(Psalms 83:18) Whom to worship, Help!?

[NWL]

Jehovah's witnesses can have serious questions, too.

mdankosk

mdankosk I really appreciate your answer it does make sense of some things that you're saying and I do agree with you on a number of things, such as that we are to "only" pray to the Father and that we can ask the Father for holy spirit for guidance and as a comforter.

Some things however I'm going to have to disagree with, for instance you say that the reason why others pray to Jesus and the HS is because the Father gets busy at time is ridiculous, look at what this psalmist said (Psalms 147:4) "[God] counts the number of the stars and he calls all of them by names.."

And scientist say that there more Stars then grain of sand in the Sea, so can God who's know the Stars by name not handle a couple Billion of prayers? I do remember however that you did say that you used to be catholic and you might not believe this teaching anymore, which I hope you don't.

Dziekuje mdankosk for your insight.

 

[NWL]

Glad to know.

Jesus is Jehovah.

Jimmydiggs

I see where your coming from in the post that you supplies, where Jehovah says he will not share his glory and that we can clearly see that Jesus has the glory along with Jehovah.

But you need to ask yourself why does Jehovah share his Glory with Jesus even though he said he won't, is it because Jesus is Jehovah? The answer is simple, Jesus is the Image of God and reflection of God, so the glory Jesus has is not his own that God has shared with him but it's reflecting from God onto Jesus.

NWT (Colossians 1:15) He is the image of the invisible God

GOD'S WORD Translation (Hebrews 1:3) [Jesus] His Son is the reflection of God's glory and the exact likeness of God's being.

Jesus not once claimed that he had more glory than the father in any way, Jesus expressions were the opposite. (John 5:19) "..The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. ." (John 17:3) "..Jesus responded to them, "What I teach doesn't come from me but from the one who sent me.."

Jimmydiggs I am being truthful here in me saying that I am a twin, I "do" have a twin brother, now people come up to me all the time and say you look and act exactly like your twin, but does that mean that me and my twin are the same people? No of course not, I could even say that my twin is the exact likeness of me, that still doesn't mean he is me.

Concerning The father calling himself the first and the last and Jesus calling himself with the same title.

Jehovah rightly describes his own position as the one and only almighty God, saying: “I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. Jehovah was making a statement about His unique position as the true God. He is God eternal, and besides him there is indeed no God.

However when Jesus calls himself it In Revelation, Jesus is talking about his bestowed title, calling attention to his unique resurrection.

Jesus was indeed “the First” human to be resurrected to immortal spirit life.

(Colossians 1:18) " and he is the head of the body, the congregation. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead"

Moreover, he is “the Last” to be so resurrected by Jehovah personally. This privilege of resurrecting people directly to Heaven then gets passed onto Jesus.

(John 11:25) Jesus said to her: “I am the resurrection and the life. He that exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life;

So not to overwhelm this post with me rambling on i'll stop there, but will answer the following so called "Jehovah is Jesus" texts you provided if you wish, I also always thought that the teaching of the trinity was that the Father son and spirit were separate but all together co-ruling, its nice to know that you don't believe this with your claim that Jesus is Jehovah instead of separate as the trinity teaches.

I do, like everyone else's comments, appreciate your answer.[/B]

 

[damombomb]

1Timothy3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

 

[NWL]

1Timothy3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached to the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

KJV (1 Timothy 3:16) "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh."

Is this what was copied by men of God, or is this verse tampered with by Trinity crazed translators?

It couldn't have been copied that "God was manifest in the flesh" since the original Greek text doesn't contain the word for "God", This text was altered to make it look like Jesus is in fact God in this scripture.

Many other translations as well render this verse "God was manifest in the flesh" , in an attempt to validate the trinity doctrine taught in the Churches of Christendom.

The text should read more of something like this.](1 Timothy 3:16) . . .‘He was made manifest in flesh. . "

So was the original text meant to be written as "God" or "He" as some people have got mixed up.

In the ancient codex, the contraction for “God,” formed by two Greek letters “0C,” appears originally to have read “0C,” the word for “who.” Obviously, this meant that Christ Jesus was not “God” in this instance.

Newer translations of the correct manuscripts agree with the example text I gave.

(1 Timothy 3:16) . . .‘He was made manifest in flesh. . " So in this instance this text is not a supporting scripture for the trinity

 

[wwjd_kilden]

^

I think this is a good point to show Jesus is God:

In the beginning was the word
and the word was with/ in front of (facing) God
and the word was God
...
and the word became flesh and dwelt among us

 

[NWL]

^

I think this is a good point to show Jesus is God:

In the beginning was the word
and the word was with/ in front of (facing) God
and the word was God
...
and the word became flesh and dwelt among us

Many people do not know but this text has also been mistranslated, the ‘Word’ in this text isn’t God himself but is meant to rendered ‘a god’.

Where ‘theos’ in Greek is used on a person, scholars always render the person “a god”, however when ‘ho theos’ is used then it become ‘God’ as in Almighty God whereas ‘thoes/a god’ means “divine” “godlike” a “Mighty person”. "Theos/ god" and "ho theos/God" mean two completely different things, don't get confused.

For people who say that "theos" in this instance should be translated "God", then you also must think that Judges, Angels and Satan is also Almighty God too then, Since Judges are called gods (John 10: 34, 35), angels a called gods (1 Corinthians 8:5), Moses is referred to as a god, even Satan himself is called a god (2 Corinthians 4:4), WHY is this? Because they are/were mighty and powerful the same goes or Jesus in John 1:1.

Most people don't realise that John 1:1 doesn't support the trinity, the trinity doctrine is that the Father/Son/Spirit = God Yet look and see what John 1:1 says "the Word [Jesus] was God" the scripture is saying Jesus= God, it goes against the trinity.

Also how can Jesus be with God and God at the same time? So God is there in heaven "God =Father/Son/Spirit" and then the "Son" is with the Father/Son/Spirit. How can the son be with the Son?

 

[mdankoski]

Some things however I'm going to have to disagree with, for instance you say that the reason why others pray to Jesus and the HS is because the Father gets busy at time is ridiculous, look at what this psalmist said (Psalms 147:4) "[God] counts the number of the stars and he calls all of them by names.."

Naturally, you are right. I don't believe that at all. I was telling you what I had been taught, the way it was taught to me, that's why I said it's ridiculous. If he ever did get too busy we wouldn't be here to answer the question, since all things are made by Him, and by Him all things consist! Guess I should have explained better, but thanks for the reply.

 

[mdankoski]

i don't believe like the Catholics. I have found the Truth. I think they might have started out all right, but through greed and jealousy they have changed and added to the Word of God that in some cases it actually goes against the Bible and makes God a liar. If you can really get a Catholic alone and actually listen, you will find that they are really hungry for the truth.

 

[jimmydiggs]

Typical Jehovah's Witnesses garbage.

I'm out for now.

 

[damombomb]

1 John 5:7For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one.
And The Spirit testifies because The Spirit is the truth
2Cor3:17Now the Lord is that Spirit,.... "The Lord", to whom the heart is turned, when the veil is removed, is Jesus Christ; and he is "that Spirit"

2Cor5:19For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people's sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation.
Jesus was definitely the Christ the son of the I am that I am or Jehovah

 

[damombomb]

1 John 5:7For there are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one.
And The Spirit testifies because The Spirit is the truth
2Cor3:17Now the Lord is that Spirit,.... "The Lord", to whom the heart is turned, when the veil is removed, is Jesus Christ; and he is "that Spirit"

2Cor5:19For God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, no longer counting people's sins against them. And he gave us this wonderful message of reconciliation.
Jesus was definitely the Christ the son of the I am that I am or Jehovah

Philippians 3:3: For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh

 

[tribesman]

Jehovah's witnesses can have serious questions, too. If he really wants to know...

I see little trace of him being here to learn, rather he seems to be here to teach JW doctrine. And, well, that is against the forum rules. We shall see for how long it will last.

 

[chesser]

JWs cant answer who created the earth. If they say god they admit jesus is god; if they say jesus they admit jesus is god.

 

[pitts288]

I see little trace of him being here to learn, rather he seems to be here to teach JW doctrine. And, well, that is against the forum rules. We shall see for how long it will last.

When talking about god, we should say this... god is love, god is life, satan is sin, satan is death.... so choose god, choose life and walk away from satan and his sin!

SIR YOU ENTERTAIN PEOPLE WHO DEBATE BY POSTING THIS COMMENT!

 

[NWL]

Typical Jehovah's Witnesses garbage.

I'm out for now.

And that is a typical response of someone who lacks the ability to reply back, the fact that you posted those "Jehovah is Jesus" scriptures by someone else shows that you are incapable of reasoning, by posting it you in fact denied the Trinity, since the trinity doesn't preach that Jesus is the Father but that theyr'e in fact separate. Btw the fact that you say what I say Is garage means you call the Bible garbage since all the claims I make regarding scripture it back up with scripture.

For those other people that think I'm here just to preach and "convert" that is not my goal, I am here to learn, by every post someone post I learn something new. I won't however stand for scriptures that have been blatantly mistranslated or mis-quoted such as John 1:1 and 1 john 5:7 even a simple google search regarding 1 john 5:7 even shows that its been mistranslated in the kjv and yet people still use it in order to support the trinity, its crazy.

But anyway, thanks for all the replies people, keep them coming, regards to everyone.

 

[damombomb]

NWL i think your sincere in your questions
Jehovah actually is the english translation of Yaweh, I Am That I Am or I Am or I Will Be

 

[damombomb]

The apostles were martyred for preaching Jesus Christ and him crucified
I imagine in the last days the same will happen to those who do not deny there faith
That should tell us something about a true believer
Rev3:8
I know your works: behold, I have set before you an open door, and no man can shut it: for you have a little strength, and have kept my word, and have not denied my name.
Notice Jesus said his name

 

[GraceBeUntoYou]

Hello all!! Hope everyone is well, please please read and answer my Q, I’m really interested in your answers.

Q1. If the Father “alone” is the most high over all the earth and Jesus himself said to “only” worship the father, then why do people worship the Holy Spirit and Jesus along with the Father?

Darby Bible Translation (Psalms 83:18) “...That they may know that thou alone, whose name is Jehovah, art the Most High over all the earth...”

Aramaic Bible in Plain English (Luke 4:8) “Yeshua answered and said to him, “It is written: 'you shall worship THE LORD JEHOVAH your God, and him only you shall serve.' “

Q2. When Jesus said "It is written: 'you shall worship THE LORD JEHOVAH your God, and him ONLY you shall serve" did he also mean for that to be directed to himself and the Holy Spirit?

I had intended on responding to some of your comments here earlier yesterday afternoon, however, in the middle of typing up my response I thought I had better hold off until the conversation developed a little more for the sake of clarity. The purpose of this post is not to respond to any one specific post of yours, but to respond to the totality of your posts in a roundabout way. There are some issues that I would like to discuss concerning the comments you’ve made about 1 Timothy 3.16, and John 1.1, but those will have to come in another post.

In unitarianism the terms “God,” and “YHWH” are assumed to refer to one Person, namely, the Father; thus, if Jesus is not the Father, then He is subsequently not “God,” or "YHWH." In reality, however, all that is proven in showing a difference between the Father and the Son is that the Son is not the Father, not that the Son is not God.

Overall, there's an entire array of different ways one could respond to the objections you've raised concerning Luke 4.8. While it is certainly possible that Christ spoke of Himself in Luke 4.8, seeing as He often spoke of Himself in parables and in third person (i.e., Luke 18.18-19, Matthew 16.13, John 17.1-5, etc.). However, my answer will differ, and focus on: (1) Christ as the object of worship/prayer, and (2) Perfector of the Law, sinlessness indwelling inside sinful flesh.

While it is true that Jesus had a God (John 20.17), one must also recognize that the Son was fully human, and possessed all of the faculties, responsibilities, emotions, and even the soul of man. To fulfill all righteousness for the benefit of the elect, this man obeyed all divine law (which includes the first commandment) in humility of spirit. The man Christ Jesus fulfilled the mandates of the Sermon on the Mount and left nothing undone. The authenticity of His humanity is expounded upon by the Apostles (Romans 5:17, John 11.35) and the Son Himself (Mattew 16.13). However, it must not be assumed that this Son of God was only man. It is clear that although His humanity is genuine, so too is His divinity. He is “the only God”/”the only unique God” (John 1:18) if understood adjectively, or if taken appositionally, “the only One, God”/“the only One, Himself God” who is at the Father's side. He possesses all the “fullness” of Deity (Colossians 2.9), being the “exact imprint” of His Father’s very nature (Hebrews 1.3), and is thereby consubstantial with the Father in divinity (John 1.1c), which of course was something He had even from “the beginning” (John 1.1). [FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
The Son, during His humilation took on human form and submitted Himself to the Father (Phil 2:7-8). The ministry of the Son was a ministry of service and submission to the will of the Father, and therefore Trinitarianism does acknowledge a temporal, albeit volitional, subordination in the sense of the Son's humanity during His earthly sojourn.

Through Christ’s obedience and perfection of the law we see two very significant things. Not only did Christ obey the first commandment, but He obeyed all the law, perfectly. As flesh and blood He was born under the law (Galatians 4.4), yet in the same token He is the sinless perfector of that very law – man and God in one, the God-man.

That said, [FONT=&quot]while it is true that προσκυνέω (proskuneo) can refer to obeisance, honor, and reverence, it is in the same token, the term which is most often utilized in the New Testament for worship. [FONT=&quot]The usage of [/FONT]προσκυνέω[/FONT] as it is found in Hebrews 1.6 can only refer to true genuine worship. The author of the Book of Hebrews draws from a couple different OT passages (Deuteronomy 32.43 LXX, Psalm 96.7 LXX), both of which are in reference to none other than YHWH. In Deuteronomy 32.34-43 the Lord claims that He alone is God (vv. 37, 39), and that He will take vengeance on His enemies and rescue His people. The broader theme is a warning to Israel not to abandon the Lord for any other god (Deuteronomy 31.24-30). Since the passage as it is found in the OT is speaking of giving worship to YHWH, by applying this quotation to Christ, the author of Hebrews is affirming that Christ is the object of worship in the heavenly realm. The author of Hebrews doesn’t just stop there, he goes on to apply an OT creation text that was in reference to YHWH, and applies it yet again to Christ (Hebrews 1.10-12 [c.f. Psalm 102.25]).

You made comment that Christ is not the object of prayer, but I’d challenge this very notion. In John 14.14, in His final discourse, Christ had been comforting the disciples in regards to His parting away, and ascension to the Heavenly realm to be seated at the right hand of the Father (John 13.1, 16; 14.2-5), and it is in this very discourse, that He claims to be, both, the agent of representation, and the agent of action (“If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it.” Now I realize that there is a traditional answer commonly used by Jehovah’s Witnesses which attempts to make the inclusion of the “Me” at John 14.14 seem contradictory to other texts (John 15.16, 16.23) where in reality no contradiction exists. A careful examination of John 15.16, and John 16.23 is totally consistent with John 14.14.The apostle writes in vv. 15.16, and 16.23 that requests made directly to the Father through the Son will be responded to by the Father. And like the Father, the apostle also writes that requests made directly to Christ will also, like the Father, be responded to directly by Christ. In order for you to prove that Christ is not the direct object of prayer, you must first start by making a textual based decision. You should consider the following:

(1) Manuscript/versional support in favor of earliest known reading ("If you ask Me anything in My name"): P66 P75 [FONT=&quot]א B W Δ Θ 060 f13 28 33 579 700 892 1006 1342 Byz(pt) [E H] l184(1/2) l514 l547 l672 l673(1/2) l813 l890(1/2) it(c, f) vg syr(p, h)[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](2) The inclusion of με (“Me”) has the strongest transmission throughout time and throughout various geographical locales, rather than its omission, which is predominantly much later than most witnesses, and least wide spread throughout geographical locales.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](3) The inclusion of με best explains the origin of both variant types, that is, the omission of με ("Me"), and its substitution ("the Father").[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot](4) Author's symmetrical style (v.14, "If you ask Me..." vs. v.15, "If you love Me...").[FONT=&quot][/FONT][/FONT]

(5) The correlation with ἐγώ (“I”) later in the verse.

[FONT=&quot](6) 1 Chronicles 16.8 LXX, "call on Him in His name"; Psalm 54.1, "save me in Your name."[/FONT]​

 

[GraceBeUntoYou]

KJV (1 Timothy 3:16) "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh."

Is this what was copied by men of God, or is this verse tampered with by Trinity crazed translators?

It couldn't have been copied that "God was manifest in the flesh" since the original Greek text doesn't contain the word for "God", This text was altered to make it look like Jesus is in fact God in this scripture.

Many other translations as well render this verse "God was manifest in the flesh" , in an attempt to validate the trinity doctrine taught in the Churches of Christendom.

The text should read more of something like this.](1 Timothy 3:16) . . .‘He was made manifest in flesh. . "

So was the original text meant to be written as "God" or "He" as some people have got mixed up.

In the ancient codex, the contraction for “God,” formed by two Greek letters “0C,” appears originally to have read “0C,” the word for “who.” Obviously, this meant that Christ Jesus was not “God” in this instance.

Newer translations of the correct manuscripts agree with the example text I gave.

(1 Timothy 3:16) . . .‘He was made manifest in flesh. . " So in this instance this text is not a supporting scripture for the trinity

“Is this what was copied by men of God, or is this verse tampered with by Trinity crazed translators?”

I wholly agree that 1 Timothy 3.16 reads, “He” rather than “God.” But to suggest that the verse in question was some kind of orthodox conspiracy, or purposeful tampering, therein is a true display of ignorance concerning the textual issue. There was no purposeful tampering of 1 Timothy 3.16, but in fact, this is simply an example of what textual critics refer to as an “error of the eye” (or “error of the pen”). That is,as a manuscript is dictated, a scribe may misread a text, and as a result, miscopy it.

When those who are not familiar with Greek, or have not been exposed to uncial texts, see the reality of the difference between the two readings at 1 Timothy 3:16, all of the conspiracy theories, such as what you have posed, go up in smoke.

Notice the stark similarity of the Greek words:

Θς = “God”
Ος = “He who”

The only difference between the two is glaringly obvious. On the one hand, omicron-sigma (Θ&#962 is standard nomina-sacra, short for Θεὸς (“God”). And the theta-sigma (Ο&#962 is simply “He who.” And of course, the only real difference between the two: a line.

 

[GraceBeUntoYou]

Many people do not know but this text has also been mistranslated, the ‘Word’ in this text isn’t God himself but is meant to rendered ‘a god’.

Where ‘theos’ in Greek is used on a person, scholars always render the person “a god”, however when ‘ho theos’ is used then it become ‘God’ as in Almighty God whereas ‘thoes/a god’ means “divine” “godlike” a “Mighty person”. "Theos/ god" and "ho theos/God" mean two completely different things, don't get confused.

For people who say that "theos" in this instance should be translated "God", then you also must think that Judges, Angels and Satan is also Almighty God too then, Since Judges are called gods (John 10: 34, 35), angels a called gods (1 Corinthians 8:5), Moses is referred to as a god, even Satan himself is called a god (2 Corinthians 4:4), WHY is this? Because they are/were mighty and powerful the same goes or Jesus in John 1:1.

Most people don't realise that John 1:1 doesn't support the trinity, the trinity doctrine is that the Father/Son/Spirit = God Yet look and see what John 1:1 says "the Word [Jesus] was God" the scripture is saying Jesus= God, it goes against the trinity.

Also how can Jesus be with God and God at the same time? So God is there in heaven "God =Father/Son/Spirit" and then the "Son" is with the Father/Son/Spirit. How can the son be with the Son?

It may have to wait until tomorrow night before I can respond to this (or if you don't wish to wait, I've actually discussed John 1.1 at length on several other threads on ChristianChat.com), but I would just like to say right now that this entire post is riddled with errors from the very first letter, to the very last punctuation mark.