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

[Mohrb]

This is the crux of the matter with our differentiation. You said although Jesus was more than just human, He is not God. <--- Right there!! Mohrb, I'm having a hard time understanding how or why you would call yourself a "Christian" when you don't believe Christ is God.

Because Christ himself stated that the Father was the only True God, and that he was merely the one sent forth by God. If Jesus himself says that only the Father is God... I believe him.

And to correct you on their behalf, I believe they see Mary as intervening on their behalf. She isn't worshiped as God is as some tend to think.

Not all catholics do, of course. However, I've sat and watched groups of catholics pray for nearly an hour... almost 90% of the time they were praying:

"Hail Mary, full of grace.
Our Lord is with thee.
Blessed art thou among women,
and blessed is the fruit of thy womb,
Jesus.
Holy Mary, Mother of God,
pray for us sinners,
now and at the hour of our death.
Amen."

They prayed to other saints a few times, and only prayed to God 3 times... in an hour of constant prayer!

Of course, they don't consider this direct worship of her... because at the end of the prayer they do also pray for her to pray for them... but the majority of the prayer is praising her for being blessed and holy and full of grace, etc. I'm sorry... but those prayers belong to God. (Don't get me wrong, she also happened to be a good woman, and I'd love to meet her some day in God's kingdom. However, praying to her as "the Mother of God" is just plain offensive. And, I'm not sure how that's considered "acceptable for a Christian" while taking Jesus' statements as being literal makes non-trinitarians "not Christian."

 

[Mohrb]

hebrews states this on christ, kjv

1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of rightenous is the scepter of rightenous is the rightenous is the scepter of thy kingdom. and on vs 9 which i wont quote. adds to that.

hmm the father is calling the son God, interesting.

You realize that this is a quote from Psalms 45:6? Where the same phrase was said about a very human king? There are two grammatically possible translations: "Thy throne, O God" or "God is thy throne." So... if you believe that God was calling his son "God" in Hebrews 1:8, he must have also been calling that human king "God" in Psalms. Do you believe that human is God as well?

Or, do you consider it a possibility that both the human king and Jesus were given authority from God, therefore "God is (their) throne?"

if our translations are so bad an yours ok then doesnt that make the bible very corruptable despite the evidence of a little to no errors from the dead sea scrolls and the textus reciptcus.

I'm not suggesting that any translation is "bad." I believe all translations retain the general message. However, there are definitely some translations that have been worded awkwardly in a way to intentionally mix up the message. The message is still there, which is why I'm just as happy to read the KJV as I am the NWT... however, no translation is perfect. Even the BEST translation cannot be perfect because certain things simply don't carry over through translation. That's just the down side of having different languages.

The lord is able to preserve his word and i doubt that only a select view up to the time mr. russell were the only right ones. i wont even go there about the 1914 thing that i recall. oops.

... you realize that 1914 was well before 1960? The 1914 thing was based on the KJV translation of Daniel (The prophecy regarding "a time, times, and half a time") ... JWs didn't "make up that prophecy".. that's in the book of Daniel, look it up yourself in whatever translation you want (particularly the KJV). The problem was that Russel saw a possible interpretation of that prophecy and presented it as fact. That was inappropriate of him to do, we all agree. But, what do YOU believe that prophecy was referring to? Thing is, it's vague... prophecies often are. We may expect one thing, and something else may happen. Russel didn't change anything in the bible, nor did he make the 1914 prophecy... he just had an incorrect feeling about what the prophecy meant. That doesn't make current JWs "false prophets."

 

[Free]

The message is still there, which is why I'm just as happy to read the KJV as I am the NWT... however, no translation is perfect.

Then perhaps you would care to address my previous post.

 

[Mohrb]

Let's use your website then and show a few more times where the Watchtower and the NWT attempt to deny the deity of Jesus.

"The title ho theos (The God, or God), which now designates the father as a personal reality, is not applied in the NT to Jesus himself: Jesus is the Son of God (of ho theos)"---The Watchtower, July 1 1986 pg. 31

These scriptures are taken from http://www.scripture4all.org as you suggested but are the same in your KIT.
John 20:28 Jesus is coming and Thomas says "Kai ho theos mou" or "The God of me"
Matthew 1:23 the verse we all hear so many times at Christmas, Immanual-"meth hemon ho theos" or literally- Immanual with us The God

It appears to me that the Watchtower and the NWT continue to deceive many well-meaning JW's and say Jesus is not "ho theos"-The God and that He is merely-a god

Greek grammar is different than English. Yes, "kai ho theos mou" does have "ho" before "theos." ... however, the two being next to each other doesn't mean one refers to the other. When a greek wants to say "My (something)" They would say "The (something) of me" ... "ho" relates to "mou" ... not "theos."

It's similar to modern german... if I want to say "I ate to fill my stomache"... I wouldn't say "Ich esse um zu fuellen meine magen." (I'm blanking on the german word for "fill" so sorry if "fuellen" isn't the right one... I'm too lazy to look it up)... I would say "Ich esse um meine magen zu fuellen." ... the "um" and "zu" don't go next to each other... that would just plain sound weird to a german. (Btw, that would literally translate into english "I am eating around my stomache to be filling.")

Greeks saying "My (something)" is grammatically similar to germans saying "in order to (something)"... Yes, it's confusing to english speakers... it's just how the language is.

As far as "immanuel" meaning "God is with us" ... yea... Look up any hebrew name... any of them ending in "el" generally mean something about God. For example, you know "Samuel?" Name literally means "The name of God." (Shem-u-El). Michael (as in the archangel) means "Who is like God?" ... many humans had (and still have) names which mean something about God.

... for example, my name is Chris... originally "Christopher" which means "Christ bearer" ... does that mean I literally hold Jesus on my shoulders? Speaking of which, I just got a note on my toolbox last week. It said "I heard you had my flashlight, so I got it back. -Jesus." ... DID I STEAL JESUS' FLASHLIGHT!? ... or was it a note from the mexican dude named "hay-zoos" who's flashlight I found on the plane and put in my box so it wouldn't get stolen? ... I remember a few years ago, the NBA drafted a guy named "God Shamgod" (I think it was the clippers or something)... The meaning of a name doesn't make the translation true.

... You may actually want to look up those names sometime... that's why I'm naming fictional characters, they're usually something like "Moriel" or "Raziel" or whatnot.

 

[Mike]

Mohrb, in all honesty, it's refreshing to hear from you, as you politely stir up lively debate. In a way, when you step away, I remember when my friend would have to go inside to eat and I'd be kicking around waiting for him to come back out. However, I'm in this for the long haul, and if you are as well, this could go on for 500 posts and we'd be in this same spot.

Speaking of debates, that's the thing that keeps me from commiting to a 1-on-1 debate with you. I love to exercise on my treadmill, but at least I can see the progress. I'm afraid a 1-on-1 would go nowhere. At least in this thread we have flexibility to bring up other issues.

Okay, so you're going to remain fixed that Jesus' reference to His Father while He was in the flesh cancels out all the places where He makes His claim as do the authors. You still can't give a solid reason for saying you're a "Christian" in spite of denying the deity of He who embodies the word! This is a weak analogy, but it's like a budhist not believing that Budha achieved nirvana. Yeah, I said it was weak, but you get my point. Our Christian church would have perished as quickly as it started if His deity wasn't believed from the beginning. You refuse to exalt the name that the rest of Christianity worships. All this, and this is the core of our core tenets, and you still claim to be a Christian. It just doesn't go!!

As for the Catholic church, the dedicated ones do spend an inordinate amount of time on her, although - as you said, they don't worship her as a god. But when they say "Holy Mother of God", they are saying Jesus is God. So they spend a lot of time dealing with intercessors when they want their prayers heard. Maybe it comes from their tradition of needing a priest to intercede and absolve their sin on behalf of God. But as I said, I read the Apostles Creed the same way they do, and our core beliefs are stated in that creed. Yours are not.

Do you believe you were created to adore God? Of course you do. So I would think you have a choice. Confess that He is God and call yourself a Christian OR hold your ground and don't. Those are the only choices you have, as I see it.

In the beginning there was the Word...

Mike

 

[westtexas]

Greek grammar is different than English. Yes, "kai ho theos mou" does have "ho" before "theos." ... however, the two being next to each other doesn't mean one refers to the other. When a greek wants to say "My (something)" They would say "The (something) of me" ... "ho" relates to "mou" ... not "theos."

I agree! You just gave us an excellent Greek lesson.

Kai ho theos mou
and the God of me
http://www.scripture4all.org

or as you just said "The (God) of me"



Westtexas

 

[Mohrb]

Mohrb, in all honesty, it's refreshing to hear from you, as you politely stir up lively debate.

Thank you, I'll take that as a huge compliment

Okay, so you're going to remain fixed that Jesus' reference to His Father while He was in the flesh cancels out all the places where He makes His claim as do the authors.

So, we should ignore when Jesus specifically stated that the Father was the only True God on the basis that "it was while he was on earth" so it shouldn't count? K... what about 1 Corinthians 15:24-28? This is after Jesus has been in heaven, speaking of the end of his thousand year reign.

24. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
25. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
26. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
27. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
28. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

If Jesus is God, why does it show Jesus handing back the authority he was given by God back to God? Specifically that the Son himself will be made subject to God (After Jesus' thousand year reign). Is there any other interpretation for this? Is the above (from the NIV) a mistranslation somehow?

Or, look closely at revelation 22.

6. The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his servants the things that must soon take place."
7. "Behold, I am coming soon! Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy in this book."
8. I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I had heard and seen them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who had been showing them to me.
9.But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers the prophets and of all who keep the words of this book. Worship God!"
10.Then he told me, "Do not seal up the words of the prophecy of this book, because the time is near.
11.Let him who does wrong continue to do wrong; let him who is vile continue to be vile; let him who does right continue to do right; and let him who is holy continue to be holy."
12."Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.

1: Note that in verse 6, the one speaking to John is "an angel" who refers to himself as "coming soon." Would you agree that it's the one speaking who is "coming soon?"

2: And that this angel is denying worship, calling himself a "fellow servant." Agree so far?

3: In verse 10, it says "Then he told me" and goes on speaking, saying again "I am coming soon" in verse 12. Do you agree that it's the same one speaking in verse 12 as it was in the previous verses?

4: Read the rest of the chapter... tell me if this isn't one continuous quote starting in verse 10. Who does the one who was called an "angel" later reveal himself to be? (Pay special attention to verse 20.)

You still can't give a solid reason for saying you're a "Christian" in spite of denying the deity of He who embodies the word!

Can a person claim to be a Christian when they deny what Jesus preached throughout his life? (That he was the "Son" of God and one who did nothing of his own will but only did as he was instructed by his Father and our Father... his God and our God (John 5:30))

Do you believe you were created to adore God? Of course you do. So I would think you have a choice.

Of course God is God. But the Father seemed to make it clear that we are to have NO other Gods before him.

Here's my biggest confusion... if people believe that the Father and Son are the same being... why is it so imperative that everyone worship one part of that being over the other? If you agree that the Father and Son are both part of the same being... Isn't my worshiping the Father JUST as valid a way to worship God as you worshiping the Son? Why are trinitarians SO opposed to worshiping the one that the Son clearly worshiped, prayed to and credited for everything he did? What's so bad about worshiping God exactly like Jesus worshiped him? What makes trinitarians demand that the Son completely replace the Father, if they believe that the Son and the Father are the same being?

-Chris

 

[Nick]

Here's my biggest confusion... if people believe that the Father and Son are the same being... why is it so imperative that everyone worship one part of that being over the other? If you agree that the Father and Son are both part of the same being... Isn't my worshiping the Father JUST as valid a way to worship God as you worshiping the Son? Why are trinitarians SO opposed to worshiping the one that the Son clearly worshiped, prayed to and credited for everything he did? What's so bad about worshiping God exactly like Jesus worshiped him? What makes trinitarians demand that the Son completely replace the Father, if they believe that the Son and the Father are the same being?

I don't believe I've come accross that point of view of trinitairians.

 

[Mohrb]

I don't believe I've come accross that point of view of trinitairians.

Most trinitarians I've spoken to put nearly all of their emphasis on the Son instead of the Father who sent him.

My question is, if they believe the Father and Son to be the same being... why are they so opposed to worshiping the Father instead of the Son?

 

[jasoncran]

dont confuse all trinitarians with the oneness doctrine of the united pentacostals.

second we talk about jesus as he is worthy to be praised as his name is above all names.

if jesus is just an archangel then why did john fall at his feet as though dead when he saw him in the apocolyptic vision of the endtimes? notice with an angel you get told not to worship them for they are thy fellow serveants. Jesus tells john fear not and lays his right hand on him.

hmm interesting study on that right thing , i need to look at that. John was never told to stand up. till after chapter 4. interesting.

if we worship the son, are we not also worshipping the father.

 

[Mohrb]

second we talk about jesus as he is worthy to be praised as his name is above all names.

Do you believe his name is above the name of Jehovah, his Father?

 

[jasoncran]

second we talk about jesus as he is worthy to be praised as his name is above all names.

Do you believe his name is above the name of Jehovah, his Father?

the trinity is one. didnt you read my posts on that verse in books hebrew.

you jw claim that jehovah is the name of the lord, when the jews to this day dont even spell GOD all they way out, they do this G-D.

is the name of Jehovah actually the name of the lord or is it something you all took from the tetragrammation and put with the vowels from adonai and made that his name? which we trinitarians did in attempt to pronounce the YHWH.

truly the vowels havent been pronounced in centuries are forgotten.

What does the name of Jehovah translate to? i have heard this the God of no name. the God of many names?

If the former then how are you saying its his name when he says i have no name. the latter is much easier to defend.


dont assume that christians here have no knowledge of the name of Jehovah

many threads have been opened up on that.

 

[Mysteryman]

With some of the comments that have been made throughout this conversation. Some of you think that Satan is a Christian according to your doctrine. Satan tempted Jesus because he knew who Jesus was. Satan knows who the Lord was, so as to tempt him into worshiping him. Do you honestly believe, that satan is a Christian or not a Christian according to his beliefs ?

Someone said that another is not a Christian because he does not believe that Jesus is God. Let me ask this --- Does believing that Jesus is God or not, make one a Christian ? And if so, then by all means back this up with scripture. Do it for my sake if nothing else.

If I understand some of the logic that has been displayed here within this thread. I would have to conclude that you are saying that catholics are not christians either. I would have to also conclude that other groups/sects, that do not hold to your paticular doctrinal views are not christians either. Am I narrowing this down for you all ? Only those who believe just as you do, are christians, correct ? That which is according to your own set of rules and standards, correct ? Where is your scripture to support your paticular views ? What I have seen is a tremendous lack of scripture within this conversation ! !

I would bet, that everyone that has contributed to this conversation, does not eat at the table of devils. Am I correct in my assumption here ? Only the other guy, who believes differently than me, eats at the table of devils. Am I getting close here in my assumptions ?

Has anyone read I John 4:2 and 3 ---- and I John 4:14 and 15 --- also I John 5:5 and 6 ? ? Oh, you say you have ? Well then, why has no one quoted these verses within this conversation ?

Why do people love to read Hebrews 1:8 ? Why not read Hebrews 1:9 ? Why not read both verses at the same time considering both verses a part of the context ?

Am I asking too many questions ?

 

[Mike]

Mysteryman, your name is apropos. I don't think anyone (certainly I) would mind if you pointed your comments at us personally. Whether you are talking about me or not, I'll address some things.

With some of the comments that have been made throughout this conversation. Some of you think that Satan is a Christian according to your doctrine. Satan tempted Jesus because he knew who Jesus was. Satan knows who the Lord was, so as to tempt him into worshiping him. Do you honestly believe, that satan is a Christian or not a Christian according to his beliefs ?

No need to comment here. Your tongue was firmly planted in cheek, I hope with a light-hearted attitude.

Someone said that another is not a Christian because he does not believe that Jesus is God. Let me ask this --- Does believing that Jesus is God or not, make one a Christian ? And if so, then by all means back this up with scripture. Do it for my sake if nothing else.

GUILTY!!! Does believing that Jesus is God make him a Christian? Not if he doesn't fall down at His feet and worship Him as such. Does disbelieving He is God within the Trinity make one NOT a Christian. Yes.

If I understand some of the logic that has been displayed here within this thread. I would have to conclude that you are saying that catholics are not christians either. I would have to also conclude that other groups/sects, that do not hold to your paticular doctrinal views are not christians either. Am I narrowing this down for you all ? Only those who believe just as you do, are christians, correct ? That which is according to your own set of rules and standards, correct ? Where is your scripture to support your paticular views ? What I have seen is a tremendous lack of scripture within this conversation ! !

I would bet, that everyone that has contributed to this conversation, does not eat at the table of devils. Am I correct in my assumption here ? Only the other guy, who believes differently than me, eats at the table of devils. Am I getting close here in my assumptions ?

Again, I'm not sure you're pointing at me, but for the sake of discussion, I'll assume you are. I have said without fail, and I addressed the Catholic thing in my previous post, that there are core tenets that are integral to the Christian faith. If those are in place, I believe these people are an equal part of the Body of Christ. I happen to be a member of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod. I've been very consistent throughout these boards, without fail, that those in denominations and in non-denominational churches who confess the core beliefs are one.

Rightly so, you stated that there has been a lack of scripture in this thread. This is no excuse, but often times, I'm replying from my blackberry. With a wife and 3 kids, time at the two laptops is at a premium, and I often have to concede them to someone else. It's difficult enough to express myself in full, let alone cut & paste scripture. I don't like to just give a verse without including the text, because I would like to have it all there to read in one view. It is a poor excuse though, because it would be a lie to say I never have a computer at my fingertips.

I'm not sure I'll use the specific verses you have suggested, but I'm going to put together a more worthy reply with His Word included. It seems we've agreed more than disagreed on these boards. Upon first pass of your post, I felt you were very combative toward your Brothers, but reading inferences into a blog can be misleading.

 

[Free]

Mohrb,

I cannot help but notice that you have not addressed my post from page 9.

 

[Mysteryman]

Quote mjjcb: "GUILTY!!! Does believing that Jesus is God make him a Christian? Not if he doesn't fall down at His feet and worship Him as such. Does disbelieving He is God within the Trinity make one NOT a Christian. Yes. "


Hi mjjcb

Yes, I addressed the whole group , because of the numereous differing comments being made. I thought I could stimulate some thought here. My point was to make one think things through before making any further comments. Which most people tend not to do. They tend to reply quickly without giving a thought to what they are about to say. Such is the case with your quoted comment above.

Satan knew who the Lord was when he tempted him. Does knowing who the Lord was, make one a christian ? Satan knew who the Lord was , yet still tempted him. Do we tempt the Lord by our beliefs ?

What actually makes one a Christian ? Doctrine ? Did you choose God, or did God choose you ? Did you choose God according to your doctrine, or according to scripture ? And if it is God's buisness whom he chooses, then doctrine has nothing to do with whom God has chosen. And if God chose you and myself from before the foundations of the earth. Then doctrine will follow after, not before. In other words, doctrine does not make or not make one a christian.

Being a Christian is to recognize that one does not believe to become a Christian. One believes , because he is already a Christian. Because he has been chosen by God. God gave us the Spirit of his Son in our hearts, crying Abba Father. You can not call Jesus Lord, except by the Holy Spirit. This means that anyone can call Jesus Lord, but Jesus will say I never knew you. Why, because this person was never chosen . Hence they do not have the Holy Spirit. After we have been chosen, we then need to study scripture. We need to grow spiritually. So many try and find God within the scriptures instead of letting God find you. Which he already has found you and chosen you.

We are known of God, before we get to know God. It is God who opens up the eyes of our understanding. It is not our own eyes that will accomplish this. Our eyes are carnal, not spiritual.

You stated in your quote above - that disbelieving he is God within the trinity makes one , not a Christian. Yet, you provided no scripture to support your view.

I believe that the Spirit of his Son was in my heart crying Abba Father, long before I was born. God placed the seed of his Son in me , not because I believed, but because he chose me from before the foundation of the earth. I believe , because I can not deny the Spirit of his Son in me, crying Abba Father. I yearn to know more of my heavenly Father. Christ came to reveal the Father. For no man can know the Father , but by the Son. If one does not have the Son, then one does not know the Father. For the Son reveals the Father too me.

Jesus said, not to call me good, there is none other good, but my Father in heaven. Ask anything of the Father in my name, and he, the Father will give it to you. Jesus taught us how to pray - "Our Father who art in heaven"

I John 4:15 - "Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God"

I John 4:19 - "We love him, because he first loved us" < Have you any idea how many people worship in reverse of what this verse says ? How many do you think try and please God , in order that God will love them back ? My estimate would be "many". Many people try and buy God's favor, by giving the tithe. They think they can receive from God, because they give to God, then expect a return on their investment. To be honest with you -- how sick this truely has become within our society of Christianity. They know not that God gives first. His love towards us is that he gave his only begotten Son as the saviour of the world. Even when we were dead in our sins. And now they want to buy God's favour. How sick is that ?

Well, the same holds true with Christianity. No one can be a christian, just because they claim a certain doctrine. Nor can they tell someone else they are not a christian because they don't hold to their doctrine. And especially man made doctrines ! Jesus said, "my sheep hear my voice". Why not just leave it at that ? Either they are listening or they are not. And how many do you think like to quote this verse in I John 4:6 ? Catholics love this verse. You who listen to us , are the only one's who follow christianity , are those who listen to Catholic leadership. Which would mean that you and myself must be following false doctrines. For neither of us are Rcc. This goes to show you how far people will go within their own denominational beliefs.

I believe that there are many Christians within the many diverse sects/denominations. I also believe, that many are clinging to false teachings and false doctrines. However, they are still Christians, because God is the one who chose them. Not you, nor myself, but God alone. So clinging to a false doctrine does not make nor not make one a Christian. There are ways of narrowing it down. But not totally ellimating one from another, unless God reveals to you who is a wolf in sheeps clothing.

I first John , it also tells us that if one loves his brother, he is of God. And how can one say he loves God, if he hates his brother whom he can see, and says he loves God, whom he hath not seen ?

Now --- Either the doctrine of the trinity is true, or it is false. And If a brother loves you, he will tell you the truth without denouncing you as a christian. Yet, the doctrine of the trinity believers, do just that. Denouce one as a Christian, because another does not believe in the trintiy. Who is the true brother here ? The one who loves or the one who denounces another as a Christian according to a doctrine ?

Remember, one must be able to defend one's beliefs. That does not mean that another will believe them. But at least you must defend your beliefs. If one does not believe in the doctrine of the trinity and this is what shows one that the other is not a christian. Then by all means , there must be scripture supporting this stance by the trinitarian believer. Is there scripture to support this view ?

Bless

 

[Mike]

Quote mjjcb: "GUILTY!!! Does believing that Jesus is God make him a Christian? Not if he doesn't fall down at His feet and worship Him as such. Does disbelieving He is God within the Trinity make one NOT a Christian. Yes. "


Hi mjjcb

Yes, I addressed the whole group , because of the numereous differing comments being made. I thought I could stimulate some thought here. My point was to make one think things through before making any further comments. Which most people tend not to do. They tend to reply quickly without giving a thought to what they are about to say. Such is the case with your quoted comment above.

Satan knew who the Lord was when he tempted him. Does knowing who the Lord was, make one a christian ? Satan knew who the Lord was , yet still tempted him. Do we tempt the Lord by our beliefs ?

Mysteryman, the word "Christian" first appears in Acts 11:26. It has always referred to those who followed Jesus and believed in the nature of His deity. Of course, one has to have a life that reflects this belief. I did not just blurt out my reply to you. I put it as succinctly as I could without getting wordy. This is the second time you went into this comparison to Satan, and it really is out of place. In response to my previous post, you re-post this. How does Satan align with who I said are Christians? He, of course, knows who Jesus is, but he doesn't fall down at His feet and worship him.

Assuming you have actually read the posts preceding yours, you must have seen the challenge in using scripture with a JW. We could cite scripture all we want, but JW's have their own bible that is reworded, so in effect we are talking two different languages. Take the most commonly cited verse, John 1:1

NIV - "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning."

Now the JW's NWT - "In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.

They've written Jesus' deity out of the Bible subtly, but purposefully. This makes it difficult to point to scripture within the context of a discussion with JW's, which is what we were doing. All of your response about believing has to come with the basic premise of Christianity. To be a "Christian", which means "little Christ", one has to at least accept the foundation of His status strewn throughout the New Testament. I'm going to go back responding to Mohrb. This is a thread discussing the differences in our beliefs, after all.

 

[jasoncran]

the first post by solo says a lot to help our case, i suggest we read it. i did.

 

[Mike]

So, we should ignore when Jesus specifically stated that the Father was the only True God on the basis that "it was while he was on earth" so it shouldn't count? K... what about 1 Corinthians 15:24-28? This is after Jesus has been in heaven, speaking of the end of his thousand year reign.

24. Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.
25. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
26. The last enemy to be destroyed is death.
27. For he "has put everything under his feet." Now when it says that "everything" has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ.
28. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.

If Jesus is God, why does it show Jesus handing back the authority he was given by God back to God? Specifically that the Son himself will be made subject to God (After Jesus' thousand year reign). Is there any other interpretation for this? Is the above (from the NIV) a mistranslation somehow?

This is not intended to infer that Jesus is in any way inferior to God the Father. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit are separate and one God at the same time and equal in deity and dignity. But they do have different rolls. When the new Kingdom has been established, His roll as Savior will be completed.

Consider this (and my comments to Mysteryman aside, I appreciate your willingness to use the NIV) other scripture. Hebrews 1:1-8...

1In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom he made the universe. 3The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven. 4So he became as much superior to the angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs.

5For to which of the angels did God ever say,
"You are my Son;
today I have become your Father[a]"? Or again,
"I will be his Father,
and he will be my Son"[c]? 6And again, when God brings his firstborn into the world, he says,
"Let all God's angels worship him."[d] 7In speaking of the angels he says,
"He makes his angels winds,
his servants flames of fire."[e] 8But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom.

Phillipians 2:5-11...

5Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus:
6Who, being in very nature God,
did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,
7but made himself nothing,
taking the very nature of a servant,
being made in human likeness.
8And being found in appearance as a man,
he humbled himself
and became obedient to death—
even death on a cross!
9Therefore God exalted him to the highest place
and gave him the name that is above every name,
10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
11and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father.

And just one more for now. John 20, in the account of Thomas.

26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."

28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

Here's my biggest confusion... if people believe that the Father and Son are the same being... why is it so imperative that everyone worship one part of that being over the other? If you agree that the Father and Son are both part of the same being... Isn't my worshiping the Father JUST as valid a way to worship God as you worshiping the Son? Why are trinitarians SO opposed to worshiping the one that the Son clearly worshiped, prayed to and credited for everything he did? What's so bad about worshiping God exactly like Jesus worshiped him? What makes trinitarians demand that the Son completely replace the Father, if they believe that the Son and the Father are the same being?

I don't believe Christians do put Jesus before God, the Father. We certainly don't imply that He is greater than the father. If His name is used more, it might just be because some people feel it easier to relate to Him, having taken our form. I don't expect someone who rejects the Trinity to understand it. It's truly a mystery to us as well. But it's there in the Bible, again not by name. I have no idea what you're talking about in "demand that the Son completely replace the Father". You'd have to show me what you're referring to.

Thanks, Chris!!

Mike

 

[Mysteryman]

Hi mjjcb

Maybe I gave you too much to chew on. So lets break down what I said in small increments , shall we ?

Would you consider responding to this statment that I made >

"What actually makes one a Christian ? Doctrine ? Did you choose God, or did God choose you ? Did you choose God according to your doctrine, or according to scripture ? And if it is God's buisness whom he chooses, then doctrine has nothing to do with whom God has chosen. And if God chose you and myself from before the foundations of the earth. Then doctrine will follow after, not before. In other words, doctrine does not make or not make one a christian. "

Thanks