim to be God.†That indicates Jesus was truly saying He was God by declaring, “I and the Father are one†(John 10:30).

John 8:58 is another example. Jesus declared, "I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am. " Again, in response, the Jews take up stones in an attempt to stone Jesus (John 8:59). Why would the Jews want to stone Jesus if He hadn’t said something they believed to be blasphemous, namely, a claim to be God?

You realize those guys REALLY liked stoning people? Honestly. If a child talked back to their parents, they could be stoned to death. If a person claimed to have existed before his human birth, that would be a fairly clear reason they'd stone someone. Anyone claiming to have a closer relationship to God than them would be considered a blasphemer... certainly to claim to directly be God's son. The fact that they wanted to stone him doesn't prove something more than what he was saying.

The translation you are questioning was painstakingly translated. I personally use the NIV, but both were carefully sculpted. It wasn't until the 1800's that Russel made the changes to His status.

I'm sure all translations were painstakingly translated. However, every translation is exactly that... a translation, an interpretation. Just because the NWT translates "Pases" as "of" whereas the KJV translates it as "over" doesn't necessarily mean the NWT is the one that translated it improperly. IMO, the deciding factor should be the grammar... the literal translation (considering context). Not "whether or not it agrees with the doctrines set forth by Constantine's council."

Did the NWT "change" the text to create a mistranslation? Or, did it "restore" the text to the original meaning before it was altered by previous translations? It's an important question to ask.