How Are We Made Right With God?

[Adullam]

The people who wrote those verses actually experienced what they wrote about. Their message is a testimony for others to seek for and struggle for...not just claim for themselves as a done deal. We do a dis-service to the gospel by laying it out as a dogma to read and claim as our own without the process of the cross. Our lives are to be a testimony through a living experience of God. Otherwise we merely pay lip service.

Our faith is rooted in the gospel, in things we did not see or experience.

We didn’t see Jesus or talk to him. We didn’t see him raised from the dead. But Jesus pronounced a blessing on us, saying, ‘Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe.’ John 20:29 We are blessed. Is that a done deal? Yes.

There are various gifts, and various levels of faith and understanding. As living branches we continue to grow in the knowledge of God; in faith, hope, love and understanding.

What else is a done deal? Jesus said anyone who enters by me will be saved and he will go in and out and find pasture.
I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. John 10:9

Sure enough it is so. Pasture to us is the word of God. It's food. It's what we live and breath. As it is written, 'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.' Mt. 4:4

‘You are already made clean by the word I have spoken to you.’ John 15:3 Done deal? Yes.

But then he said, abide in me. If a man does not abide in me he is cast forth as a branch and withers. John 15:4-6

In that respect you are right. Jesus said if you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love. John 15:10

There are the things that are done deals and then there are the things that we as the sons of the kingdom do. To keep things in order, first, Jesus taught the disciples, then he sent them out into the world to preach the good news.

The question which is being put to the forum, as I understand it, is how are we made right with God in the first place? How are we justified? We are justified apart from the law by faith in the Son of God. If we abide in him and we keep his commandments, then we will abide in his love. Then we will endure. 'For we share in Christ if only we hold our first confidence to the end'. Hebrews 3:14

There are three things that attest to the fact that we have eternal life - his teachings (his word), his sacrifice (his blood) and the Spirit of truth (besides understanding, we tend to have an aversion to lies). These three agree.

Are we justified through reading? Is it not possible to give mere lip service to God?

The problem lies with the word "believe" and what we think that means. At every turn there seems to be a way to minimize the depth of the gospel so that a casual approach is sufficient for God's purposes. We need to be convinced the gospel is just not that easy. But we fight the process every inch of the way. We have the easy rendering...believe you are a saint...and presto...you are one. That is the way it is seen by many.

Is anyone interested in the truth anymore????

 

[MarkT]

Are we justified through reading? Is it not possible to give mere lip service to God?

The problem lies with the word "believe" and what we think that means. At every turn there seems to be a way to minimize the depth of the gospel so that a casual approach is sufficient for God's purposes. We need to be convinced the gospel is just not that easy. But we fight the process every inch of the way. We have the easy rendering...believe you are a saint...and presto...you are one. That is the way it is seen by many.

Is anyone interested in the truth anymore????

Faith comes from what is heard or read.

Romans 10:17 RSV
So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ.

Galatians 3:2 RSV
Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?

Galatians 3:5 RSV
Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith?

It's really a matter of understanding - if you seek it like silver and search for it like hidden treasure. Happy is the man who finds wisdom and the man who gets understanding for the gain from it is better than silver and its profit better than gold. Do you understand this?

If you’re called to be a saint, then you’re a saint. You have no choice in the matter. Paul didn’t say, ‘sorry I don’t want to be a saint‘. He didn’t work to be a saint either. People don’t become saints by reading the Bible anymore than Jesus became the Son of God by reading the Scriptures. If they are called to be saints, then they will read the Bible and they will get insight, and they will get wisdom as it is written, Isaiah 29:18 RSV 'In that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book, and out of their gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see'.

According to the prophecy, here we are, eyes open, awake.

 

[JamesG]

.

Jasoncrans

Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same God. The question is, what do they think of Jesus Christ? Most conservative Christians believe that he is one of the persons of a Trinitarian God, a concept that is not understood in the same way by all conservative Christians. The Jews believe that he was just a man no different than any other. The Muslims believe that he was a prophet. And since you want to add the Jehovah’s Witnesses into the equation, a group of conservative Christians, they believe like the Jews concerning God. But they hold Jesus Christ in very high esteem as the redeemer of humankind and the King of the Kingdom of God, in agreement with most conservative Christians. A much higher esteem than the Muslims.

If you want to split hairs, then maybe you should consider Judaism. The Hebrews were specifically chosen by God. They do not believe that God is a Trinity. And neither do the Old Testament writers except through interpretation. And the Muslims agree with the Jews and the Old Testament writings. The only reason that we believe in Jesus Christ is because of what the New Testament writers say about him and how certain New Testament writers understand certain parts of the Old Testament that they believe relate to him. And the New Testament writers never specifically taught a Trinitarian concept. Evidence from the Old writings for a Trinitarian concept is the result of interpretation.

From that perspective, it is the Christian that believes differently, that believes in a different God. So be careful who you judge and how you judge them, lest the judgment come back and slap you in the face. It is OK to disagree with the understanding of reality held by those who are not Christians. But do not judge them. There is plenty of agreement in how Jews and Christians and Muslims understand God. When you judge their God to be a different God, you may be judging your own God in the process. We are not God and we understand very little about God. When you presume to think that you understand God or anything about him, memorize this, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.†(Isaiah 55:8-9)

You have been given a revelation, through the Holy Spirit presumably, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Life of those of us who believe. Leave it at that. If a Jew or a Muslim asks you, give an answer for the hope that is in you. And do precisely as Peter instructs. Wait to be asked. Those are the ones who God has sent to you. Don’t waste your words on those who do not want to hear. And don’t even think of including the Acts account of the eunuch in this matter. That situation was a special case as is seen by the context.

And incidentally, I believe that the New Testament does give evidence that Jesus is a person of God, such as in Acts chapter 2. I just don’t believe that God is merely a Trinity. He is a multi-personed God. And I have reasons to believe that.

There is a Moslem on this forum. He is here for a purpose. Do not presume you can read his heart or his mind. He may be here to proselytize or he may be here because he is a seeker of truth. You do not know any more than what he himself reveals, and even that may hide his true intent. So if he asks for a reason, reveal the reason and no more. We must be ready to give an answer by walking according to the Spirit of God and exercising the wisdom that comes through the Spirit. Spouting forth our own interpretations of reality helps no one. Judgment of the heart belongs to God. Even the Catholics, especially after Vatican II, do not presume to judge anyone, though they believe that their Priests, as stand ins for God, can absolve their own, and only their own, in relation to sin.

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.

Francisdesales

““Again, I am impressed with your experiences that you have opened yourself to...â€â€

Don’t be too impressed, these experiences didn’t lead me to become a Catholic. (smiley face) But my experiences with the various denominations of Christianity did cause me to be more understanding of the differences and have a greater tolerance of these differences. And there is no better way to learn about Christianity than to experience the various denominations first hand as they currently exist, and to understand their history from their own perspective. And LA, the proverbial melting pot, is conducive to such an experience.

““Overall, I am open to other people's opinions on the Liturgy, but I understand that "how we pray is how we believe". Perhaps the turning of the priest to face the people has lessened the idea in people's mind about the reverence due the Eucharist and what is actually taking place... Thus, anything that would make the Mass to appear more holy and reverent would be a good thing, if done with proper explanation and without scandal to the "weaker minded". We must not become overly fixated on rituals, as that can be idolatry itself. They are all meant to move the mind to God Himself. On the other hand, Lex orandi, Lex credendi.â€â€

I agree.

And yet, Lex orandi, Lex credendi, is something that is a bit negative to me simply because it is a law that shouldn’t be a law. The only true Law is what God has already given us in the Bible. And if it is a Law in the sense of the Law of Gravity, then it is a Law according to a human understanding. There is definitely a relationship between prayer and belief. But the relationship between prayer and belief should be the experience of life as we walk according to the Spirit of God. If we need a law, it often implies that it is because we are not walking according to the Spirit; but rather according to our own mind, or worse, according to our own flesh. Keeping the letter of the Law was and is the undoing of many in Judaism. And keeping the letter of a law is the undoing of many in Islam and Christianity as well. Those who understand the true nature of the Law of God are more apt to accept Jesus Christ for who he is.

It is the law of prayer in the Catholic Church that is probably the one thing that will forever keep me out of the Catholic Church simply because I do not agree with everything in that law of the Catholic Church. The separation is not on my side. I am tolerant. And the disagreements are not that drastic to me. But the Catholic Church is not so tolerant. The situation is like modern pharmaceutical medicines. There always seems to be an unfortunate side effect. And because of what you were impressed about, “your experiences that you have opened yourself to...â€, experiences that have no doubt had some influence on how I understand reality today, including my ability to be relatively tolerant, I am destined to be on the outside looking in as far as the Catholic Church is concerned.

With Vatican II, the Catholic Church moved in the right direction, IMHO. At least I am now considered a separated brother. But that is still a far cry from being on the inside and really has no practical value other than being a step in the right direction. I will be long gone from here before the next step is taken, if it is ever taken.

Nevertheless, I want to leave the matter of Sacraments and Liturgy for the moment because I want to discuss something else that is of more importance to me as it relates to the Catholic understanding of reality. Besides, this thread appears to have gained new life and we should let it run its course.

I appreciate your input, perhaps particularly since you have experience teaching your understanding of the Catholic understanding. And your understanding is a little different than what I usually run into. Under the circumstances, I think that we need a thread that deals with Catholic understanding. I will call it “Some Catholic Conceptsâ€. Please look for me over there.

JamesG

 

[jasoncran]

.

Jasoncrans

Christians, Jews, and Muslims all believe in the same God. The question is, what do they think of Jesus Christ? Most conservative Christians believe that he is one of the persons of a Trinitarian God, a concept that is not understood in the same way by all conservative Christians. The Jews believe that he was just a man no different than any other. The Muslims believe that he was a prophet. And since you want to add the Jehovah’s Witnesses into the equation, a group of conservative Christians, they believe like the Jews concerning God. But they hold Jesus Christ in very high esteem as the redeemer of humankind and the King of the Kingdom of God, in agreement with most conservative Christians. A much higher esteem than the Muslims.

If you want to split hairs, then maybe you should consider Judaism. The Hebrews were specifically chosen by God. They do not believe that God is a Trinity. And neither do the Old Testament writers except through interpretation. And the Muslims agree with the Jews and the Old Testament writings. The only reason that we believe in Jesus Christ is because of what the New Testament writers say about him and how certain New Testament writers understand certain parts of the Old Testament that they believe relate to him. And the New Testament writers never specifically taught a Trinitarian concept. Evidence from the Old writings for a Trinitarian concept is the result of interpretation.

From that perspective, it is the Christian that believes differently, that believes in a different God. So be careful who you judge and how you judge them, lest the judgment come back and slap you in the face. It is OK to disagree with the understanding of reality held by those who are not Christians. But do not judge them. There is plenty of agreement in how Jews and Christians and Muslims understand God. When you judge their God to be a different God, you may be judging your own God in the process. We are not God and we understand very little about God. When you presume to think that you understand God or anything about him, memorize this, “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.†(Isaiah 55:8-9)

You have been given a revelation, through the Holy Spirit presumably, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Life of those of us who believe. Leave it at that. If a Jew or a Muslim asks you, give an answer for the hope that is in you. And do precisely as Peter instructs. Wait to be asked. Those are the ones who God has sent to you. Don’t waste your words on those who do not want to hear. And don’t even think of including the Acts account of the eunuch in this matter. That situation was a special case as is seen by the context.

And incidentally, I believe that the New Testament does give evidence that Jesus is a person of God, such as in Acts chapter 2. I just don’t believe that God is merely a Trinity. He is a multi-personed God. And I have reasons to believe that.

There is a Moslem on this forum. He is here for a purpose. Do not presume you can read his heart or his mind. He may be here to proselytize or he may be here because he is a seeker of truth. You do not know any more than what he himself reveals, and even that may hide his true intent. So if he asks for a reason, reveal the reason and no more. We must be ready to give an answer by walking according to the Spirit of God and exercising the wisdom that comes through the Spirit. Spouting forth our own interpretations of reality helps no one. Judgment of the heart belongs to God. Even the Catholics, especially after Vatican II, do not presume to judge anyone, though they believe that their Priests, as stand ins for God, can absolve their own, and only their own, in relation to sin.

JamesG

it is in err that you assume that i judge for i'am of heberew lineage,and most of that side doenst know the lord. but the truth cant be denied. i was also raised in the jw doctrine and know what they teach.

 

[jasoncran]

the jw's dont call those outside the their"truth' christians. but rather followers of christendom and decieved by the devil.

 

[francisdesales]

.

Francisdesales

““Again, I am impressed with your experiences that you have opened yourself to...â€â€

Don’t be too impressed, these experiences didn’t lead me to become a Catholic. (smiley face) But my experiences with the various denominations of Christianity did cause me to be more understanding of the differences and have a greater tolerance of these differences. And there is no better way to learn about Christianity than to experience the various denominations first hand as they currently exist, and to understand their history from their own perspective. And LA, the proverbial melting pot, is conducive to such an experience.

I agree, experiencing various aspects of other people's faith breeds tolerance to a degree. I think we will still regard how we follow God to be "more correct" than others, but that doesn't need to lead to triumphantism or the degradation of other people's experience of God. My being impressed is not that it would lead you to Catholicism, but that you appear to have a working knowledge of the history of mysticism and Catholic liturgy, which is rare on these threads...

.

““Overall, I am open to other people's opinions on the Liturgy, but I understand that "how we pray is how we believe". Perhaps the turning of the priest to face the people has lessened the idea in people's mind about the reverence due the Eucharist and what is actually taking place... Thus, anything that would make the Mass to appear more holy and reverent would be a good thing, if done with proper explanation and without scandal to the "weaker minded". We must not become overly fixated on rituals, as that can be idolatry itself. They are all meant to move the mind to God Himself. On the other hand, Lex orandi, Lex credendi.â€â€

I agree.

And yet, Lex orandi, Lex credendi, is something that is a bit negative to me simply because it is a law that shouldn’t be a law. The only true Law is what God has already given us in the Bible.

And here is where your Protestant background tends to force you to overlook something important - the idea that the "only true Law is what God gave us in the Bible". The Bible itself never makes this claim for itself - it is just PRESUMED...

Judaism never was this way, nor was Catholicism. Oral Traditions were considered given by God to Moses on Sinai and were authoritative, as were the Written Traditions. With the writing of the Mishna, these oral traditions were written down, part of their usefulness in correctly interpretating the written Word, the Sacred Scriptures. Having a set of Scriptures requires a proper set of interpretations. It was the same with the Apostles' understanding (who were jews), such as in Galatians 1. Christian history has shown quite vividly how these Scriptures can be mis-interpreted to mean something opposite of its intent. As such, both Judaism and Christianity requires a living interpretation - and thus, Lex orandi, lex credendi is a valid means of identifying what the Church believes about those Scriptures and Traditions passed down from the Apostles.

.

And if it is a Law in the sense of the Law of Gravity, then it is a Law according to a human understanding.

All, including the WRITING of Scriptures, is according to human understanding. But the belief here is that God guides valid interpreters of Scriptures, whether Judaism or in Christianity.

.

There is definitely a relationship between prayer and belief. But the relationship between prayer and belief should be the experience of life as we walk according to the Spirit of God. If we need a law, it often implies that it is because we are not walking according to the Spirit; but rather according to our own mind, or worse, according to our own flesh.

Which "Law" are you talking about? Canonical Law? Even in the NT, we understand that Paul is establishing a standard of worship for others to follow. He suggests that people not speak out of turn during worship, that women do not teach, that certain clothes are worn/not worn.

Remember, the first Christians were Jews, well-versed in proper standards and behaviors of worship.

Keeping the letter of the Law was and is the undoing of many in Judaism. And keeping the letter of a law is the undoing of many in Islam and Christianity as well. Those who understand the true nature of the Law of God are more apt to accept Jesus Christ for who he is.

The "letter of the Law" is not the same thing as HAVING a law, my friend. The Torah is the means by which Jews come to respond to God. Read the Mishna, the "Ethics of the Fathers", for example. You will find a deep love of Scriptures, charity, and worship, that is not merely "attempting to fulfill the letter". The Prophets clearly teach the oral tradition that men are to love God from their hearts THROUGH this Law.

It is the same for Christians. We fast, give alms, pray, etc., at directed times as part of a "law" that certainly does NOT HAVE to be a mere "following the letter of the Law". Devout, pious Catholics love God and respond to their neighbors by this law, for example, during Lent. Can it BECOME a mere "following the letter"? Sure. But the Lord God gave man a Law with the INTENT that THROUGH it, man responds to God out of Love. Thus, the Torah is so highly venerated in written and in oral traditions.

.

It is the law of prayer in the Catholic Church that is probably the one thing that will forever keep me out of the Catholic Church simply because I do not agree with everything in that law of the Catholic Church.

Once a person identifies the Church that Christ established is now called the Catholic Church, the person will soon realize that one must transform HIMSELF, not that the Church must transform to fit the "sign of the times". Men are called to transform - the Church calls men to do so as it preaches truth in our society.

The separation is not on my side. I am tolerant. And the disagreements are not that drastic to me. But the Catholic Church is not so tolerant.

Truth has a tendency to be intolerant of false teachings. The issue is how to present truth to those people who are relativistic in nature without offending their sensibilities. Perhaps this is not possible, and we must pray that the Spirit of God does open the relativistic man's mind to the notion that there is truth and that one must learn to change according to that truth.

With Vatican II, the Catholic Church moved in the right direction, IMHO. At least I am now considered a separated brother. But that is still a far cry from being on the inside and really has no practical value other than being a step in the right direction. I will be long gone from here before the next step is taken, if it is ever taken.

You are part of the Church by your baptism, it is a long-overdue recognition.

But again, who needs to change, the teachings of the Church to suit modern society's sensibilities, or men in society with modern sensibilities?

.

Nevertheless, I want to leave the matter of Sacraments and Liturgy for the moment because I want to discuss something else that is of more importance to me as it relates to the Catholic understanding of reality. Besides, this thread appears to have gained new life and we should let it run its course.

I appreciate your input, perhaps particularly since you have experience teaching your understanding of the Catholic understanding. And your understanding is a little different than what I usually run into. Under the circumstances, I think that we need a thread that deals with Catholic understanding. I will call it “Some Catholic Conceptsâ€. Please look for me over there.

JamesG

I believe my understanding is more in tune with ancient Catholicism, rather than the more recent Catholic "ghetto" mentality of "us vs them". I think Vatican 2 was a step in the right direction to recoup this attitude. Time will tell where it leads us.

PM me when and where you are posting, so I can respond. I know this forum has rules about Catholic discussion, so we may have to either do PM discussion, or go to the Debate forum, just to speak whatever we want and not be interrupted, without actually debating.

Regards,

joe

 

[JamesG]

.
Jasoncran

I am intrigued. I thought that I remembered that you had been in the JW’s. That accounts for your belief that Judaism and Islam, and even the JW’s believe in a different God. The JW attitude continues, just in a different venue. My Dad is a JW, but he is unusual in that he has never denied that I am as legitimate a believer as he is himself.

Are you saying that you began as a Jew? If so, that is so unusual. Even that Christian with a Jewish background that just died (Moishe Rosen who started Jews for Jesus) was only able to achieve some measure of success among the Jews by starting a hybrid Judeo-Christian group. And what he did created a lot of controversy from both Judaism and Christianity. Not many Jews, or Muslims for that matter, convert to Christianity, let alone to Jesus Christ.

Tell me a little about your personal history. I am fascinated by unusual histories, maybe because my own history is unusual.

JamesG

 

[jasoncran]

.
Jasoncran

I am intrigued. I thought that I remembered that you had been in the JW’s. That accounts for your belief that Judaism and Islam, and even the JW’s believe in a different God. The JW attitude continues, just in a different venue. My Dad is a JW, but he is unusual in that he has never denied that I am as legitimate a believer as he is himself.
i am by lineage, not by faith. only my dad was raised in the temple. my last name carries the hebrew lineage. the jw most are very strict in that stuff, while i cant speak for all jw's , its my expericience that the tract society pushes the idea that they have the correct interpration only. i'm not agianst various groups that accept the basics, but once you deny a truine God and the nature of Jesus, how can you call yourself a christian.otherwise the mormons are one, add the muslim as well and the hebrew all are on thier way to heaven. did not jesus say i am the way, and theres also for there's but one name under heavean.
Are you saying that you began as a Jew? If so, that is so unusual. Even that Christian with a Jewish background that just died (Moishe Rosen who started Jews for Jesus) was only able to achieve some measure of success among the Jews by starting a hybrid Judeo-Christian group. And what he did created a lot of controversy from both Judaism and Christianity. Not many Jews, or Muslims for that matter, convert to Christianity, let alone to Jesus Christ.

Tell me a little about your personal history. I am fascinated by unusual histories, maybe because my own history is unusual.

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.
Jasoncran

Almost missed your response. It kind of got hidden within your copy of my post.

Were you raised in the JW’s? If not, what was your faith before converting to the JW’s? How did you come to believe that the JW’s anti-Trinitarianism is in error? The JW’s originally divided from what is today called Seventh-day Adventism. They are the Trinitarian branch of the division. What do you think of them? Why do you think that Trinitarianism should be the standard by which to judge a Christian denomination as non-Christian?

JamesG

 

[jasoncran]

.
Jasoncran

Almost missed your response. It kind of got hidden within your copy of my post.

Were you raised in the JW’s? If not, what was your faith before converting to the JW’s? How did you come to believe that the JW’s anti-Trinitarianism is in error? The JW’s originally divided from what is today called Seventh-day Adventism. They are the Trinitarian branch of the division. What do you think of them? Why do you think that Trinitarianism should be the standard by which to judge a Christian denomination as non-Christian?

JamesG

i was raised in it. because of what the bible says about God. for when we deny the diety of christ, then how the sin debt be paid.

 

[JamesG]

.
Jasoncran

Did you catch how easy it is to see the Deity of Christ in Acts chapter 2 of the New World Translation, because of the practice of putting the name Jehovah in the place of Lord in Old Testament quotes?

Does someone’s lack of understanding of the Deity of Christ make Christ not Divine or incapable of being a propitiation or a redeemer? What about those who believe in the Deity of Christ, but either understand the Trinity in a different way than you do, or understands that God is more than a Trinity numerically?

JamesG

 

[jasoncran]

first point to the verse in acts 2. i dont have the nwt memorised.

do you have respect for st.augustine's point on the trinity?

 

[JamesG]

.
Jasoncran

Peter's dissertation in Acts 2 beginning at verse 14 and ending at verse 36. If you still have a NWT, check it out.

There are three different "orthodox" versions of the Trinitarian concept. Augustine is well respected in Western Christianity, but he is something of a lesser light to those in Eastern Christianity. And one reason is his understanding of the Trinity. It is not a matter of a lack of respect for Augustine. It is more a matter that the Eastern Christians, and I as well, see something different. Not that I agree with the Trinitarian concept of the Eastern Orthodox Church.

JamesG

 

[Vic C.]

off topic?

Peter's dissertation in Acts 2 beginning at verse 14 and ending at verse 36. If you still have a NWT, check it out.

Why the NWT? Please, not the NWT. My KJV is quite clear where it start also.

Acts 2:14 But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words:


The KJV is also quite clear on the Deity of Christ. But I also prefer the YLT for it's strict adherence to the "word for word" school of translating.

 

[JamesG]

.
Vic C

You’re right. This is off topic on this thread. But how many threads actually stay on topic?

Don’t judge the NWT too harshly just because you don’t happen to like the JW’s. It is generally a good literal translation. So long as one realizes its bias and the few places that the bias shows itself, there is nothing wrong with this translation. All translations are biased according to the understandings of the Translators. Even the literal ones like the KJV and the NASB and the YLT. It is the better part of wisdom to realize that.

The NWT is the best translation to see the Divinity of Jesus Christ in Acts 2 simply because of a practice of the translators of the NWT. In the New Testament, in those places that include an Old Testament quote, the translators replace LORD or the reference to Jehovah with the actual word Jehovah. That practice actually makes the Divinity of Jesus Christ easier to see. Weird huh?

And if you really want literal, learn the original languages. Or at least get a basic understanding of the original languages and then get an interlinear and some good lexicons to help with the rest. This is not so hard to do with the New Testament. Harder with the Old Testament. But then if you just want to deal with the Greek, there is always the Greek Septuagint Old Testament.

And if you want this to be related to the topic of this thread, then that is easy. Before one can know for certain how we are made right with God, one has to know for certain what the Biblical writers say about the matter. Also, according to Jasoncran, one really can’t know how to be made right with God unless one also understands the Divinity of Jesus Christ. I happen to disagree with that assessment, but it is a valid point for discussion in relation to this matter.

JamesG

 

[Vic C.]

My distaste for the NWT has nothing to do with my stance on the JWs. It's very biases and the people who interpreted it is enough for me to dismiss it as reliable. If it's so reliable concerning the Deity of Jesus, then why do they deny His deity?

Anyway,

Also, according to Jasoncran, one really can’t know how to be made right with God unless one also understands the Divinity of Jesus Christ. I happen to disagree with that assessment, but it is a valid point for discussion in relation to this matter.

I share Jason's convictions. The Scriptures teach us that God is our Savior. The scriptures also teach us Jesus is our Savior. Either we have two Saviors or the two are One. I choose the latter. If you must know, I am more binitarian than trinitarian, but the difference between the two have nothing to do with the Deity of Jesus. Both positions claim a belief in a hypostatic union.

I'm getting way off here. I didn't read the thread. I came across the NWT only because I click on the last page just to mark the page as being read. But maybe it was really the HS who lead me to the last page. ;)

 

[jasoncran]

uh james g , you do realise the nwt was written by a person who couldnt speak basic greek or hebrew, so i am told.

the jw wont accept us, that i have no doubt. they hate the idea of the trinity. its demonic to them.

 

[JamesG]

.
Vic C

Interesting. You went in the opposite direction to me. I am a multitarian. It’s too bad that our positions are so unusual that we had to create words to even name the positions (smiley face).

I think that you have a good point about the two saviors. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that two saviors is an impossible concept. They could be two different beings who are one in purpose. And it is conceivable that a human or non-human being could be chosen specifically by God to replace Adam as head of a new creation that included those who believed into him. It is within the capability of God. So the position of the JW’s is not entirely illogical. No one would believe in the JW position if it were too illogical. And we must concede that what they believe is a matter of interpretation of the Bible, a common practice in Christianity.

However, one reason that I don’t agree with the JW position is because they believe that Jesus is actually an Angel. And there are references where Jesus is referred to as an angel so such a position is not without warrant. But angel means a messenger. And that is used in the sense of particular beings who are called Angels or Messengers and to people who are called angels or messengers. It just seems to me that if Jesus can be an Angel, he can just as easily be a part of the being that is God. That would at best make this matter merely a matter of opinion or a difference in interpretation. And the contention of the JW’s that those who believe in the Trinity believe in a being with multiple personality disorder is not without a certain degree of logic. But one has to consider that they view God as a Being, but not a being in the sense of a being like humanity is a being. Humanity is a certain kind of being within which are many persons. God is exactly the same. He is a being in the same sense that humanity is a being. And within God are many persons. God created humanity it its own image. The JW’s understand God to be a singular person in the same sense as you and I are persons. And they are in agreement with Judaism and Islam in this understanding. If we are to judge them, we are judging ourselves because it is the majority of Christianity who believes in some form of Trinitarian concept who are actually the ones who are the newer religion and who believe in a different God. The JW’s merely returned to what was believed by the Jews and in the Old Testament. And they interpret the New Testament in the light of the Old Testament instead of vice versa. But I maintain that Judaism and Islam and Christianity, and yes the JW’s, all believe in the same God. They just don’t understand that God in the same way. Christians should declare that they have a better or more accurate understanding of God. Not that they believe in a different God. Christians should not unnecessarily give ground to people by separating themselves from those people without warrant who might otherwise listen to what they have to say.

And the choice of an Angel to replace Adam also doesn’t make sense to me because humans are created with a Divine element within. God breathed and man became a living soul. The Angels are beings that are created differently, otherwise Satan and those Angels who followed him could conceivably be saved in the same manner as we are. But they have no hope of salvation as near as I can tell. Is it no wonder that their reaction to knowing the truth of reality and believing in that truth is trembling?

Nevertheless, I see the Divinity of Christ very clearly. And it became abundantly clear to me while I happened to be reading the NWT. And I thought that clarity would be interesting to a former JW like Jasoncran. What I fail to understand, is why the JW’s in general can’t see this as clearly as I do. One could chalk it up to a lack of walking by the Spirit of God. But it is more logical to me to presume that it may be as simple as a bias getting in the way. And the JW’s are very biased on the matter of the Trinity. To such an extent that they are anti-Trinitarian, rather than just disagreeing with the doctrine.

But I still maintain that not being able to understand the Divinity of Christ is insufficient reason to deny salvation to anyone or to call them a cult or to claim that they believe in a different God. I know good Evangelical Protestants who do not understand the Divinity of Christ and question it as a true doctrine. Some are afraid to voice that opinion to anyone except someone like me who is open minded enough to not judge them. Others are more contentious, mainly in hope of finding someone who will finally convince them once and for all that the Trinitarian concept is a true concept and that Jesus is truly God. You and I may be able to help them to understand the Divinity of Christ a little better. But it would be futile for them to look to either of us for confirmation of the Trinitarian concept. In fact if we had followers, our respective groups would be considered a cult by the Trinitarian majority in Christianity. And that is a little disturbing to me.

JamesG

 

[JamesG]

.
Jasoncran

If you think that the NWT is just something written by a JW, you are sadly mistaken. The NWT is an actual translation of the Bible that was translated from the original languages by a group of JW scholars who knew the languages very well. They used the Westcott-Hort Alexandrian compilation, the same as the ASV, as the basis for their translation of the New Testament. The translation is a good and reliable translation, except in those areas such as John 1:1 where they translated according to a biased interpretive understanding. And believe it or not such places are somewhat rare in the NWT.

There are those who are against the JW’s because of differences of doctrine. And then there are those who are simply anti-JW. Your understanding comes from the latter and you should distance yourself from them in order to ascertain the truth. Putting your faith in the straw men of such people can only be detrimental to you.

““the jw wont accept us, that i have no doubt. they hate the idea of the trinity. its demonic to them.â€â€

That is quite true of the Watchtower organization. But it is not always true of the rank and file. Fortunately, my dad is one of the rank and file who agrees with the non-Trinitarian viewpoint, but is not judgmental toward those who adhere to a Trinitarian concept. He even believes that what is apparent corruption in Christianity to the Watchtower organization, is not the fault of the rank and file within Christianity. He blames it on those who created the denominations. And he believes that going door to door is his way of helping those who are caught up in, what are basically from his perspective, cults. Wise of him under the circumstances IMHO. I guess what is good for the goose is good for the gander. And I’m not one to blame Satan for the things that men do, since men seem to do quite well without any interference from Satan. I am only thankful that there are some who God allows to transcend what is of human derivation.

JamesG