Jehovah Wittness & their 'sabbath day'

[George Muller]

Another thread by the so-called sabbath keepers? If any of you are willing to really go into the law and look at what all the commanmdnets and rules that the law demands in keeping the sabbath, and will abide by the clear reading of the law, I will accept that you are really interested in keeping the sabbath, and not just a bunch of religious boasting in your easy greasy law keeping. Just ignore the hard rules and pretend to justify yourselves by the easy ones?:naughty

that is why I know the cross devastated the mosaic law in that He fulfilled it to the point we don't have to do that.

Why do you as a Jew, help explain to these people all the statues and precepts that are REQUIRED in keeping the sabbath according to written standard that is written in the law?

OK! you 'ins' do not even have class enough to wake up to the Lords WORDS of Isaiah 42:21 and... 'The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness' sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.' [[[AND IT IS NOT MOSES LAW!]]]

So you are ALL FREE from sin, and there is NO LAW for YOU! And what about all of these others that are dieing all around you as we speak?? Never mind, for you without your 7th Day Sabbath burials. James 2:8-12

But you are the problem!

Go tell tell it to these who live in Oklahoma.

--Elijah

Well, not sure how you can blame the storm in Oklahoma on me?

And yes I am not under law, but under grace. Sin has no power over me.

Ro 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

 

[Maedchen]

Hello to everyone.

I just left Jehovah's Witnesses in January this year. I disassociated myself, and consequently I am shunned.
I still possess my many Watchtower publications, and I won't throw them away, because it helps me to reason against their false teachings.
One of those publications is called "Reasoning from the Scriptures" [jasoncran might remember it], which is a handy short edition of their bible reference books, and which I was told to carry always with me when I was in 'field service' ( going door to door). It states the Watchtower beliefs, and then gives examples as how to answer to common questions that might occur.
(Also, how you might respond to potential conversation stoppers ! - we were well trained!) :shades

So I thought it might be of interest for you to read what JWs are told to answer to the Sabbath question. I picked out the key sentences:

- page 350: "The 'seventh day', referred to in Genesis 2:2, was not merely a 24-hour day. Similarly, the 'sabbath resting' that true Christians share is not limited to a 24-hour day. By exercising faith and obeying the Bible's counsel, they can enjoy it every day, and especially will they do so in God's new system."

- page 350/351: "There is a thousand-year 'sabbath' rest that lies ahead for mankind
Mark 2:27,28: '[Jesus] went on to say to them: 'The sabbath came into existence for the sake of man, and not man for the sake if of the sabbath; hence the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath.' '
Jesus knew that Jehovah had instituted the Sabbath as a sign between God and Israel, and that it was meant to bring them relief from their labors. Jesus also was aware that his own death would provide the basis for setting aside the Mosaic Law as having found its fulfillment in him. He appreciated that the Law, with its sabbath requirement, provided 'a shadow of the good things to come.' (Hebr. 10:1; Col. 2:16,17) In connection with those 'good things' there is a 'sabbath' of which he is to be Lord."

- page 351: "As Lord of lords, Christ will rule all the earth for a thousand years. (Rev. 19:16; 20:6; Ps.2:6-8) While on earth, Jesus mercifully performed some of his most amazing works of healing on the Sabbath, thus demonstrating the kind of relief that he will bring to people out of all nations during his Millennial Reign. (Luke 13:10-13; John 5:5-9; 9:1-14)
Those who appreciate the real meaning of the Sabbath will have opportunity also to benefit from that 'sabbath' rest."

Just meant as a little insight.

Love, Rose

 

[Deborah13]

As far as I know the SDA believe Jesus is who He is... JWs do not.

I agree with this statement.

The last time I looked at a JW Bible this is how John 1;1 read, if I remember correctly, [MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION] could verify this.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god." Jesus is not God but a god.

 

[farouk]

As far as I know the SDA believe Jesus is who He is... JWs do not.

I agree with this statement.

The last time I looked at a JW Bible this is how John 1;1 read, if I remember correctly, [MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION] could verify this.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god." Jesus is not God but a god.

Deborah13:

Yes, there's no translation basis for the rendering 'a god' at the beginning of John's Gospel there.

Blessings.

 

[Maedchen]

As far as I know the SDA believe Jesus is who He is... JWs do not.

I agree with this statement.

The last time I looked at a JW Bible this is how John 1;1 read, if I remember correctly, [MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION] could verify this.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god." Jesus is not God but a god.

Deborah13:

Yes, there's no translation basis for the rendering 'a god' at the beginning of John's Gospel there.

Blessings.

Well, they claim that there is a translation reason. In the Greek original there is no definite article before the last " theos" =God. They hint to a grammar rule that says that a missing definite article results in the translation with an indefinite article. Hence they translate " a god".

It is very interesting that in the Greek publications the Watchtower does not apply this rule, obviously because the Greek speaking readers would not approve it. The reasoning there is different.

Rose

 

[farouk]

As far as I know the SDA believe Jesus is who He is... JWs do not.

I agree with this statement.

The last time I looked at a JW Bible this is how John 1;1 read, if I remember correctly, @jasoncran could verify this.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god." Jesus is not God but a god.

Deborah13:

Yes, there's no translation basis for the rendering 'a god' at the beginning of John's Gospel there.

Blessings.

Well, they claim that there is a translation reason. In the Greek original there is no definite article before the last " theos" =God. They hint to a grammar rule that says that a missing definite article results in the translation with an indefinite article. Hence they translate " a god".

It is very interesting that in the Greek publications the Watchtower does not apply this rule, obviously because the Greek speaking readers would not approve it. The reasoning there is different.

Rose

[MENTION=96634]Rose[/MENTION]:

Kind of a backhanded admission from them that it's not accurate, I guess...

It's interesting that you have such insights, having been previously with them. I'm sure the Lord has work for you helping others who may have been from the same background.

Blessings.

 

[John 8:32]

Another thread by the so-called sabbath keepers? If any of you are willing to really go into the law and look at what all the commanmdnets and rules that the law demands in keeping the sabbath, and will abide by the clear reading of the law, I will accept that you are really interested in keeping the sabbath, and not just a bunch of religious boasting in your easy greasy law keeping. Just ignore the hard rules and pretend to justify yourselves by the easy ones?:naughty

that is why I know the cross devastated the mosaic law in that He fulfilled it to the point we don't have to do that.

Why dont you as a Jew, help explain to these people all the statues and precepts that are REQUIRED in keeping the sabbath according to written standard that is written in the law?

How about if you list them George? If you reject the Sabbath, you must surely have good reasons.

 

[Brother Mike]

The Word was God points to the quality of something and not a person. I won't go into the Greek of why this is, but the Word of God shares the same authoritative quality being the same as God. Though God exalted his Word above himself, that was His doing. (Psa 138:2)

Jesus name means the Word. This does not make Jesus the literal spiritual and physical word though. God sent his son in these last days to speak the Word. (Heb somewhere)

The JW interpretation is correct.

The Word was with God, can not be the same person as God, but shares the same divine quality as God. The Word was God. All the scriptures must fit, not just the hand picked ones by those that support a trinity doctrine.

Were JW's mess up is concerning the deity of Jesus. Jesus is not a created being, however, he is also not a "piece of a god" as the trinity doctrine wants us to believe. Some part of a egg white that makes a "Whole" God egg. Jesus is fully God, but He is not a piece of or part of His father to make a one God type machine. There are two thrones in heaven for a very good reason.

I do not keep a Sabbath day. Every day is what do I do today Lord. The Sabbath was for people that were not spirit filled and to keep the Lord in remembrance.

Col 3:17 And whatever you do [no matter what it is] in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus and in [dependence upon] His Person, giving praise to God the Father through Him.

Everything, means just that. Mon-Sun. I don't pick one day and plan it for the Lord to rest and be religious set on that. That would be one day every week that I did my own thing and giving rules to God about what day I do what He wants.

Mike.

 

[John 8:32]

The Word was God points to the quality of something and not a person. I won't go into the Greek of why this is, but the Word of God shares the same authoritative quality being the same as God. Though God exalted his Word above himself, that was His doing. (Psa 138:2)

Jesus name means the Word. This does not make Jesus the literal spiritual and physical word though. God sent his son in these last days to speak the Word. (Heb somewhere)

The JW interpretation is correct.

The Word was with God, can not be the same person as God, but shares the same divine quality as God. The Word was God. All the scriptures must fit, not just the hand picked ones by those that support a trinity doctrine.

Were JW's mess up is concerning the deity of Jesus. Jesus is not a created being, however, he is also not a "piece of a god" as the trinity doctrine wants us to believe. Some part of a egg white that makes a "Whole" God egg. Jesus is fully God, but He is not a piece of or part of His father to make a one God type machine. There are two thrones in heaven for a very good reason.

I do not keep a Sabbath day. Every day is what do I do today Lord. The Sabbath was for people that were not spirit filled and to keep the Lord in remembrance.

Col 3:17 And whatever you do [no matter what it is] in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus and in [dependence upon] His Person, giving praise to God the Father through Him.

Everything, means just that. Mon-Sun. I don't pick one day and plan it for the Lord to rest and be religious set on that. That would be one day every week that I did my own thing and giving rules to God about what day I do what He wants.

Mike.

The JW interpretation is false. Christ was the creator, His name is Eternal (LORD)...

H3068
יהוה
yehôvâh
yeh-ho-vaw'
From H1961; (the) self Existent or eternal; Jehovah, Jewish national name of God: - Jehovah, the Lord. Compare H3050, H3069.

He was prior to the creation of anything.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Col 1:16 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:
Col 1:17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

There are no exceptions, He made all things that were created. He has been alive forever and will be alive forever. He has life inherent in Himself.

 

[Brother Mike]

John 8:32

I am thinking it best to start some Trinity doctrine thread as this one is about the JW and Sabbath. Jesus created in two places in the KJV is contradicted also by the KJV. They mistranslated a word that the new translations get correct. Understandably so, as the Trinity doctrine was a hot issue back then and supported by the scribes of the KJV. I am not knocking the KJV, it's the bible I study out of.

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

We assume that John is speaking about Jesus, because we Assume that Jesus must be the Word. This is fine, because the scripture clearly makes Jesus the creator of all things, and even if you were to argue that John never mentioned Jesus in the scripture before that, the whole Greek Article is still about Jesus. Jesus the creator!

Col 1:16 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:

Here, Jesus is most definitively the creator of all things. There would be no argument here as the scripture clearly states that.

Eph_1:22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

Now we have a issue. Something was given to him. Being the creator of all things by whom all things consist, then it would not be possible to give Him something that was not already his.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 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;

God the Father made the worlds, and gave it all to His son Jesus. Once again this does not make Jesus the creator, but the Son of God whom is a heir. If there is "ONE" God, then we have a split personality disorder going on here. Jesus the creator made all things to give it back to Jesus the creator who made all things. I guess our "ONE" God felt he did a great job and rewarded himself.

Rom_15:7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God (Himself?????).

Way to many scriptures denoting that we are not talking about a "ONE GOD made of 3 pieces here" This is one of so many.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
God must be mediating with Himself here, though He specifically said that a Mediator is between "TWO" Could he be mediating with a piece of his arm or something? Who knows.

When you change the Greek Word DIA you can make Jesus the creator. If you translate it properly, then you have zero scripture contradictions.

Col 1:16 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:


The KJV contradicts itself.

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Who made something for him?

All we have to do is correctly translate the word "DIA".

YLT:
Col 1:16 because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created,

DIA "by"

2) through
2a) the ground or reason by which something is or is not done
2a1) by reason of
2a2) on account of
2a3) because of for this reason

God the father made everything for His son, and did everything through His son for His son. A Father and Son, Both God, not a One God system, but two separate Gods, the Father and the Son.

Mike.

 

[John 8:32]

John 8:32

I am thinking it best to start some Trinity doctrine thread as this one is about the JW and Sabbath. Jesus created in two places in the KJV is contradicted also by the KJV. They mistranslated a word that the new translations get correct. Understandably so, as the Trinity doctrine was a hot issue back then and supported by the scribes of the KJV. I am not knocking the KJV, it's the bible I study out of.

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

We assume that John is speaking about Jesus, because we Assume that Jesus must be the Word. This is fine, because the scripture clearly makes Jesus the creator of all things, and even if you were to argue that John never mentioned Jesus in the scripture before that, the whole Greek Article is still about Jesus. Jesus the creator!

John identifies Christ as the Word...

Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

So who became flesh and dwelt among us? The Word. Now as to the latter half of the sentence, who brought grace and truth...

Joh 1:17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

Col 1:16 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:

Here, Jesus is most definitively the creator of all things. There would be no argument here as the scripture clearly states that.

Eph_1:22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

Now we have a issue. Something was given to him. Being the creator of all things by whom all things consist, then it would not be possible to give Him something that was not already his.

Why do we have an issue? The Father is greater than Christ...

Joh 14:28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.

Even though Christ created all things, He did so under the direction of the Father. He plainly says that He did what the Father told Him to do, He said what the Father told Him to say and He came to reveal the Father. He is given a Kingdom at His return but eventually gives it to the Father...

1Co 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.
1Co 15:25 For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet.
1Co 15:26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.
1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

Christ is subject to the Father and always will be.

I am an engineer and design systems for the company I work for. I design them, oversee the installation and startup. Guess what? When they are up and running, they are not mine, they belong to my employer. Do we have an issue? No, the Father is greater than Christ and all ultimately belongs to Him.

Heb 1:1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
Heb 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;

God the Father made the worlds,

Absolutely not! He directed the creation through Jesus Christ. Christ has always been willingly submissive to the Father and always will be.

and gave it all to His son Jesus. Once again this does not make Jesus the creator, but the Son of God whom is a heir. If there is "ONE" God, then we have a split personality disorder going on here. Jesus the creator made all things to give it back to Jesus the creator who made all things. I guess our "ONE" God felt he did a great job and rewarded himself.

Rom_15:7 Wherefore receive ye one another, as Christ also received us to the glory of God (Himself?????).

No, to the ultimate glory of the Father.

Way to many scriptures denoting that we are not talking about a "ONE GOD made of 3 pieces here" This is one of so many.

Whoa, big fella. I am not a JW or an SDA or whatever else and I can assure you that I am not a trinitarian.

1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
God must be mediating with Himself here, though He specifically said that a Mediator is between "TWO" Could he be mediating with a piece of his arm or something? Who knows.

Sorry if you don't know, but I do. Christ is mediating between us and the Father. It is through Christ we are reconciled to the Father...

Rom 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Rom 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

When you change the Greek Word DIA you can make Jesus the creator. If you translate it properly, then you have zero scripture contradictions.

Col 1:16 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:

One does not need a "special" (read New World here) translation, one must simply put all the scriptures together and believe what they say instead of what men write about them.

The KJV contradicts itself.

Joh 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Who made something for him?

All we have to do is correctly translate the word "DIA".

YLT:
Col 1:16 because in him were the all things created, those in the heavens, and those upon the earth, those visible, and those invisible, whether thrones, whether lordships, whether principalities, whether authorities; all things through him, and for him, have been created,

DIA "by"

2) through
2a) the ground or reason by which something is or is not done
2a1) by reason of
2a2) on account of
2a3) because of for this reason

God the father made everything for His son, and did everything through His son for His son. A Father and Son, Both God, not a One God system, but two separate Gods, the Father and the Son.

Mike.

Christ did all creating, anything else is a contradiction of scripture. Christ created all things, but ultimately they were created for the Father...

1Co 15:27 For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him.
1Co 15:28 And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

 

[Deborah13]

It is very interesting that in the Greek publications the Watchtower does not apply this rule, obviously because the Greek speaking readers would not approve it. The reasoning there is different.

If anyone is interested here a link to an explanation of the GK grammar used in John 1:1.
http://www.ntgreek.org/answers/answer-frame-john1_1.htm

Also here you will find the structure of the sentence in the Gk. note that the GK says, "God was the Word" . Putting the predicate before the verb rather than after as in the rest of the sentence. The link above explains. The links below show the structure of the sentence.
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/joh1.pdf
http://v3.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=Jhn&c=1&t=YLT#s=t_conc_998001

This might be quite helpful in witnessing to our JW friends.
The context of the sentence as well as v14 are logical anyway, so knowing the GK rules give backup.
Blessings

 

[Deborah13]

The JW interpretation is correct.

The Word was with God, can not be the same person as God, but shares the same divine quality as God. The Word was God. All the scriptures must fit, not just the hand picked ones by those that support a trinity doctrine.

See post #52

The greek reads "God was the Word" thus putting the predicate before the verb. Because the form "theos" is not the same as in the previous phrase "theon" does not necessarily (according to GK grammar) mean that the "theos" should have an indefinite article, Gk doesn't have one only definite. But that doesn't mean that we need to add it in the translation.

The link I provided in post 52 gives an explanation of the GK and other links as well.

Hope this is helpful. I don't read GK so I have to search and seek.

 

[Brother Mike]

John 8:32

Your coming from a Non-trinitarian point of view. I really don't have a answer for your point of view as the Christ being creator subject to the Father. No question that Christ (Anointing, power of God) moved by the spoken Word and made it happen. Not by my might, power but by my Spirit said the Lord. I respect that you defend Jesus as being fully God and the King of Kings, and not part of the god goo. Trinity not only removes man from God's family (Godhead) but removes the Father having a son that is just as much God as he is. Both are the I Am.
To be honest, I have not heard that version of Christ as creator, this would be my first time, so I am not qualified to give an answer. I do understand somewhat the point of view because it was through the Power of the Holy Spirit the Word took shape.

Now if you say Christ (Jesus the anointed one) is Jesus or the same as the Spirit of God, then I would have to disagree. If you say there is a Holy Spirit the Spirit of God, Jesus the son of God, and the Father, then I agree.

Deborah13

This might be quite helpful in witnessing to our JW friends.
The context of the sentence as well as v14 are logical anyway, so knowing the GK rules give backup.
Blessings

Thank you for that. Your link and break down of scripture is correct and does not support the "Trinity concept" I think when running into JW teaching and those that don't buy into a God is made of 3 pieces, one has to be careful not to appear to side with JW as Jesus being some created being. There is no recored of his creation point in which the JW's believe that Jesus was created. This belief would effect the understanding of most other things such as the Sabbath.

Mike

 

[Deborah13]

Thank you for that. Your link and break down of scripture is correct and does not support the "Trinity concept" I think when running into JW teaching and those that don't buy into a God is made of 3 pieces, one has to be careful not to appear to side with JW as Jesus being some created being.

Quite the contrary, the link provides the why the JW translation is INCORRECT. Their explanation does not work in the GK. Which may be why in their translation to their Greek peoples does not read like the English translation. The Greeks would never accept their reasoning on the English translation especially taken in context.

 

[Elijah674]

Look what happens when I leave the site to do some work? It gets railroaded!;)

Well I do know of a couple here that have taken their position on the 's'abbath!

What ever Lord?

--Elijah

 

[Brother Mike]

Deborah13

Quite the contrary, the link provides the why the JW translation is INCORRECT. Their explanation does not work in the GK. Which may be why in their translation to their Greek peoples does not read like the English translation. The Greeks would never accept their reasoning on the English translation especially taken in context.

I guess I read it different. The JW translation is that the Word is not an actual person. Same way I read the Greek as the Word is as authoritative as God who exalted his word above his name. Your translation does not make Jesus creator, so it's not supportive of the "Trinity Concept" a god made of 3 parts.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, The same was in the beginning with God.

The same was as the Word as with as is God. Trinity concept which gets thrown in these JW discussions makes the Word of God the literal Jesus. Jesus is the Word. The JW's add the word "A" A god, that is also not correct. The JW interpretation comes from Jesus being a lesser being or some angel. The Trinity interpretation makes Jesus a piece of God, or the Word part of God. Both do not Make Jesus fully God on his own without being a lesser god, or having two more parts added in. Jesus is fully God, and He is not his Father, or a piece of his father.

This is what makes these types of discussions tricky because John 1:1 is looked at through some doctrine on both sides. Jesus a piece of a god, or Jesus a lesser "Created" angelic god.

Gen 1:26 And God ('ĕlôhı̂ym) 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.

'ĕlôhı̂ym is a Hebrew Plural meaning two full and separate God's here speaking. We have the two "I Am's" that have always been here from the start. Father and Son.
Both have their own throne.

Mike.

 

[jasoncran]

As far as I know the SDA believe Jesus is who He is... JWs do not.

I agree with this statement.

The last time I looked at a JW Bible this is how John 1;1 read, if I remember correctly, [MENTION=11841]jasoncran[/MENTION] could verify this.

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was a god." Jesus is not God but a god.

yes that is the way the nwt says it.

 

[jasoncran]

Deborah13

Quite the contrary, the link provides the why the JW translation is INCORRECT. Their explanation does not work in the GK. Which may be why in their translation to their Greek peoples does not read like the English translation. The Greeks would never accept their reasoning on the English translation especially taken in context.

I guess I read it different. The JW translation is that the Word is not an actual person. Same way I read the Greek as the Word is as authoritative as God who exalted his word above his name. Your translation does not make Jesus creator, so it's not supportive of the "Trinity Concept" a god made of 3 parts.

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, The same was in the beginning with God.

The same was as the Word as with as is God. Trinity concept which gets thrown in these JW discussions makes the Word of God the literal Jesus. Jesus is the Word. The JW's add the word "A" A god, that is also not correct. The JW interpretation comes from Jesus being a lesser being or some angel. The Trinity interpretation makes Jesus a piece of God, or the Word part of God. Both do not Make Jesus fully God on his own without being a lesser god, or having two more parts added in. Jesus is fully God, and He is not his Father, or a piece of his father.

This is what makes these types of discussions tricky because John 1:1 is looked at through some doctrine on both sides. Jesus a piece of a god, or Jesus a lesser "Created" angelic god.

Gen 1:26 And God ('ĕlôhı̂ym) 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.

'ĕlôhı̂ym is a Hebrew Plural meaning two full and separate God's here speaking. We have the two "I Am's" that have always been here from the start. Father and Son.
Both have their own throne.

Mike.

elohim isn't plural. its a tense in Hebrew that appears to be plural that is merely accentuation. ie the idea of KING of KINGS. that is what the Hebrew means and elohim is a borrowed word from the Chaldean tounge. it means God of a congress of gods.

 

[Brother Mike]

jasoncran

elohim isn't plural. its a tense in Hebrew that appears to be plural that is merely accentuation. ie the idea of KING of KINGS. that is what the Hebrew means and elohim is a borrowed word from the Chaldean tounge. it means God of a congress of gods.

Thank you Jason, I am aware of that. It is used in a singular form and used for just gods in general. Both the BDB and Strongs have it listed a plural though. In the case of Genesis though, God is speaking to someone who we are in the image of. In this case it would be plural as Strongs suggest.

Those who support a 3-1 Trinity god have used this to prove that all 3 are there. Those that do not support a 3-1 god like myself prove that the Son had always been with the Father and denotes family which we become part of the Godhead Body, not the Godhead without the body.

So Jason, I won't disagree with you, because those that know more about Hebrew than myself can't seem to fully agree.

Mike.


Mike.