Biblical PROOF that Jesus Christ IS GOD

by Bibleboy 156 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • Reslight
    Reslight

    [[the Word:

    a. Continually was in the beginning.]]

    Yes, the Word was in the beginning, probably before as well as after. This does not mean that he had an eternity of existence before the beginning spoken of.

    [[b. Continually was face-to-face with God.]]

    While John 1:1 does not directly say this, yes Jesus from the time of his creation was continually face-to-face with God. Thus he was not God Almighty with whom he was face-to-face with. Even on earth, the only time that he possibly lost contact with God was just before he died, when Jesus cried, "My God, My God, why have you forsaken me?"

    [[c. Continually was God.]]

    Yes, he was continually God, Theos, a powerful one (using Hebraic background of el and elohim), from the time of his creation. Even on earth, he still had special power given to him by Yahweh, his God. John, in effect, tells us that Jesus is not God Almighty by stating and repeating that he was with God (Almighty), and sent by God (Almighty). He thus indicates a distinction between God, as the Almighty One, as the one who was the Almighty One. I have no reason to believe that God Almighty is more than one person.

    Without using the Hebraic background as an explanation of why the Logos is called Theos here, and to satisfy the trinity, one has to come up with a lot of defining of what are the qualities of the God the Logos is with, and how these qualities differ from the the qualities of the Logos as God also, yet still maintain that both have the qualities of Almighty God. As confusing as it gets, the trinitarians did come up a lot of definitions to define all this, which even they say are mystifying, even claiming the mystery about this as proof that it is of God and not man; but there is no reason to accept all the added philosophy and unique definitions to explain the trinity as the Bible is complete in itself without adding the trinitarian concepts.

    Ronald
    http://reslight.addr.com/l-trinity.html
    (Not a JW site)

  • Reslight
    Reslight

    [[The only thing worthy of comment in his letter is his reference to John 1:4 in the “Bible in Basic English. The translation he represents as coming from that source is not a literal translation for the word (or even its implication) do not appear in the koine.]]

    I am not sure what "word" is being referred to, but the BBE takes the last part of verse 3 and puts it into verse 4. Here are some other translations:

    All things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being. What has come into being in him was life, and the life was the light of all people. -- New Revised Standard Version.

    The Word was the source of life; [or] What was made had life in union with the Word. -- Today's English Version, footnote alternate rendering.

    All things through him came into existence, and without him came into existence not even one thing: that which hath come into existence in him was life, and the life was the light of men. -- Rotherham's Emphasized Bible.

    Ronald

  • Hairdog1937
    Hairdog1937

    aa:

    Yeah, you're right. If most people are like you, they have a hard time with big words, so they just laugh at them. Too bad. This is quite a serious matter. One's eternal destiny depends on it.

    For those who follow these and have difficulty with big words like aa (although I think most of you do not), what I've said is basically this:

    aa has failed to see what Scripture has to say because satan (in this sense, aka WTBTS) has blinded his eyes. He can only respond with what others have said he should since he is a slave to sin, being so enslaved by the Watchtower Society. I pray for him - that God would remove the veil from his mind and the scabs from his eyes, and you should, too.

    Hairdog

  • Hairdog1937
    Hairdog1937

    Mr. Day:

    In the original koine, John 1:4 is literally translated thusly:

    In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

    If it were amplified so that the individual who has no knowledge of koine could see the full meaning of the verbs, it would read thusly:

    “In Him continually (eternally) was life, and the life was continually (eternally) the light of men.”

    Read your own NWT, for it translates it fairly accurately:

    "by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men."

    Does this help you?

    Hairdog

  • pomegranate
    pomegranate

    Luke 10:21
    21 At that time Jesus, full of joy through the Holy Spirit, said, "I praise you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children.

    Little children don't understand big words. Wise and learned do.

    How can this word jibberish be true?

    1 Cor 1:26-28
    27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things-and the things that are not-to nullify the things that are,

    Somethings wrong with this intellectual picture eh?

  • dubla
    dubla

    hairdog-

    Yeah, you're right. If most people are like you, they have a hard time with big words, so they just laugh at them. Too bad. This is quite a serious matter.

    -um, im pretty sure i didnt say anyone was laughing at your words, as i am not laughing at your words either. perhaps i should explain myself again, due to the fact that you have once again (this is becoming a nauseatingly common aspect of your posts) MISUNDERSTOOD what i was trying to get across. ill start by re-quoting you AGAIN, and then RE-explaining myself in a hopefully easier-to-understand way for your simple one-tracked mind. okay? here we go.....

    I choose to point out to those who read this that your hermeneutical and grammatical skills, if any, fall quite short of being exegetical.

    -NOW, first off, i dont think anyone (including myself) is laughing at your "big words." why would we? (another ridiculous notion on your part). no, what i was laughing at was the fact that this quote is focused on trying to show "those who read this" my supposed lack of skills, when really this is a trinity discussion, and im sure there arent that many people overly concerned with MY particular skills. if indeed there are people still reading this (and havent fallen asleep from the boredom of broken record syndrome yet), im sure they weigh the arguments/reasonings on both sides, and in fact probably already have their own belief anyhow, and could really care less about MY skills. THATS what i was laughing at: you getting sidetracked with specifically belittling ME instead of concentrating on the issue at hand.

    For those who follow these and have difficulty with big words like aa....

    -again, sad, pointless belittling that really takes away my respect for your argumentative skills. i have no problems with all your "big words" by the way. the fact is you havent used any terminology that someone with even average intellect couldnt understand.

    aa has failed to see what Scripture has to say because satan (in this sense, aka WTBTS)

    -LOL, and no, im not laughing at your "big words", dont worry. im laughing at your insinuation that i follow anything from the wtbts, or any beliefs that come from that religion. i have already stated, on this thread (maybe you pick and choose what to read), that i am not a jw, nor do i hold their particular beliefs. what a ridiculous (boy im finding that word useful alot with these responses) assumption to make: namely that anyone that doesnt believe in the trininy is a jw. open your eyes hairdog, there are many people out there that dont buy the man-made trinity doctrine.

    He can only respond with what others have said he should since he is a slave to sin, being so enslaved by the Watchtower Society.

    -another absurd statement, considering once again that i have no involvement with the watchtower society, and i read absolutely less than zero of their publications. (and maybe you havent noticed my bible quotes, but i dont read their bible either). i do not "respond with what others have said", in fact i do my own REASONING (and i know you hate the thought of actual logical reasoning). i could provide you with numerous links to other threads in which i debate against the wtbts beliefs with active members of the jw religion, but why should i have to prove anything to you? its not my fault you jump to ridiculous(there it is again) conclusions. do you think pom is a jw as well?

    . I pray for him - that God would remove the veil from his mind....

    -the one part of your post i actually appreciated. thank you for your prayers, and please know these same prayers go out from me to god in your behalf.

    aa

  • Reslight
    Reslight

    [[In the original koine, John 1:4 is literally translated thusly:

    In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.”

    If it were amplified so that the individual who has no knowledge of koine could see the full meaning of the verbs, it would read thusly:

    “In Him continually (eternally) was life, and the life was continually (eternally) the light of men.”]]

    I would say this reads into the Greek koine something that is not there to satisfy preconceived ideas. I do admit that the Greek can seen in different manners, depending on how one looks at it. The Bible was deliberately written so that this could be done, that the strong delusion would prevail. -- 2 Thessalonians 2:11

    http://reslight.addr.com/understanding.html

    [[Read your own NWT,]]

    I don't own the NWT, but I do own a copy of it. I am not with the JWs, BTW, nor I am an advocate for the NWT or any other one translation.

    [[ for it translates it fairly accurately:

    "by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men."]]

    Let us quote both verses and see exactly how the NWT renders this.

    "All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men."

    Not that I agree with all the conclusions reached by the following quotes, but I submit these to show that John was saying here that it was life that was brought into existence by means of the Logos:

    ||
    1:4 i In him k was life; and the life was l the light of men.

    (i) That is, by him: and this is spoken after the manner of the Hebrews, meaning by this that by his force and working power all life comes to the world.
    (k) That is, even at that time when all things were made by him, for otherwise he would have said, "Life in him", and not "life was".
    (l) That force of reason and understanding which is kindled in our minds to acknowledge him, the author of so great a benefit.
    || -- Beza, Theodore. "Commentary on John 1". "The 1599 Geneva Study Bible". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/GenevaStudyBible/
    gen.cgi?book=joh&chapter=001. 1600-1645.

    ||
    In him was life (en autwi zwh hn). That which has come into being (verse 1 John 3) in the Logos was life. The power that creates and sustains life in the universe is the Logos. This is what Paul means by the perfect passive verb ektistai (stands created) in Colossians 1:16. This is also the claim of Jesus to Martha (John 11:25). This is the idea in Hebrews 1:3 "bearing (upholding) the all things by the word of his power." Once this language might have been termed unscientific, but not so now after the spiritual interpretation of the physical world by Eddington and Jeans. Usually in John zwh means spiritual life, but here the term is unlimited and includes all life; only it is not bioß (manner of life), but the very principle or essence of life. That is spiritual behind the physical and to this great scientists today agree. It is also personal intelligence and power. Some of the western documents have estin here instead of hn to bring out clearly the timelessness of this phrase of the work of the Logoß. And the life was the light of men (kai h zwh hn to pwß twn anqrwpwn). Here the article with both zwh and pwß makes them interchangeable. "The light was the life of men" is also true. That statement is curiously like the view of some physicists who find in electricity (both light and power) the nearest equivalent to life in its ultimate physical form. Later Jesus will call himself the light of the world (John 8:12). John is fond of these words life and light in Gospel, Epistles, Revelation. He here combines them to picture his conception of the Pre-incarnate Logos in his relation to the race. He was and is the Life of men (twn anqrwpon, generic use of the article) and the Light of men. John asserts this relation of the Logos to the race of men in particular before the Incarnation.
    || -- Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on John 1:4". "Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament". http://bible.crosswalk.com/Commentaries/RobertsonsWordPictures/
    rwp.cgi?book=joh&chapter=001&verse=004. Broadman Press 1932,33, Renewal 1960.

    Christian (agape) love,

    Ronald

  • dubla
    dubla
    I don't own the NWT, but I do own a copy of it. I am not with the JWs, BTW, nor I am an advocate for the NWT or any other one translation.

    -wow hairdog, can you believe it?? maybe you jumped to conclusions to fast again. maybe you cant comprehend anyone outside of jws believing contrary to the trinity. or maybe you think were liers? jws masquerading as non-jws? or maybe, just maybe, thats the easiest way to disarm someone. call them a jw under the mind control of the wtbts, and the significance of their arguments are immediately minimized. it was a nice effort.

  • Scorpion
    Scorpion

    Hairdog,

    Ronald is not a JW, he is a Bible Student. The Bible Students are the ones who believe in "much" of what Charles Taze Russell (founder of the WT) wrote and taught. There are different Bible Students faiths, not all believe exactly the same thing.

    To attack one's faith is not addressing the arguments or thought's posted by the individual. I do not take part in Trinity debates, I have in the past and find them all a dead end.

    Trinitarians cannot prove that believing in the Trinity is a salvation issue. Salvation is God's department and he decides this vital issue in ones life, not believing a doctine or the Trinity.

  • Bibleboy
    Bibleboy

    Scorpion, neither can you proove that you exist let alone God.

    So let me pose this question.

    Why, PERSONALLY, do YOU believe in God??

    (don't give me evidence because evidence could be a hallucination or a figment of the imagination)

    think long and hard, it JUST may be relevant.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit