Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, I thought you were going to show a scripture that Witnesses teach the exact opposite what the Bible says.
A statement by their leaders saying that if a person simply reads the Bible, they won't believe what they teach isn't enough?
Quote:
Jesus taught his disciples to teach others the Bible. Look at the whole book of Acts. Yet no one wags their fingers at them? What happened to those that taught their own doctrines back in Paul day? Such as Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus. They were 'let go' to do their own thing. So be it with anyone today. If they don't want to be in the JW religion because of they learn, then they are free to leave.
If you'd like, show a teaching that Witnesses teach that is not Biblical and I will show that you're incorrect using very few words of my own words and none from any JW publication. I will only use the Bible.
The point is that the JW religion is not teaching the bible. They have said as much. They realize to be in the Bible means you won't believe the Watchtower doctrine. There is no other way to spin that statement.
Give a scripture and then show me where Witnesses don't teach it.
John 1:1 "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The fact of the matter is, the Bible calls him God. There, along with Colossians 1, Hebrews 1, Revelation 1. In John 8:58-59 the Jews tried to stone Jesus because he claimed to be God.
The quote I showed you was lamenting the fact that if people read the Bible alone, they realize this, and they believe this. It takes them listening to the Watchtower organization instead of reading the Bible to believe that Jesus is not God.
Why not just admit it? Why not just admit the fact that the leadership of the Watchtower organization KNOWS that they don't teach the Bible?
John 1:1 "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The fact of the matter is, the Bible calls him God. There, along with Colossians 1, Hebrews 1, Revelation 1. In John 8:58-59 the Jews tried to stone Jesus because he claimed to be God.
The quote I showed you was lamenting the fact that if people read the Bible alone, they realize this, and they believe this. It takes them listening to the Watchtower organization instead of reading the Bible to believe that Jesus is not God.
Why not just admit it? Why not just admit the fact that the leadership of the Watchtower organization KNOWS that they don't teach the Bible?
The Jews answered him: “We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy; for you, although being a man, make yourself a god." Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”’? If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified— do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? - John 10:33-36
The Bible corrects you. Not me. Not any JW publication.
Jesus called the Jews gods based on Ps 82:6. The Bible says even our own belly can be a 'god'. (Php 3:19) Jesus is called a mighty god in the Bible. This is true. But not Most High God. No where in the Bible is Jesus called this. No one in the Bible is called Most High God this but Jehovah. (Ps 83:18) Witnesses teach that Jesus is God's Son just as Jesus said he was. Show me one scripture where Jesus is called Almighty God or Most High God. You can't do it.
The problem with those the follow the trinity doctrine is that the doctrine doesn't teach the difference between Most High God and just a god. It's all lumped together in the doctrine. The trinity doctrine limits how much of the Bible should be listened to and how much should be ignored. According to the doctrine anything called a god is part of the trinity. Yet if that were true then a person's belly would be part of the trinity. (Php 3:19) But the Bible doesn't lump it all together under one title of 'Most High God'. However, I just used the Bible to show there are many things called a 'god' but only one Most High God. If Jesus called himself, "Most High God" then the Jews would have right to stone him. But never does Jesus call himself "Most High God". He doesn't even glorify himself at all. (John 8:54)
So when I hear some try to use the trinity doctrine to show that JW don't use the Bible, I know they are just parroting what they have been taught and the few scriptures they have been allowed to focus on. Witnesses on the other hand strive to take into account the entire Bible before coming to a conclusion. The Nicaea creed had no authority by the Most High God to create the doctrine, which are men that trinity followers follow.
Last edited by 2Timothy316; 06-01-2016 at 02:59 PM..
A friend of mine told me that JWs do NOT vote, do NOT lobby the politicians, state governments, etc unlike the Catholics and mormons who do it every chance they get. Is this true? Are they that pure of a religion?
It's true of the membership. Jehovah's Witnesses do not vote ( it's a matter of conscience that if you choose wrong will get you expelled and shunned). They consider the "world" and it's governments under Satan control and will have no part of it. Many Jehovah's Witnesses have been abused, tortured and murdered upholding this directive from the Watchtower. They also believe that Armageddon is due any day now (120+years of saying that) so it would make no sense to try and fix a dying system. They are also highly unlikely to participate in humanitarian efforts choosing instead to warn others about the coming destruction.
The Watchtower however, doesn't practice what they preach at all. They maneuver behind the scenes to whatever will benefit their bottom line but care not for the safety of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Watchtower has spent decades trashing the UN calling them vile, evil ,disgusting. It even refers to the UN as the scarlet colored wild beast in revelations. Then in 1992 they joined the UN as a non governmental organization and got busted a decade later.
John 1:1 "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
In some translations but not all. Plus that version supports Oneness since by capitalizing it they make it definite. Of course then they claim it isn't definite but Qualitative. Now what does the NWT say about that?
*** Rbi8 p. 1579 6A Jesus—A Godlike One; Divine ***
In the Greek text there are many cases of a singular anarthrous predicate noun preceding the verb, such as in Mr 6:49; 11:32; Joh 4:19; 6:70; 8:44; 9:17; 10:1, 13, 33; 12:6. In these places translators insert the indefinite article “a” before the predicate noun in order to bring out the quality or characteristic of the subject. Since the indefinite article is inserted before the predicate noun in such texts, with equal justification the indefinite article “a” is inserted before the anarthrous θεός in the predicate of John 1:1 to make it read “a god.” The Sacred Scriptures confirm the correctness of this rendering.
Even Trinitarian scholars agree with the JW's, but the priests and ministers will never admit that as then they have to explain the problem it creates for the Trinity.
Daniel Wallace in his Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (GGBB) discusses whether or not θεὸς could be definite in John 1:1c. On page 268 he says:
Further, calling θεὸς in 1:1c definite is the same as saying that if it had followed the verb it would have had the article. Thus it would be a convertible proposition with λόγος (i.e., "the Word" = "God" and "God" = "the Word". The problem of this argument is that the θεὸς in 1:1b is the Father. Thus to say that the θεὸς in 1:1c is the same person is to say that "the Word was the Father." This, as the older grammarians and exegetes pointed out, is embryonic Sabellianism or modalism. The Fourth Gospel is about the least likely place to find modalism in the NT. [GGBB 268]
It could also be translated: ‘the Word was a god’ or ‘the word was divine’ … It is true, on the most natural reading of the text, that there are two beings here: God and a second who was theos but this second is related to God in a manner which shows that God is the absolute over against which the second is defined. They are not presented as two equal gods. William Loader, in Beiträge Aur biblischen Exegese und Theologie Bet. Frankfurt am Main, etc. Veriag Peter Lang, Band 23, article, “THE CHRISTOLOGY OF THE FOURTH GOSPEL STRUCTURES AND ISSUES”, p. 156.
The predicate [noun] commonly refers not to an individual or individuals as such, but to the class to which the subject belongs, to the nature or quality predicated of the subject; e.g. Jo I, 1 [kai theos en ho logos], which attributes to the Word the divine nature,—Maximilian Zerwich, S.J., Biblical Greek, Rome, Scriptua Pontificii Instituti Biblici (Pontifical Biblical Scripture Institute), p. 55.
In John 1:1...Theos en (“was deity”);...The qualitative force is obvious and most important,—Alfred M. Perry, “Translating The Greek Article” in Journal of Biblical Literature, 1949, Vol. l68, p. 331.
Taken by itself, the sentence καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος could admittedly bear either of two meanings: (I) 'and the Word was (the) God' or (2) 'and the Word was (a) God.'" (The Expository Times, Vol. 62, October 1950 — September 1951), p. 315.
Barclay, W. The Daily Study Bible- The Gospel of John (vol.1) "III. Finally John says that "The Word was God". There is no doubt that this is a difficult saying for us to understand, and it is difficult because Greek, in which John wrote, had a different way of saying things from the way in which English speaks. When the greek uses a noun it almost always uses the definite article with it. The Greek for God is `theos', and the definite article is `ho'.
When greek speaks about God it does not simply say `theos'; it says `ho theos'. Now, when Greek does not use the definite article with a noun that noun becomes much more like an adjective; it describes the character, the quality of the person. John did not say that the Word was `ho theos'; that would have been to say that the Word was identical with God; he says that the Word was `theos'- without the definite article- which means that the Word was, as we might say, of the very same charactor and quality and essence and being as God. When John said `The Word was God' he was not saying that Jesus is identical with God, he was saying that Jesus is so perfectly the same as God in mind, in heart, in being
that in Jesus we perfectly see what God is like"
This is just a small amount of the evidence and most ministers have no clue about it.
Quote:
The fact of the matter is, the Bible calls him God. There, along with Colossians 1, Hebrews 1, Revelation 1. In John 8:58-59 the Jews tried to stone Jesus because he claimed to be God.
No he didn't as even the KJV agrees since it did not capitalize the "a" in "am". They knew it was neither a name or title and the grammar indicates a claim of being in existence, not a claim to be God. Again anyone who knows a little Greek and Hebrew (EX 3:14) knows this.
Quote:
The quote I showed you was lamenting the fact that if people read the Bible alone, they realize this, and they believe this. It takes them listening to the Watchtower organization instead of reading the Bible to believe that Jesus is not God.
Why not just admit it? Why not just admit the fact that the leadership of the Watchtower organization KNOWS that they don't teach the Bible?
As I pointed out the context did not say that. It was focused on being in disagreement. No one uses just the Bible alone however, as they also have ministers, priests, teachers, etc who not only verbally instruct them but also have written many books they also read.
John 1:1 "1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."
The fact of the matter is, the Bible calls him God. There, along with Colossians 1, Hebrews 1, Revelation 1. In John 8:58-59 the Jews tried to stone Jesus because he claimed to be God.
The quote I showed you was lamenting the fact that if people read the Bible alone, they realize this, and they believe this. It takes them listening to the Watchtower organization instead of reading the Bible to believe that Jesus is not God.
Why not just admit it? Why not just admit the fact that the leadership of the Watchtower organization KNOWS that they don't teach the Bible?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Timothy316
The Jews answered him: “We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy; for you, although being a man, make yourself a god." Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”’? If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified— do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? - John 10:33-36
The Bible corrects you. Not me. Not any JW publication.
Jesus called the Jews gods based on Ps 82:6. The Bible says even our own belly can be a 'god'. (Php 3:19) Jesus is called a mighty god in the Bible. This is true. But not Most High God. No where in the Bible is Jesus called this. No one in the Bible is called Most High God this but Jehovah. (Ps 83:18) Witnesses teach that Jesus is God's Son just as Jesus said he was. Show me one scripture where Jesus is called Almighty God or Most High God. You can't do it.
The problem with those the follow the trinity doctrine is that the doctrine doesn't teach the difference between Most High God and just a god. It's all lumped together in the doctrine. The trinity doctrine limits how much of the Bible should be listened to and how much should be ignored. According to the doctrine anything called a god is part of the trinity. Yet if that were true then a person's belly would be part of the trinity. (Php 3:19) But the Bible doesn't lump it all together under one title of 'Most High God'. However, I just used the Bible to show there are many things called a 'god' but only one Most High God. If Jesus called himself, "Most High God" then the Jews would have right to stone him. But never does Jesus call himself "Most High God". He doesn't even glorify himself at all. (John 8:54)
So when I hear some try to use the trinity doctrine to show that JW don't use the Bible, I know they are just parroting what they have been taught and the few scriptures they have been allowed to focus on. Witnesses on the other hand strive to take into account the entire Bible before coming to a conclusion. The Nicaea creed had no authority by the Most High God to create the doctrine, which are men that trinity followers follow.
There is also this...
John 5:17-18 - But He answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working." 18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
I also made bold a section above. You are correct, Jesus does not glorify Himself. But you did not finish the thought... the Fathers glorifies Him.
John 8:54 - Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, `He is our God';
And in the Hebrews 1 verse, the Father calls the Son, God.
The Trinity doctrine is basically saying the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are designed (by the Father) to operate as One in unity. I actually think marriage on earth was designed by God to mimic that unity - in that you have two different beings coming together to live in complete unity.
Now this is not to say Jesus and the Father are the same, because They are not. The Father is running the show. He is in charge. Everything that Jesus had on earth, and currently has in heaven, was given to Him by the Father. Jesus has His role. The Holy Spirit has His role. Those roles were assigned by the Father.
John 5:17-18 - But He answered them, "My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working." 18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
I also made bold a section above. You are correct, Jesus does not glorify Himself. But you did not finish the thought... the Fathers glorifies Him.
Yes. That means there are two people of different status. Jesus' Father, The Almighty God is higher than Jesus, God's Son.
Read on in verse 19 and listen to Jesus' response. "Therefore, in response Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, the Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative..."
Jesus is not the Most High God because he can't do anything of his own initiative. Why not? Just read further.
"...but only what he sees the Father doing."
Jesus is not the one in control. Jesus is given control by his Father, the Most High God. Never does Jesus give the Most High God power or give his Father, the Most High God his own initiative. Every place in the Bible, The Father gives to the Son. Jesus Father is the higher being. Jesus and Jehovah are not equals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
John 8:54 - Jesus answered, "If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing; it is My Father who glorifies Me, of whom you say, `He is our God';
And in the Hebrews 1 verse, the Father calls the Son, God.
As I had posted before. A god doesn't always refer to the Almighty God or Most High God. Jesus is a mighty and power person, of this the Bible is clear. But Jesus is not the Almighty God Jehovah. Exodus 7:1 says, "Jehovah then said to Moses: “See, I have made you like God to Pharʹaoh, and Aaron your own brother will become your prophet." Because Jehovah made Moses a God to Pharaoh does that make Moses part of the trinity or an anyway Jehovah's equal? Of course not.
God means 'mighty one'. Yet when we see Most High or Almighty God this is a unique title that belongs to Jehovah only. (Ps 83:18)
Also, when Jesus said, 'He is our God' he was speaking of his Father. Meaning that the Father is not only the Son's God but the Jews' God as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
The Trinity doctrine is basically saying the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are designed (by the Father) to operate as One in unity.
I don't disagree that Jehovah and Jesus are in unity as far their goals. There's a lot of 'this is basically what the trinity is saying' speeches out there and they are all slightly different. I have always been told that the trinity was a mysterious thing that was beyond human comprehension. If that is true, then all these trinity 'basically' speeches are all wrong because no one can explain the trinity. Thus a major red flag for me if the Bible can't explain it. Therefore, I have tossed the trinity doctrine created in the 3rd century by a creed that was given their authority from a human ruler.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
I actually think marriage on earth was designed by God to mimic that unity - in that you have two different beings coming together to live in complete unity.
Perhaps. Yet we read in Ephesians 5:22 "Let wives be in subjection to their husbands." A husband isn't a wife and wife isn't a husband. They are in union but when it comes to taking the lead according the path Jehovah has shown them, the responsibility was put on the husband. In this respect husbands and wives are not equal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Now this is not to say Jesus and the Father are the same, because They are not. The Father is running the show. He is in charge. Everything that Jesus had on earth, and currently has in heaven, was given to Him by the Father.
I agree. Yet do you still think that Jesus is the Most High God? Can you see why JWs don't believe he is based on the Bible? One doesn't have to believe in a trinity to know that Jesus is a mighty and powerful person. Yet the Bible is clear that Jesus isn't the Almighty God as many in the trinity claim. The trinity clouds the Bible and divides people. I watch those that believe the trinity fight with each other over what exactly the trinity is. Yet another reason to reject the trinity. Anyway, the trinity discussion was spawned because another poster said that Jehovah's Witnesses don't follow the Bible yet I have proved this wrong by using only the Bible to make my case vs the trinity. All teachings from Witnesses are Bible based, if they are just a guy like me or a guy that writes an article in one of our publications. Just like anyone reading my post has the option weigh and decide for themselves if what I present from the Bible is true. The same goes for what anyone reads in a publication. The Bible always has the final say.
Last edited by 2Timothy316; 06-02-2016 at 08:07 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
