westtexas said:
Hello Mohrb, typically JW's do just as you have just done and focus on the verses that describe Jesus as a man and shy away from any verse that shows Jesus as God.
Such as?
Jesus was fully man and also fully GOD.
I'm aware that people hold this opinion... but I've yet to see a single (properly translated) verse that suggests this. The closest one is Isaiah 9:6, which does refer to Jesus as "EL" ... hoever, it's specifically "El-GIBHOR" (
mighty god) Not "EL SHADDAI" (
Almighty God). In English the order of magnitude between "Gibhor" and "Shaddai" are not as spectacular as they are in Hebrew. But, keep in mind, Psalms 82:6 refers to PEOPLE as "Elohim"... But -not- "Elohim Gibhor," let alone "Elohim Shaddai." (Not sure if the modifiers would be pluralized with "Elohim" as opposed to "El." I don't claim to be anywhere near fluent in Hebrew, although I do study what I can.)
JW's do just as you did and deny the deity of our Lord Jesus
As Jesus did when he said "The Father is greater than I," when he constantly stated that he came not to do his own will, but to serve his God's will, and in John 17 where (praying to his God) He said "This means everlasting life,
their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God." (notice "you"... not "us.")
which is why most Bible-believing Christians do not consider JW's Christian.
A person can just as validly claim that Bible-believing Christians do not consider trinitarians to be Christian. You choose to focus on verses that you believe support a trinity, but you can't deny that there at least is some very reasonable evidence to support monotheism.
You stated the JW's used the KJV until 1960 and then wrote your own version out of simplicity for reading the same version. That is almost laughable. Why did the JW's just not say "everybody bring a KJV"?
The NWT wasn't translated for the sake of simplicity. It was translated because the KJV was in old english. All the "thee"s and "thou shalt"s were awkward to read, and are not a part of proper, modern english (plus, they wanted to restore God's name to the bible). JWs were FAR from the only ones that wanted a modern translation. The "New King James Version" and the "NIV" were both translated within a few years after the NWT for the same reason, as well as many more translations in the following decades. That's the reason the NWT was translated when we already had the KJV.
The reason we specifically use the NWT as opposed to other modern translations is for the sake of simplicity.
If you really want to be picky about someone "changing the bible to match their doctrines" ... look at the KJV. Translating "gehenna" (the name of a city dump) as "Hell?!" Translating the name of God as the title "lord" to intentionally skew the lines between "LORD" and "Lord?" (People still honestly believe "Jesus is kurios" literally means that Jesus is the Father... and claim that this is an example of Jesus claiming the divine name as his own because they REALLY think that "Lord" is a proper translation of YHWH)...
I would like to hear your description from a JW's point of view who Jesus is. Is He a God? Is He a man? Prophet? King?
We believe that Jesus is the only-begotten Son of God, sent by God (1 John 4:9). He is "ho logos," the word (John 1:1); The firstborn of Creation, through which the rest of creation came into being (Colossians 1:15) and "
through whom all things are, and we through him" (1 Corinthians 8:6). The fact that he's the firstborn
of creation, and specifically God's
begotten son proves to us that he was created. However, he is still our lord, savior (messiah), and high priest. We believe that he's God's chief messenger, the one who will eventually defeat satan, who will rule the earth for 1,000 years until the end of the final judgement at which point he will give all authority he was given back to his Father, so that God may be all in all (1 Corinthians 15:26-28).
Although he was sent in a human body, we do believe he was more than just human. Even before his earthly life, he was anointed by his God with the oil of exultation more than his peers (Hebrews 1:9)... however, being above humans doesn't automatically make one equal to God.
The only questions I don't think I covered was: "Is he a prophet" ... Not just a prophet. Although he did prophesy. If I said "he is a prophet" people would interpret this to mean he was "Just a prophet" IAW the islamic interpretation of Jesus.
Feel free to respond with similar detail. You can use only the KJV if you like. I don't mind using the KJV as well in most cases, unless there is a question as to the validity of the translation. In which case, I'll go to the original greek/hebrew (not just a translation that suits my argument).
But remember... even the KJV says "But to us there is but one God, the Father." ... the choice of "to us" as opposed to "for us" is a bit awkward... but that's beside the point.