-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
G
GraceBeUntoYou
Guest
“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 (Θςis standard nomina-sacra, short for Θεὸς (“God”). And the theta-sigma (Ος
Correction, to the last paragraph, should read as follows: "On the one hand, theta-sigma (Θς
is standard nomina-sacra, short for Θεὸς ('God'). And the omicron-sigma (Ος is simply 'He who.'"
P
psychomom
Guest
It would greatly surprise me if you are a genuine seeker, as, from what's been told me by members of the organization to which you belong, questioning the organization is strictly prohibited. Your further responses bear out the accuracy of my doubt that you wish to learn, rather than to teach that which is clearly anti-Christ.
As far as vainly quoting scripture, you're both right and wrong. You're wrong in that the Word of God contains all the answers to your original question, whom to worship, if one has eyes to see. (that understanding is given by God alone)
You're right in that, without the Spirit within you to appraise all spiritual things, giving the Word as a response to you is, I'm afraid, in vain.
I do sincerely thank you for answering the question I asked (and for your courtesy), and I pray God will reveal His Son to you that you might be saved by grace through faith.
~ellie
N
NWL
Guest
GraceBeUntoYou
I had a read of your reply and the first thing I noticed is you present an argument absolutely void of logic and miss fundamental points. I just wanna show you an example of some of your lack of logic.
To make the claim Jesus is talking in the third person here is utter nonsense.
(Luke 18:19) "Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God"
He clearly say's here he is NOT God here. Let me re-word it for you "Why are you saying these things about me only God is the one you should say this about"
There is absolutely no way that this Jewish leader would have taken that comment as anything else other than what it said, he knew God was Jehovah, he was a Jew.
Not only that but your just trying to cram a sentence in the scriptures that has no meaning whatsoever, Jesus speaking in the third person here has entirely no meaning whatsoever behind it, it's just in the scriptures taking up space.
Jesus spoke in third person very rarely and for one reason and one reason only, to make known the importance and significance of his name. Which is essential for salvation.
(1 John 2:22) "Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ"?
Now there's entirely no reason whatsoever to address every point you raise and I shall explain my reasons for this at the end. But what I will say is as per usual with Trinitarian argument it's based on assumption's and what you think is the case, just read your arguments and you SHOULD see my point.
Now let's start here. This next point is a fundamental flaw in your argument , let's see if you can get past this first, if you can't your argument falls.
The very first point to bring to your attention,is that Jesus say's "IT IS WRITTEN" this means written in the Hebrew scriptures. So there can be no argument the Hebrew scriptures where written for the Jews the Jews worshipped Jehovah ALONE!!
(Deut 6:4) “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. 5 And you must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your vital force. 6 And these words that I am commanding you today must prove to be on your heart; 7 and you must inculcate them in your son and speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up. 8 And you must tie them as a sign upon your hand, and they must serve as a frontlet band between your eyes; 9 and you must write them upon the doorposts of your house and on your gates"
Jesus said it right here to the woman at the well.
(John 4:22) "YOU worship what YOU do not know; WE worship what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews"
"WE worship" (this includes Jesus)the Jewish God, ONE God Jehovah. That's where salvation is found.
The Samaritan woman knew all about the Christ
25 "The woman said to him: “I know that Mes·si′ah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one arrives, he will declare all things to us openly.” 26 Jesus said to her: “I who am speaking to you am he"
and she knew the Christ was a worshipper of God.
29 “Come here, see a man that told me all the things I did. This is not perhaps the Christ, is it?"
He just told her he was a worshipper of God and she had no question of that fact whatsoever."she never said "you're not the Christ the Christ is God, he doesn't worship God"
Because she knew that "Christ" is the anointed of God(that's what Christ means) and not God himself.
So it boils down to this, "YOU" show me anywhere where "it is written" that the Jews worshipped anybody but Jehovah alone as this is the only way you can show how Jesus words in Matt 4:10 make any sense with regard the Trinitarian argument.
Now bear in mind I have no problem answering all your scriptures , but it is important that we don't end up jumping around scriptures and getting no real clarity our argument. So let's take it a scripture at a time for this reason.
There's also a further reason to work in this way .As a true Bible student if I can't answer a question on the scriptures I always ask myself why, all Jehovah's witnesses do this, because that is the attitude of a true Bible student, one who genuinely want's to please God. So I want to see if you demonstrate the same attitude and your not just the sort of person who sticks to a pre-conceived idea no matter what, as I would be wasting my time with a person like that.
Appreciate the time and length that you've taken to respond to my post.
Regards, NWL
I had a read of your reply and the first thing I noticed is you present an argument absolutely void of logic and miss fundamental points. I just wanna show you an example of some of your lack of logic.
To make the claim Jesus is talking in the third person here is utter nonsense.
(Luke 18:19) "Jesus said to him: “Why do you call me good? Nobody is good, except one, God"
He clearly say's here he is NOT God here. Let me re-word it for you "Why are you saying these things about me only God is the one you should say this about"
There is absolutely no way that this Jewish leader would have taken that comment as anything else other than what it said, he knew God was Jehovah, he was a Jew.
Not only that but your just trying to cram a sentence in the scriptures that has no meaning whatsoever, Jesus speaking in the third person here has entirely no meaning whatsoever behind it, it's just in the scriptures taking up space.
Jesus spoke in third person very rarely and for one reason and one reason only, to make known the importance and significance of his name. Which is essential for salvation.
(1 John 2:22) "Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ"?
Now there's entirely no reason whatsoever to address every point you raise and I shall explain my reasons for this at the end. But what I will say is as per usual with Trinitarian argument it's based on assumption's and what you think is the case, just read your arguments and you SHOULD see my point.
Now let's start here. This next point is a fundamental flaw in your argument , let's see if you can get past this first, if you can't your argument falls.
The very first point to bring to your attention,is that Jesus say's "IT IS WRITTEN" this means written in the Hebrew scriptures. So there can be no argument the Hebrew scriptures where written for the Jews the Jews worshipped Jehovah ALONE!!
(Deut 6:4) “Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah. 5 And you must love Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul and all your vital force. 6 And these words that I am commanding you today must prove to be on your heart; 7 and you must inculcate them in your son and speak of them when you sit in your house and when you walk on the road and when you lie down and when you get up. 8 And you must tie them as a sign upon your hand, and they must serve as a frontlet band between your eyes; 9 and you must write them upon the doorposts of your house and on your gates"
Jesus said it right here to the woman at the well.
(John 4:22) "YOU worship what YOU do not know; WE worship what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews"
"WE worship" (this includes Jesus)the Jewish God, ONE God Jehovah. That's where salvation is found.
The Samaritan woman knew all about the Christ
25 "The woman said to him: “I know that Mes·si′ah is coming, who is called Christ. Whenever that one arrives, he will declare all things to us openly.” 26 Jesus said to her: “I who am speaking to you am he"
and she knew the Christ was a worshipper of God.
29 “Come here, see a man that told me all the things I did. This is not perhaps the Christ, is it?"
He just told her he was a worshipper of God and she had no question of that fact whatsoever."she never said "you're not the Christ the Christ is God, he doesn't worship God"
Because she knew that "Christ" is the anointed of God(that's what Christ means) and not God himself.
So it boils down to this, "YOU" show me anywhere where "it is written" that the Jews worshipped anybody but Jehovah alone as this is the only way you can show how Jesus words in Matt 4:10 make any sense with regard the Trinitarian argument.
Now bear in mind I have no problem answering all your scriptures , but it is important that we don't end up jumping around scriptures and getting no real clarity our argument. So let's take it a scripture at a time for this reason.
There's also a further reason to work in this way .As a true Bible student if I can't answer a question on the scriptures I always ask myself why, all Jehovah's witnesses do this, because that is the attitude of a true Bible student, one who genuinely want's to please God. So I want to see if you demonstrate the same attitude and your not just the sort of person who sticks to a pre-conceived idea no matter what, as I would be wasting my time with a person like that.
Appreciate the time and length that you've taken to respond to my post.
Regards, NWL
P
psychomom
Guest
So it boils down to this, "YOU" show me anywhere where "it is written" that the Jews worshipped anybody but Jehovah alone as this is the only way you can show how Jesus words in Matt 4:10 make any sense with regard the Trinitarian argument.
I don't s'pose you'd like to hear about guys named Peter, or John, or James, or Paul, eh?They were Jews who worshipped Jesus...
As for OT Jews, they didn't have the full revelation of Truth, though many of them believed in the promise God made, and that's called faith, and it was saving faith for them.
On a personal note...young man, if you think that one walks with the Lord longer than you've been on this earth and has not posed all sorts of questions regarding God and His Word, think again. (she said with asperity) You are allowed to ask "why" only insofar as your "answers" line up with Watchtower Society answers. You, I have no doubt (by which I mean I do not question your sincerity), believe as they do, but woe to you if you begin to question their ideas to them, and fail to agree with them.
I'll not even try to answer your "questions", since you don't want to hear my answers, you want only to convince others.
But I will continue to pray that the Lord Jesus will send you the Holy Spirit to lead you into all truth.
My prayers are also with any who choose to discuss this further with you.
I don't s'pose you'd like to hear about guys named Peter, or John, or James, or Paul, eh?They were Jews who worshipped Jesus...
As for OT Jews, they didn't have the full revelation of Truth, though many of them believed in the promise God made, and that's called faith, and it was saving faith for them.
On a personal note...young man, if you think that one walks with the Lord longer than you've been on this earth and has not posed all sorts of questions regarding God and His Word, think again. (she said with asperity) You are allowed to ask "why" only insofar as your "answers" line up with Watchtower Society answers. You, I have no doubt (by which I mean I do not question your sincerity), believe as they do, but woe to you if you begin to question their ideas to them, and fail to agree with them.
I'll not even try to answer your "questions", since you don't want to hear my answers, you want only to convince others.
But I will continue to pray that the Lord Jesus will send you the Holy Spirit to lead you into all truth.
My prayers are also with any who choose to discuss this further with you.
P
psychomom
Guest
addendum--it's not the doctrine of the trinity you so oppose, you know. It's that Jesus IS God, and for that I feel profound sorrow for you.
~ellie
~ellie
N
NWL
Guest
Psychomom I've already said before that I'm not here to convince anyone, I here to learn from others whether they agree with me or not, and if they don't agree with me and then go ahead and oppose me then I apply this scripture;
(1 Peter 3:15) But sanctify the Christ as Lord in YOUR hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone that demands of YOU a reason for the hope in YOU, but doing so together with a mild temper and deep respect.
Please psychomom, if you have something to share with me then please do, I sincerely want to hear anything you have to say.
Regards NWl
Lk 18:18,19
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
This certain ruler only recognized Christ as a Good Master or teacher and not the Son of God that would have made him equal with God (Jn 5:18). When Christ responding to him with the question, 'Why do you call me good', none is good, save one, that is God'... He was letting this certain ruler know exactly who he was addressing as good, not just a Good Master or teacher but rather God in the flesh (Jn 1:14, 1Tim 3:16). The ruler did not think or recognize that Jesus had come from God, who was sent by God the Father from heaven. Jesus said in other words, 'don't call me good if you see me only as a good teacher, because there is none good, save God'.
Jesus made no bones about who this ruler could receive eternal life from and it when He had finished instructing him He said, 'Sell all you have, give it to the poor and come and follow me'. Jesus was telling this ruler who to follow to receive eternal life and the ruler, who was a wealthy man, missed it. God passed by and this ruler missed his opportunity to have eternal life because he was rich and blinded by those riches. In no way was Jesus denying that He was God in the flesh to this young ruler or to any that were present, in fact, He was declaring just the opposite.
18 And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?
19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
This certain ruler only recognized Christ as a Good Master or teacher and not the Son of God that would have made him equal with God (Jn 5:18). When Christ responding to him with the question, 'Why do you call me good', none is good, save one, that is God'... He was letting this certain ruler know exactly who he was addressing as good, not just a Good Master or teacher but rather God in the flesh (Jn 1:14, 1Tim 3:16). The ruler did not think or recognize that Jesus had come from God, who was sent by God the Father from heaven. Jesus said in other words, 'don't call me good if you see me only as a good teacher, because there is none good, save God'.
Jesus made no bones about who this ruler could receive eternal life from and it when He had finished instructing him He said, 'Sell all you have, give it to the poor and come and follow me'. Jesus was telling this ruler who to follow to receive eternal life and the ruler, who was a wealthy man, missed it. God passed by and this ruler missed his opportunity to have eternal life because he was rich and blinded by those riches. In no way was Jesus denying that He was God in the flesh to this young ruler or to any that were present, in fact, He was declaring just the opposite.
N
NWL
Guest
You twist scripture like no other, I think you actually know the true meaning behind Luke 18:19 but you simply twist scripture to try and back up your claim, lets have a look at what other translations say in Luke 18:19:
(International Standard Version ©2008) Jesus said to him, "Why do you call me good? Nobody is good except for God.
(Aramaic Bible in Plain English ©2010) Yeshua said to him, “Why do you call me good? There is no one good except the one God.”
(King James 2000 Bible ©2003) And Jesus said unto him, Why call me good? none is good, except one, that is, God.
(Douay-Rheims Bible) And Jesus said to him: Why dost thou call me good? None is good but God alone.
It's ridiculous for you to claim that Jesus was talking of himself in Luke 18:19, if you really believe what you say then you truly lack understanding of the Bible.
Jesus was obviously stating that HE himself was not the "good" one since he says “Why do you call 'me' good?"
Also for you to also say "This certain ruler only recognized Christ as a Good Master or teacher and not the Son of God" is also ridiculousness, firstly you cannot make the claim that simply because the ruler called him "Good master" and not "the son of God" means that he didn't know that he was Gods son. It’s ridiculous!! Unless the ruler makes the claim that he didn't know who he was you yourself cannot claim it, were you there at the time to know? Your basing your whole belief on your own assumptions of what a man thousands of years ago "might" of been thinking.
Luke 18:19 speaks for itself “Why do you call me good [As-in I’m not good]? There is no one good except the one God.” And who was the One God the Jews believed in that Jesus made reference to? Oh yeah here it is “..Hear, Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah..” (Deut 6:4) Darby Bible Translation
What Jesus was doing by saying "None is good but God alone" wasn't that he isn't "good". Jesus was saying that God is good in the absolute and perfect sense. Jesus recognized God as the definitive standard of what is good.
(Psalm 25:8) Good and upright is Jehovah. That is why he instructs sinners in the way.
As always Jesus never made himself equal to God, when the Jews accused him of being equal to God in John 5:18 what does Jesus say in the very next verse to show that he wasn't equal:
(John 5:19) Therefore, in answer, Jesus went on to say to them: “Most truly I say to YOU, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing.
Imagine that, Almighty Jesus who is meant to be God can't do A SINGLE THING without the help of his father, strange isn't it, and I always thought the Holy Spirit was meant to be the helper and not the Father.
E
episcopotic
Guest
For students of mathematics, one of the best ways to detect a misunderstanding is to detect a contradiction. "If this is true, then how can this also be true?" I love getting that sort of question in class because it means the student is working through the implications of an idea and wants to reconcile his understanding with some other claim.
As an example - "if log (x + y) = log(x) + log
, then why isn't it working out that way on my calculator?" The student has heard something, has tested the idea by other means, and found some contradiction. Over time, he will conclude that his initial understanding was wrong and will adjust his ideas. "Oops, I believed something wrong about the logarithm. Fixed. Let's move on." This only occurs, however, because the student was open to the idea that his initial understanding might be wrong.
There is another student who has a completely different set of assumptions but can ask exactly the same question. He is under the assumption that all his ideas are already necessarily correct; any idea that contradicts them has to be a problem with the source. The question, therefore, is not asking for help to reconcile his ideas with what he's just heard, but is asking the instructor to defend his claim against the truth the student presupposes. This sort of conversation is remarkably unfruitful, even in the context of mathematics where the truth can be unambiguously demonstrated.
You can quickly and easily tell who these students are. They answer "yes, but..." to every example that does not seem to favor their initial idea. They are not open and they are not asking a question - they are trying to teach, no matter how many question marks they stick at the end of sentences. The only way to get something fruitful from the conversation is to acknowledge that they disagree and move on.
NWL, we understand that JWs differ from many Christians on the nature of God and Jesus and the scriptures used to discuss them. There are genuine questions to be asked in this area, but you're not asking them. You're arguing for a particular interpretation. Nothing is inherently wrong with that, but you're being overly coy about it and, frankly, treading too close to simply lying about your intentions.
The questions marks don't protect you in the way you suspect, because you don't let someone get a word out before you start objecting. I have dealt with thousands of students are you are a textbook example of hiding an objection within an apparently innocent question.
You're a Jehovah's Witness (and it took forever to get that out of you) and you're asking Christians around here to defend their view of Jesus' divinity and the Trinity. The questions don't occur because you detect a contradiction and think your understanding is faulty - they occur because you think most Christians here are simply wrong.
If you don't change your strategy, you will either burn out or get kicked; this isn't a threat, just a statistical observation. People who act like this don't survive.
As an example - "if log (x + y) = log(x) + log
, then why isn't it working out that way on my calculator?" The student has heard something, has tested the idea by other means, and found some contradiction. Over time, he will conclude that his initial understanding was wrong and will adjust his ideas. "Oops, I believed something wrong about the logarithm. Fixed. Let's move on." This only occurs, however, because the student was open to the idea that his initial understanding might be wrong.There is another student who has a completely different set of assumptions but can ask exactly the same question. He is under the assumption that all his ideas are already necessarily correct; any idea that contradicts them has to be a problem with the source. The question, therefore, is not asking for help to reconcile his ideas with what he's just heard, but is asking the instructor to defend his claim against the truth the student presupposes. This sort of conversation is remarkably unfruitful, even in the context of mathematics where the truth can be unambiguously demonstrated.
You can quickly and easily tell who these students are. They answer "yes, but..." to every example that does not seem to favor their initial idea. They are not open and they are not asking a question - they are trying to teach, no matter how many question marks they stick at the end of sentences. The only way to get something fruitful from the conversation is to acknowledge that they disagree and move on.
NWL, we understand that JWs differ from many Christians on the nature of God and Jesus and the scriptures used to discuss them. There are genuine questions to be asked in this area, but you're not asking them. You're arguing for a particular interpretation. Nothing is inherently wrong with that, but you're being overly coy about it and, frankly, treading too close to simply lying about your intentions.
The questions marks don't protect you in the way you suspect, because you don't let someone get a word out before you start objecting. I have dealt with thousands of students are you are a textbook example of hiding an objection within an apparently innocent question.
You're a Jehovah's Witness (and it took forever to get that out of you) and you're asking Christians around here to defend their view of Jesus' divinity and the Trinity. The questions don't occur because you detect a contradiction and think your understanding is faulty - they occur because you think most Christians here are simply wrong.
If you don't change your strategy, you will either burn out or get kicked; this isn't a threat, just a statistical observation. People who act like this don't survive.
N
NWL
Guest
You must of misunderstood what I meant, please re-read what I wrote, please remember anyone one can make up anything and say its based on the Bible just aslong as they throw in The son of God, some angels and Abraham references and then hey presto its from the Bible.
As I said before I'm looking for answers just aslong as people "base there answers on the bible within context of the scriptures"
What I said earlier underneath.
****and when I say biblical I mean ideas backed up by the bible with scriptual proof.
If their is anyone that can answer them and base there answers on the bible within context of the scriptures then yes, I want to know.
so far I think all people have done is quote scriptures in a vain attempt to answer my question.****
You are the one that is in unbelief concerning our Lord Jesus Christ. If you do not believe that Christ was God manifest in the flesh and dwelt among men, then you are in unbelief as to who Christ was as the Son of God who now sits at the right hand of the Father. Anyone that denies that Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh or that God was come manifest in the flesh, is the spirit of antichrist. Even the disciples had a problem recognizing that Christ was God in the flesh in (Jn 14:6-9) and demanded that He show them the Father and they would be satisfied.
8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father?
8 Philip said to Him, Lord, show us the Father [cause us to see the Father—that is all we ask]; then we shall be satisfied.
9 Jesus replied, Have I been with all of you for so long a time, and do you not recognize and know Me yet, Philip? Anyone who has seen Me has seen the Father. How can you say then, Show us the Father?
8 Philip said, “Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us.”
9 Jesus answered: “Don’t you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
See what kind of injustice you can do with these scriptures as you wrestle with these direct quotes from the mouth of Jesus Christ as to who He was.
I rather liked a post written on another website, it went something as follows.
Christ asked the disciples who they believed he was, Peter replied.
'You are the Christ, the son of the living God
Jesus replied.
No Peter, that is not enough belief as to who I am, you must undertstand and accept an equal Trinity. Father son and Holy Spirt are co equal and co eternal, and interdependant on each other, and I have existed for all eternity as an individual member of the Trinity.
And you must understand that in the ontological sense of Trinity I am equal with the Father, but in the economic sense I am subject to the Father and if you do not believe and understand these things you are a heretic/apostaste. and vcan have no eternal life...................................................
Christ asked the disciples who they believed he was, Peter replied.
'You are the Christ, the son of the living God
Jesus replied.
No Peter, that is not enough belief as to who I am, you must undertstand and accept an equal Trinity. Father son and Holy Spirt are co equal and co eternal, and interdependant on each other, and I have existed for all eternity as an individual member of the Trinity.
And you must understand that in the ontological sense of Trinity I am equal with the Father, but in the economic sense I am subject to the Father and if you do not believe and understand these things you are a heretic/apostaste. and vcan have no eternal life...................................................
Last edited:
C
chesser
Guest
NWL, according to the scripture you posted, only god is good, yet, jesus calls himself good in john 10:11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep." so lets see if you can find a flaw in my logic:
1.only good is good
2.jesus is good
3.therfore,jesus is god
1.only good is good
2.jesus is good
3.therfore,jesus is god
NWL
I am not a JW but do like the idea of soley discussing from scripture, as you have mentioned.
As I do not know who a JW actually believes Christ to be can you tell me please?
According to the Bible a person must believe Christ is the son of God for salvation, that's it
But The Bible also states
Christ is the image of the invisible God
He is the exact representation of his being
He had glory with the Father before the world began
The fulnesss of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ
He reigns now in Heaven and on earth as all things have been put under his feet by the Father
There is no way to the Father but through the Son
Would a JW accept all of these things as they are clearly written in the Bible?
I am not a JW but do like the idea of soley discussing from scripture, as you have mentioned.
As I do not know who a JW actually believes Christ to be can you tell me please?
According to the Bible a person must believe Christ is the son of God for salvation, that's it
But The Bible also states
Christ is the image of the invisible God
He is the exact representation of his being
He had glory with the Father before the world began
The fulnesss of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ
He reigns now in Heaven and on earth as all things have been put under his feet by the Father
There is no way to the Father but through the Son
Would a JW accept all of these things as they are clearly written in the Bible?
Last edited:
G
GraceBeUntoYou
Guest
[FONT="]You stated that each time theos is anarthrous that it is to be translated as “a god,” but when theos is articular it is in reference to God Almighty. This of course is completely false. As R. H. Countess pointed out, in the NT there are 282 occurrences of the anarthrous theos. In sixteen of the 282 occurrences, the NWT (translation put out by Jehovah’s Witnesses) has either “a god,” “god,” “gods,” or “godly.” In vv. John 1.1, 1.2, 1.6, 1.12, 1.13, 1.18, the articular theos occurs only twice. However, the NWT translates the anarthrous theos six times as “God,” once “a god,” and once “the god.” This of course means that the NWT does not agree with your assertion, [/FONT][FONT="]“Where ‘theos’ in Greek is used on a person, scholars always render the person ‘a god,’ however when ‘ho theos’ is used then it becomes ‘God’ as in Almighty God.”[/FONT][FONT="]
[/FONT]
[FONT="]Further, this statement of course raises more problems for you, because Christ is also identified as ho theos in John 20.28; therefore, by your standard, He is Almighty.[/FONT]
[FONT="]Whether theos is anarthrous or articular, it does not matter. The anarthrous theos can refer to God Almighty without any indefiniteness whatsoever. In fact the anarthrou theos can carry with it three differing semantic forces: qualitative (Lord of the Sabbath), definite (the Lord of the Sabbath), or indefinite (a Lord of the Sabbath). So you are simply just wrong.[/FONT]
I want to strongly emphasize the statement you made here, “For people who say that ‘theos’ in this instance should be translated ‘God,’ then you must also must think that Judges, Angels, and Satan is also Almighty God.” However, let’s turn that argument around. Remember, in your previous statements, you argued whenever the articular theos is used it is in reference to God Almighty. If this then is the case, then by your own standard (since you see 2 Corinthians 4.4 as a reference to Satan), Satan is God Almighty (2 Corinthians 4.4, “ὁ θεὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος”).
Though, there are many commentators that take 2 Corinthians 4.4 as a reference to Satan as “the god of this world,” there are many Early Church Fathers that suggest this verse in particular is in reference to God the Father, and for good reason.
[FONT="]"In their case the god (ho theos) of this world [lit. 'the god of this age'] has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God (tou theou)."[/FONT]
G
GraceBeUntoYou
Guest
Again, this a basic misunderstanding of the Doctrine of the Trinity. You have this mental picture that says that The Father/The Son/The Holy Spirit = God, as seen in the first diagram below. However, not only does Trinitarianism believe that the three are in unity, but also that each Person fully possesses all the qualities, attributes, and nature of God (see second diagram below), and are therefore equal to one another in divinity. So not only are the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in unity, but also they each possess everything that makes God, God (see diagram 3).Below I've included a response that I typed up several months ago that goes in depth to the historic Trinitarian understanding of this passage:
This passage is not simply implying that the Logos is “divine” or “god-like” as you would espouse, because John does not use the adjectival (θεῖος [“divine”]) here, but rather uses the noun form (θεὸς [“God”]); however, that is not to say that nouns cannot, within their semantic domain, convey qualities – they most certainly can, and do! Take for example, John 3.6,
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit."
With that being said, the Trinitarian approach to John 1.1 does not emphasize the identity of the Word (thus, the reason for the anarthrous θεὸς
, so your overall assessment and conclusion falls ten miles short of the mark. Call attention to what Henry Alford, the 19th c. Anglican theologian once wrote, “The omission of the article before θεὸς is not mere usage; it could not have been here expressed, whatever place the word might hold in the sentence. ὁ λόγος ἦν ὁ θεὸς would destroy the idea of the λόγος altogether. θεὸς must then be taken as implying God, in substance and essence, -not ὁ θεὸς, ‘the Father,’ in Person. . . . as in σὰρξ ἐγένετο [John 1.14], σὰρξ expresses that state into which the Divine Word entered by a definite act, so in θεὸς ἦν [John 1.1c], θεὸς expresses that essence which was His ἐν ἀρχῇ [“In the beginning”]: -that He was very God.”—Henry Alford
, and 14 (σὰρξ ἐγένετο, is not only are the two parallel passages conveying similar thought, but John’s placement of the noun before the verb in each passage is significant in that it stresses the qualities or nature of the subject. The positioning of θεὸς before the verb ἦν is what is known as a preverbal predicate nominative. Since John has identified ὁ λόγος (“the Word”) as the subject of the verse, this means that θεὸς in John 1.1b is a subject complement which further identifies the subject. In other words, θεὸς serves to describe the nature and essence of the Word, and this is precisely what we as Trinitarians believe. Not that the Word’s identity is being stressed, rather, it is the intrinsic nature of the Logos that is being portrayed here. All the qualities, attributes, and nature of God – everything that makes God, God – the Word also possesses. In other words, this is a clear affirmation of ontological equality between the Father, and the Son, as expressed in the historic Christian confessions, and creeds,“consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood” – Chalcedonian Creed
“equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity” – Athanasian Creed
“equal to the Father in divinity, subordinate to the Father in humanity” – Athanasian Creed
Attachments
N
NWL
Guest
Hello newcovenantchristian, there is not a single scripture that Jehovah Witnesses deny. I’ll try and answer each one of the scripture that you states as plainly and short as I can.
Christ is the image of the invisible God, He is the exact representation of his being
We Humans are also Gods image, however does that make us God? of course not!
(Genesis 1:27) And God proceeded to create the man in his image, in God’s image he created him; male and female he created them.
Jesus is the image of God in the same sense that you can be the Image of your own father, have you ever heard of the phrase "a chip of the old block" you must of because I can see your English. A human son can act very similar to his own Father in like manner Jesus who is Perfect and been with God since before the earth was even created reflects his Father so well that he is God’s image, and only Gods image. Notice Col 1:15 says Jesus is God’s image; why not say Jesus is simply God?
He had glory with the Father before the world began
Just because scripture says the Father had Glory doesn't then mean no one else can have Glory, I as a human can have Glory, but again does that make me God? No!
PROOF is in scripture below
(Revelation 18:1) After these things I saw another angel descending from heaven, with great authority; and the earth was lighted up from his glory
(2 Corinthians 3:18) And all of us, while we with unveiled faces reflect like mirrors the glory of Jehovah, are transformed into the same image from glory to glory
So the glory Jesus had before the world was does not mean he must also be God. If people were to make such a claim then they have to accept Humans as God and also the Angel in Rev 18:1 as God.
The fulnesss of the Godhead bodily dwells in Christ
American King James Version (Col 2:9) “For in him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily”
To get this answer we need to find the meaning of the Greek words here. We also need to consider the context of the scripture.
First, verse 10 states that Christians "share in this fullness in him" (NAB). Also Paul says of Christians "That ye might be filled with all the fullness of God" (Eph.3:19; cf. Jn. 1:14,16).
(Ephesians 3:19) and to know the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge, that YOU may be filled with all the fullness that God gives.
No one would claim that because Paul said Christians would be "filled with all the fullness of God" then we must be equal to God. Likewise, it is ridiculous to say and claim that this would make Jesus equal to God. The obvious understanding is that Christians and Christ would be full of God's divine qualities, certainly not some mystical union of a Trinitarian "Godhead."
He reigns now in Heaven and on earth as all things have been put under his feet by the Father
(1 Corinthians 15:27) For [God] “subjected all things under his feet.”
Look at the context of the scripture, If Jesus is part if the Godhead then why does the “Father who alone [is] the Most High over all the earth” need to subject things under his feet, If Jesus is God wouldn’t he simply take what is rightfully his, instead of waiting for the Father to allow it to him.
There is no way to the Father but through the Son
This is simply because it’s only through Jesus shed blood that we gain the forgiveness of our sins, a question people need to ask is why is getting through to the father so important? Why doesn’t the scripture say that we should be seeking the Father Jesus and the HS but simply the father.
International Standard Version (©2008) (John 14:6) Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
Like i’ve shown we accept all these scriptures.