There Are Many Scriptures That Disprove The Trinity

[homwardbound]

I think you will find that NWL believes the body of Jesus was vaporized, not risen back to life. At least most Jehovah Witnesses that I have talked to, deny the literal physical resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. PLUS many of them believe that the Jesus they teach, had only a spiritual resurrection, and therefore they also believe HE also has already returned spiritually, and indwells the Watchtower building controlling everything that is Published there, so that it is equal to the Word of God. Therefore they do not question the Watchtower's accuracy, even when we show them in KJV that the Watchtower has contradicted what GOD has said; they will automatically then assume we have interpreted the Bible wrong, because the Watchtower cannot be wrong.

Correct me if I am wrong NWL.


Matthew 24:26 (NASB)
[SUP]26 [/SUP] "So if they say to you, 'Behold, He is in the wilderness,' do not go out, or, 'Behold, He is in the inner rooms,' do not believe them.

And:
1 John 4:3 and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Christ was not only risen in Spirit but flesh too.
Thomas put his hand in his side felt, and knew, Christ hung around for forty days in the flesh and even ate with them after the resurrection. So yes he is justified in the Spirit but was risen in flesh to perfect flesh. The only flesh that was and is forever perfect, and the only flesh that ever pleased God or ever will.
So we are called to be alive in Spirit today and consider ourselves to be dead to flesh and alive to God



John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Can't see the kingdom without being born again, and this today is available through God the Father, if one believes by Christ they are forgiven period, have received this, are moved onto life in the Spirit of God from God as gift

 

[VCO]

And:
1 John 4:3 and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Christ was not only risen in Spirit but flesh too.
Thomas put his hand in his side felt, and knew, Christ hung around for forty days in the flesh and even ate with them after the resurrection. So yes he is justified in the Spirit but was risen in flesh to perfect flesh. The only flesh that was and is forever perfect, and the only flesh that ever pleased God or ever will.
So we are called to be alive in Spirit today and consider ourselves to be dead to flesh and alive to God

John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Can't see the kingdom without being born again, and this today is available through God the Father, if one believes by Christ they are forgiven period, have received this, are moved onto life in the Spirit of God from God as gift

And follow it through to the next step.

John 1:12-13 (NASB)
[SUP]12 [/SUP] But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
[SUP]13 [/SUP] who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Received Him as what?

Colossians 2:6 (NIV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord {which means Master}, continue to live in him,

Romans 10:9 (NASB)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; {It is not a confession if you have not already received HIM willingly as LORD in your Heart, that would only be a profession, and a profession will not save.}

Is that not works righteousness? NO, the ability to Receive Jesus Christ as LORD, is purely a Work of the Holy Spirit, and therefore is part of the Free Gift of GOD.

 

[NWL]

The passage from Colossians is about the supremacy of Jesus Christ -- He has supremacy in all things. He is Lord over all of creation -- over all of created things.

Again, yes, He did die -- but that isn't what Colossians 1 is about. It is talking about Jesus Christ's supremacy....He is supreme over all of creation, supreme over death, etc. Jesus didn't have to die in order to gain this supremacy, but even in His death, Jesus showed His supremacy. In the context of Colossians 1, firstborn has to do with supremacy, but we can only know that by reading the context of the passage.

In the "firstborn" puppies question the context is different. I'll answer your question anyway....I have a feeling that you are waiting for me to answer this....No, a puppy could not be called the firstborn cat of a litter of kittens. Why? Because you are asking about a litter of kittens. Context says everything.

Hi again Arwen, before we go on I need to ask you something, for the sake of any readers and for myself I ask you to stop spamming the board with the unnecessary use parallel scripture in relation to me saying 'other translations render certain verses the same as the Jehovah's Witnesses NWT'. It shows a lack of tact and is chaotic to do so. If you have a problem with the way a certain passage is rendered, please tactfully bring it to my attention, maybe doing so one or two at a time. Posting a heap of scripture regarding many different passages doesn't allow me the time to respond back to any misunderstanding you may have, nor is it sensible, since no single person is going to read every passage parallel of transaltion which you post, since it would simply take too much time.

There is also no need to post passage in an attempt 'bring to light' the way other bible verses renders scripture, I am fully aware of other translations. I always review over 25+ Bible rendering of any given verse before (usually) posting it here on CC, so please understand I'm fully aware.

Now, back to our discussion. Your answer to "Could a 'puppy' be called the 'firstborn cat' of a 'litter of kittens'" was 'No' because "Because [I was] asking about a litter of kittens".

And you couldn't of answered the question more correctly! A Puppy cannot, by definition be "firstborn of a cat" because he's not in that group of kittens, he's not a kitten himself. By definition you have to be part of that group to be labelled firstborn of it.

This same principle can be found in Exodus 11:5, with “the firstborn of Pharaoh”. Now if I asked what type of person was Pharaoh's firstborn, the logical answer would be his firstborn child. And still too, if I was to ask what type of persons would Pharaoh's second-born, third-born be the answer would still be his children. This is again because to be called firstborn of something, by definition you have to be part of that group. Now this same rule applies whether or not firstborn is in regards to firstborn is the sense of supremacy/authority, or firstborn in the sense of time it works either way. For instance Jacob bought Esua's Birthright (his firstborn status) for stew, Jacob could then be called the firstborn Son in a sense of "authority", however Jacob obviously had to be part of Isaacs son's to do so.

So when we take this basic principle, and apply it to Col 1:15 what do we get? Well we get the same outcome! Jesus has to be part of that group - of creation- to be called firstborn in it, regardless if it's talking about rank or time. This is an inescapable fact!

(Colossians 1:15,18) "...He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation...He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead..."

Jesus was the firstborn from the dead, he therefore had to of died, he's part of that group, Jesus is firstborn of creation, therefore he must be part of that group, he must be created!

You can go and look at every instance "the firstborn of" is used in scripture, its used an upwards of 30 times and every single instance its used, the firstborn is always part of that group its firstborn in. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals, its an irrefutable truth my friend, if you accept that a puppy cannot be be a kitten for the reason you have to be a kitten to be labelled firstborn of it then you should then be accepting that for Jesus to be firstborn of creation is that he is part of that group, a created thing.

Scripture goes on to show us this very same fact;

(Rev 3:14 NASB) "..."To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, [who is] the faithful and true Witness, [who is] the Beginning of the creation of God..."

 

[NWL]

In Hebrews 1:3 -- again, the context is talking about Jesus' superiority over the angels. Hebrews 1 declares that the Son is YHWH. Jesus is the exact representation of the Father because Jesus is God's full revelation to humanity. Jesus is YHWH just as the Father is YHWH.

2 Corinthians is talking about sanctification. We are being sanctified and being made more like the Father through our faith in Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit, as other Scripture points to. It is the whole triune God in action.

Again your reasoning makes no sense my friend, if Heb 1:3 is showing Jesus is the YHWH because he's "reflection of [his] glory and the exact representation of his very being" then by that same logic he should also be the Father, why would you assume that simply because he's his reflection that that means he too should have the name YHWH. If I was the reflection of my twin (and I am a twin btw) would that imply I should share his name? Nope, likewise If Jesus is the reflection of the Father should he share the same name YHWH? Nope again. It's illogical reasoning friend.

And who makes the call whether or not it was true worship or merely homage? What if the NWT were wrong? They translated it that way because they assumed that Jesus was just a king who was not God Himself. But what if they were in error, and have thus led many readers into error by this rendering?

I know you could say the same about Trinitarian translators. However, it is clear that the early Christians worshiped Jesus as God. The fact that Jesus was worshiped as God was part of the debates at Nicea. One of the arguments against Arius' position was that if Jesus was not YHWH, then it would be wrong for Christians to worship Him. But a statement like that couldn't be made unless Jesus was already being worshiped.

That's the question you should be asking Awren, who can make that call whether Jesus should be worshiped, should the proskyneo given to Jesus be translated worship or obeisance? Well for one, to claim it should be rendered worship for the reason that Jesus was worshiped is circular reasoning. And second, the fact that nowhere in scripture (no not even in Revelation as I'll show you) does it say to worship Jesus should be another reason as to why it's wrong by context to say that proskyneo to Jesus was Godly worship.

Now you want to use the term "only" as part of your argument because you think that it benefits your point of view, but you discount it when it does not fit your view....

As I said before only in scripture can mean only, but when it conflicts with another verse is when we need to dig deeper. Worship "only" been given to the Father doesn't conflict with scripture since nowhere else is Jesus or the Holy Spirit given Godly worship.

Matthew 4:8-10 (NASB)

Jesus doesn't deny His own deity here, nor does He say that only the Father should be worshiped. What He did say is that only God should be worshiped. We can't assume here that Jesus was only talking about the Father. We can assume that He was referring to YHWH here. This verse doesn't prove anything.

I didn't claim Jesus denied his divinity, I said that Jesus said to only worship YHWH

Matthew 6:9 (NASB)

Again, Jesus didn't say here, "only pray to the Father and not Me." If it said that, you would have a case. But it does not. Jesus is simply talking about praying to the Father, which is, of course legitimate. The Father is YHWH. But that doesn't mean that Jesus forbids us from praying to Him or to the Holy Spirit or to the whole triune God. So, this verse proves nothing.

I guess that since the verse also doesn't read that we can't pray to Mary, the Apostles, Angels or even people who have died that it means we can in fact pray to them, does it? No, plain and simply Jesus taught us how to pray, did he direct prayer to the Holy Spirit? No, well did he direct prayer to himself? Again No, but he only direct prayer to his Father, therefore it was not wrong of me to claim Jesus said to only pray to the Father, show me otherwise.

John 4:23 (NASB)
23 But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers.

Once again, this verse doesn't make the "Father only" claim that you think it does. It is simply talking about worshiping the Father. That doesn't mean that Jesus is saying that He and the Holy Spirit should not be worshiped and glorified along with the Father. Once again, this proves nothing.

Again, by you reasoning I could claim the same things as I just said above! but the fact remains, true worship isn't going to be restored to Jesus nor to the HS, but by this verse onlyto the Father

Now, the NWT might have translated the worship passages in the Gospels as being obeisance instead of worship....but is it consist of that where Jesus and the Father are both worshiped in heaven as God? Jesus and the Father are both worshiped as God there, even in the NWT....

Let's look at this one again:
Revelation 5:11-14 (NASB)

“To the One sitting on the throne+ and to the Lamb+ be the blessing and the honor+ and the glory and the might forever and ever.”+ 14 The four living creatures were saying: “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshipped.

Let for arguments sake say Jesus should of been worshiped as God, and picture him walking down a road to whatever village you can think of, and he was walking along with his apostle Peter, now if scripture said "the men upon seeing Jesus and his apostle became overwhelmed ran and worshiped" would you logically conclude they must of been worshiping Peter along with Jesus? Or would your biblically trained mind be able to understand that since the Bible never states that Peter was ever to be given Godly worship, that the verse was not linking the "worship" to him but rather Jesus.

Now try to understand the above and realize that the verse doesn't say they worshiped Jesus along with the Father, all its says is that the Father was on his throne and Jesus was with him, and they "worshiped. Another thing to note is that they were before the one sitting on the throne (the Father), Jesus wasn't depicted as on the throne with him, so the logical thing to assume is that any type of worship (Godly worship) given was to the one on the throne and not to Jesus. The same was that if a king was sitting on the throne and his son was along him, if someone came to pay homage in front of them, you wouldn't assume that they were paying homage to the son, but the one on the throne, the King! Thirdly the word for worship cannot even be proved as Godly worship but could simply be sign as paying homage. The verse simply cannot be used as proof as godly worship given to Jesus.

 

[NWL]

Do you believe Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah?

Yes, I do.

Do you believe he came in the flesh

Yes, I do.

went to the cross died there and was risen back to life and is now with Father as one in Spirit?

I believe that he died on a Stauros or Xylon, not on a cross, but yes he was risen back to life and is one with the father as the context tells us in John 17.

I agree with all your points my friend.

 

[danschance]

How could Jesus die on an upright pole if a sign was placed above His head?

And above His head they put up the charge against Him which read, "THIS IS JESUS THE KING OF THE JEWS." Matt 27:37

 

[NWL]

How could Jesus die on an upright pole if a sign was placed above His head?

The question you should be asking yourself is why should the word "Cross" be inserted into Bibles when both the Hebrew and Greek for the instrument for Jesus death mean simply a tree, stake, pole or a beam. The word "cross" has no connection with the word Starous or Xlyon, therefore it shouldn't be seen in any Bible. If people wish to speculate then speculate, however do not insert pure assumption into Gods word.

 

[danschance]

The question you should be asking yourself is why should the word "Cross" be inserted into Bibles when both the Hebrew and Greek for the instrument for Jesus death mean simply a tree, stake, pole or a beam. The word "cross" has no connection with the word Starous or Xlyon, therefore it shouldn't be seen in any Bible. If people wish to speculate then speculate, however do not insert pure assumption into Gods word.

So you wish to not even attempt to answer my simple question. I will assume you can't answer it.

 

[NWL]

I think you will find that NWL believes the body of Jesus was vaporized, not risen back to life. At least most Jehovah Witnesses that I have talked to, deny the literal physical resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. PLUS many of them believe that the Jesus they teach, had only a spiritual resurrection, and therefore they also believe HE also has already returned spiritually, and indwells the Watchtower building controlling everything that is Published there, so that it is equal to the Word of God. Therefore they do not question the Watchtower's accuracy, even when we show them in KJV that the Watchtower has contradicted what GOD has said; they will automatically then assume we have interpreted the Bible wrong, because the Watchtower cannot be wrong.

Correct me if I am wrong NWL.

I'm not here on CC to defend the Watchtower society Biblical teaching, or here to defend the teaching of the Jehovah's Witnesses. However when misunderstanding's are stated as fact (I won't call them lies because you may simply be ignorant of the JW's), then I would naturally explain their actual belief along with their supporting evidence, this is not because I'm defending them but rather am doing what anyone should do, clear up false accusations of people when they know incorrect things are being said.

Firstly they do not believe Jesus was vaporized, that is false, however as you said they do believe his body didn't rise. They do believe Jesus rose as a spirit, however they do not believe Jesus dwells in the Watchtower building or any building for that fact. He sits at the right a hand of his Father in heaven. Jehovah's Witnesses are also encouraged to question their belief's and keep testing in that they are in the faith, the accusation that they aren't allowed to question beliefs is false.

 

[NWL]

Re: Owned again...

The Trinitarian interpretation of Isa 48.16 is consistent with Isa 61.1, 08, just as it is with the rest of the book of Isaiah, in that Yahweh The Son is speaking.

Thank you for that random statement Bowman which doesn't add or take away from our conversation, since we're sharing random facts did you know the Muslim interpretation of the Bible is that it's corrupt and holds little value in their lives, just thought I'd randomly throw that in their even though it proves nothing.

Isaiah did not break into the monologue to interject that Yahweh had sent The Spirit.

If Isaiah did not break into monologue then why do we have various translations -trinitarian translations- referring that It was indeed Isaiah, simply ignoring the facts and claiming otherwise doesn't fool anyone.

The Book of Hebrews owns you like no other.

Not only does the book initiate with the declaration that the ONE God revealed Himself as containing plural parts

Where does Heb 1:1 show that God reveals himself as a trinity bowman, just because the verse reads he spoke on many occasions and spoke in various forms of ways is not proof that he was talking of the trinity, again mere assumptions! You can keep claiming this nonsense all day, it may fool ignorant ones who want to hang onto the trinity, but all it is, is speculative.

but then in verse two, He declares that He now reveals Himself in The Second Person of The Trinity, which is now called The Son.

Mere assumptions, yes it reads he reveals himself through his son, but where does it state that this son is the second part of the trinity, where are those words (more or less) in Hebrews 1:2? You can keep waving you magic wand all day Bowman, it doesn't make speculation anymore real.

 

[phil36]

Hi NWL,


Just to clarify for us who are reading along. do you worship a created being?

 

[NWL]

If we read all of Revelation, then it becomes clear that, in context, the Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last is referring to Jesus Christ. In it, Jesus is worshiped along with the Father as God. The imagery used to describe Jesus in it is identical to the imagery used to describe YHWH in the OT.

Jesus is the one who is coming again. That is part of what our Christian hope is.

You'll also see that it is Jesus who speaks often in this book. It isn't the Father.

Revelation 22:20 shows that it is Jesus who is coming, not the Father.

I'm not even going to comment on anything else from this particular post because its pointless for now.

Let me bring it to your attention that your now fighting scripture with scripture. Instead of rationally and logically explain Rev 1:4.

(Revelation 1:4) "...John to the seven congregations that are in the [district of] Asia: May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from “The One who is and who was and who is coming,” and from the seven spirits that are before his throne and from Jesus Christ..."

Please explain to me how we are to have undeserved kindness from "The One who is and who was and who is coming Jesus Christ" and from "the seven spirits" and from "Jesus Christ"..."

So basically, explain to me how they're two Jesus in these verses?

Clearly the one who is coming is the Father, stop fighting scripture with scripture, you don;t win anything, but only contradict the Bible.

 

[NWL]

Hi NWL,


Just to clarify for us who are reading along. do you worship a created being?

Hi phil36, although I don't think any readers would assume I worship something that's created, nor do I think you have a innocent motive to simply show the readers that I don't worship a created being (by which I hope I'm wrong), I shall answer regardless.

The answer to your question is no.

 

[phil36]

Hi NWL,

thanks for answering that, so Jesus has always been eternal never had a beginning?

 

[VCO]

And:
1 John 4:3 and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.
2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

Christ was not only risen in Spirit but flesh too.
Thomas put his hand in his side felt, and knew, Christ hung around for forty days in the flesh and even ate with them after the resurrection. So yes he is justified in the Spirit but was risen in flesh to perfect flesh. The only flesh that was and is forever perfect, and the only flesh that ever pleased God or ever will.
So we are called to be alive in Spirit today and consider ourselves to be dead to flesh and alive to God



John 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Can't see the kingdom without being born again, and this today is available through God the Father, if one believes by Christ they are forgiven period, have received this, are moved onto life in the Spirit of God from God as gift

Plus those that deny His resurrection was physical need read and meditate on this verse:

Matthew 26:29 (ASV)
[SUP]29 [/SUP] But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

 

[VCO]

I'm not here on CC to defend the Watchtower society Biblical teaching, or here to defend the teaching of the Jehovah's Witnesses. However when misunderstanding's are stated as fact (I won't call them lies because you may simply be ignorant of the JW's), then I would naturally explain their actual belief along with their supporting evidence, this is not because I'm defending them but rather am doing what anyone should do, clear up false accusations of people when they know incorrect things are being said.

Firstly they do not believe Jesus was vaporized, that is false, however as you said they do believe his body didn't rise. They do believe Jesus rose as a spirit, however they do not believe Jesus dwells in the Watchtower building or any building for that fact. He sits at the right a hand of his Father in heaven. Jehovah's Witnesses are also encouraged to question their belief's and keep testing in that they are in the faith, the accusation that they aren't allowed to question beliefs is false.

Matthew 26:29 (ASV)
[SUP]29 [/SUP]But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

You may be talking about a particular Jehovah Witness Church that you are familiar with, and is more liberal than most; but here in the USA Witnesses who dare to question the Watchtowers teachings are frequently disfellowshipped and shunned, even by family members. Jehovah's Witnesses, disfellowshipping and shunning

The Jehovah’s Witnesses believe Jesus’ invisible reign began in 1914, and that he examined all the religious organizations on earth and selected the Watchtower as his “faithful and wise servant.

"The Watchtower", October 1st 1955 Issue, Page 518:"...[Jesus Christ's original human body] was disposed of by Jehovah God, dissolved into its constituent elements or atoms."
-------------------------------------------------------------
"Things in Which it is Impossible for God to Lie", 1965, Page 354:
"The human body of flesh, which Jesus Christ laid down forever as a ransom sacrifice, was disposed of by God's power..."
-------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/49159/1/All-About-Jesus-Christ#.UvA8juiwX6A

 

[Bowman]

Study up....

Thank you for that random statement Bowman which doesn't add or take away from our conversation, since we're sharing random facts did you know the Muslim interpretation of the Bible is that it's corrupt and holds little value in their lives, just thought I'd randomly throw that in their even though it proves nothing.

Not exactly.

I have spent over 15 years studying Koranic Arabic, and the obvious conclusion drawn is that the authors of the Koran merely paraphrased and copied the Holy Bible to compose their opus.

If they reject the Holy Bible - then they are rejecting their Koran.

Again...people who exempt themselves from the study of the original languages can assert all they want to absolutely no avail...

If Isaiah did not break into monologue then why do we have various translations -trinitarian translations- referring that It was indeed Isaiah, simply ignoring the facts and claiming otherwise doesn't fool anyone.

There is no reason for Isaiah to break into the monologue just to introduce The Spirit and then exit the conversation.

You can do better than googling this tired old argument...defend it!

Mere assumptions, yes it reads he reveals himself through his son, but where does it state that this son is the second part of the trinity, where are those words (more or less) in Hebrews 1:2? You can keep waving you magic wand all day Bowman, it doesn't make speculation anymore real.

The Greek informs the reader that the one God consists of plural parts, per lexicography.

You are missing so much of God's word by exempting yourself from the study of it.

Further, the Holy Bible defines 'Faith' as 'acting upon established Truth'.

This established Truth has the Son as the originator, and the Book of Hebrews provides examples of 'Faith' as being Trinitarian.

Thus...'Faith' is acting upon the Trinity.

 

[Bowman]

You simply don't know scripture...

Scripture goes on to show us this very same fact;

(Rev 3:14 NASB) "..."To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, [who is] the faithful and true Witness, [who is] the Beginning of the creation of God..."

Let’s review Rev 3.14…


και τω αγγελω της εν λαοδικεια εκκλησιας γραψον ταδε λεγει ο αμην ο μαρτυς ο πιστος και [ο] αληθινος η αρχη της κτισεως του θεου

Kai tō angelō tēs en laodikeia ekklēsias grapson tade legei o amēn o martus o pistos kai o alēthinos ē archē tēs ktiseōs tou theou

Rev 3.14 And to the angel in the Laodicea assembly, write: This says the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the origin, the creation, the God:


Concentrating on what you had highlighted as ‘support’ for your Jehovah Witness stance, you seem to want to diminish Jesus’ deity by interpreting an English translation to mean that He was created.

First, Jesus is the one being directly quoted (tade legei) and His epithets are listed appropriately. Jesus is not applying these epithets to anyone else – as they are applied solely to Him, alone – same as He applies them to Himself all through Revelation chapters 2 & 3.




και τω αγγελω της εν λαοδικεια εκκλησιας γραψον ταδε λεγει ο αμην ο μαρτυς ο πιστος και [ο] αληθινος η αρχη της κτισεως του θεου

In seven out of seven sequential verses, the formula ‘tade legei’ (demonstrative accusative; indicative verb) precedes the nominative singular masculine article ‘o’.

This translates into what is being stated by the epithets listed after the formula.

This means that listed epithets belong to Jesus – they do not represent separate entities.

The trend in all of these epithets points to Jesus’ deity not to Him being created.

Further, each address to the assemblies initiates with Jesus’ words, and then concludes with stating that the Spirit is the one who has just addressed them – thus, confirming the Trinity.

Secondly, this verse mandates that Jesus was never created and that He is the singular, nominative archē (i.e. the origin; the active cause), of the singular genitive creation, and the singular genitive God.

Jesus is God.

All things came into being through Jesus.

Thirdly, confirming that Jesus is the creator and not the creation, we have the following…





Peter to the Jews

ο θεος αβρααμ και ισαακ και ιακωβ ο θεος των πατερων ημων εδοξασεν τον παιδα αυτου ιησουν ον υμεις μεν παρεδωκατε και ηρνησασθε κατα προσωπον πιλατου κριναντος εκεινου απολυειν υμεις δε τον αγιον και δικαιον ηρνησασθε και ητησασθε ανδρα φονεα χαρισθηναι υμιν τον δε αρχηγον της ζωης απεκτεινατε ον ο θεος ηγειρεν εκ νεκρων ου ημεις μαρτυρες εσμεν

ho theos abraam kai isaak kai iakōb ho theos tōn paterōn ēmōn edoxasen ton paida autou iēsoun on umeis men paredōkate kai ērnēsasthe kata prosōpon pilatou krinantos ekeinou apoluein umeis de ton agion kai dikaion ērnēsasthe kai ētēsasthe andra phonea charisthēnai umin ton de archēgon tēs zōēs apekteinate on ho theos ēgeiren ek nekrōn ou ēmeis martures esmen

The "God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob," "the God of our fathers," glorified the Son of Him, Jesus, whom you delivered up, and denied Him in the presence of Pilate, that one having decided to set Him free. But you denied the Holy and Just One, and asked for a man, a murderer, to be granted to you. And the Originator of Life you killed, whom God raised up from the dead, of which we are witnesses. (Acts 3.13 -15)

Here we have Peter declaring to the Jews that they rejected and killed the ‘Originator of Life’ (de archēgon tēs zōēs), Jesus.

Here we can see the contrast that is being made as the Jews chose the release of a murderer(death) over that of Jesus Christ (the very originator of Life).

 

[homwardbound]

And follow it through to the next step.

John 1:12-13 (NASB)
[SUP]12 [/SUP] But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
[SUP]13 [/SUP] who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

Received Him as what?

Colossians 2:6 (NIV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP] So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord {which means Master}, continue to live in him,

Romans 10:9 (NASB)
[SUP]9 [/SUP] that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; {It is not a confession if you have not already received HIM willingly as LORD in your Heart, that would only be a profession, and a profession will not save.}

Is that not works righteousness? NO, the ability to Receive Jesus Christ as LORD, is purely a Work of the Holy Spirit, and therefore is part of the Free Gift of GOD.

So either one is a professor or a possessor, yep I think that to be right

 

[homwardbound]

Yes, I do.


Yes, I do.



I believe that he died on a Stauros or Xylon, not on a cross, but yes he was risen back to life and is one with the father as the context tells us in John 17.

I agree with all your points my friend.

Thanks but what is:
died on a Stauros or Xylon, not on a cross,