What I have on the comparison of mainstream and JWs leaders' views is on pp.
6b to 10 at the next link. Tha mainstream view is better indicated.
http://www.freewebs.com/glenster1/gtjbrooklyn6b.htm
is jesus a god?
by javig 304 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
glenster
-
lampstand
The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit are one in name (Matt 28:18-20), pay attention that it says "in the name" singular form not plural.
Also notice that Jesus never refers to The Father or God, with any other name. Especially the one name the WT has taught you, which was a mistransaltion from a German monk some 600 years ago. There is a good reason why nobody in the Bible spoke a "name" of God, you have to learn a few things about Hebrew law, and to proclaim "to be God" or a "the name" of God, right or wrong was blasphemy and punishable by death...
Last thing, read John 10:25-33, and pay attention to verse 30 and 33.
Peace be with you, my peace I give to you.
-
Alwayshere
I am not a JW. Was once but never will be again because I know they do not care for people and they teach lies, destroy families and are a cult. But I have always believed Jesus and God were two separate people.
-
designs
The House of Furies and the House of Atreus........
-
jonathan dough
The divinity of Christ the Son, that he was consubstantial or of the same essence as the Father, was formally acknowledged at Nicaea I in the 4th century. The decision was in great part a response to the flourishing heresy of Arianism which saw in Christ no more than a creature, a special god-like individual, subordinate to God Almighty in every way at all times. At the very core of Nicaea I was the council’s belief in the inescapable Biblical conclusion that Christ the Word was, and is, God. Church doctrine evolved from, and revolved around, this fundamental Scriptural truth. And central to this thought was John 1:1 which in part states in plain language that “The Word was God” (Green’s Literal Translation, NAB, RSV, NKJV).
The Jehovah's Witnesses and others, reflecting Arian Subordinationism, interpret John 1:1 differently. The Jehovah's Witnesses’ New World Translation Bible reads: “and the Word was a god.” A distinct minority of other translations conveying the same general idea read: “and the Word was divine” (The Bible - An American Translation, 1935), or “and godlike kind was the Logos” (Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 1978).
The Jehovah's Witnesses base their interpretation “the Word was a god” on a) rules of grammar, and b) the overall context of the Bible. Basically, they argue that even though a literal translation does not include the indefinite article “a” before God, it can and should be inserted, depending upon the context (Should You Believe, Chapter 9), even though a literal Greek rendering is “and God was the Word” or in English “and the Word was God,” (ibid., Chapter 10; Reasoning, 416, 417).
Strong and Vine’s vehemently disagrees with this grammatical assessment.
(4) Theos is used (4a) with the definite article, (4b) without (i.e., as an anarthrous noun). (4c) The English may or may not have need of the article in translation. But that point cuts no figure in the Greek idiom. Thus in Acts 27:23 (“of [the] God whose I am,”) the article points out the special God whose Paul is and is to be preserved in English. In the very next verse (ho theos) we in English do not need the article, (4c) John 1:1 As to this latter it is usual to employ the article with a proper name, when mentioned a second time. (4c) There are, of course, exceptions to this, as when the absence of the article serves to lay stress upon, or give precision to, the character or nature of what is expressed in the noun.
(4c1) A notable instance of this is in Jn 1:1, “and the Word was God”; here a double stress is on theos by the absence of the article and by the emphatic position. To translate it literally, “a god was the Word” is entirely misleading. Moreover, that “the Word” is the subject of the sentence, exemplifies the rule that the subject is to be determined by its having the article when the predicate is amorphous (without the article).
In other words, the absence of “a” in “a god” lays a double stress on and emphasizes theos so that it should read “God,” ie., “and the Word was God.”
Interestingly, in time the church fathers’ overriding struggle was with the question of the humanity of Christ, i.e., how could God the Son be truly human, not His divinity. The Jehovah's Witnesses take the opposite view, seeing Christ as only a man while assailing his divinity. Of course the real reason the Jehovah's Witnesses deny the divinity of Christ and reduce Him to “a god” is the context of the entire Bible, or more precisely, their notion of their Bible’s context (Should You Believe, Chapter 9). One hears that quite often.
-
jonathan dough
But I have always believed Jesus and God were two separate people.
Trinitarianism teaches that Jesus, the creature, the man of the God-man Jesus, was not the Almighty, and in that sense they were separate.
-
designs
The Orestes complex
-
AGuest
Yes, dear davig (and may you have peace!)...my Lord is a god.
Is he the MOST High God? No.
Does the use of the Greek word "theos" in two places at John 1:1 show him to be the MOST High God? No. The SAME Greek word "theos" is used when referencing the MOST High God... as when referencing lesser gods, including Satan:
John 1:1 - ? ν ? ρχ ? ? ν ? λ ? γος κα ? ? λ ? γος ? ν πρ ? ς τ ? ν θεο ? (refers to the Father and Most High God, JAH of Armies) κα ? θε? ς (refers to the Son and Christ) ? ν ? λ ? γος
2 Corinthians 4:4 - ? ν ο ? ς ? θε ? ς (refers to Satan) το ? α ?? νος το ? του ? τ ? φλωσεν τ ? νο ? ματα τ ? ν ? π ? στων ε ? ς τ ? μ ? α ? γ ? σαι τ ? ν φωτισμ ? ν το ? ε ? αγγελ ? ου τ ? ς δ ? ξης το ? Χριστο ? ? ς ? στιν ε ? κ ? ν το ? θεο ? (refers to the Father and MOST High God, JAH of Armies)
Acts 7:43 - κα ? ? νελ ? βετε τ ? ν σκην ? ν το ? Μολ ? χ κα ? τ ? ? στρον το ? θεο ? (refers to the false god, Remphan) ? μ ? ν ? εμφ ? ν, το ? ς τ ? πους ο ? ς ? ποι ? σατε προσκυνε ? ν α ? το ? ς κα ? μετοικι ? ? μ ? ς ? π ? κεινα Βαβυλ ? νος
In the verses above, the same word used in reference to the Most High God (θεο ?) is used in reference to the false god, Remphan. The same word used in reference to Christ (θε? ς), is used in reference to Satan. Both of these words are... ORIGINALLY (at least as far as the Greek is concerned)... Strong's G2316... "theos." Regardless of who is being referred to, the MOST High God... or Satan. And yet, another verse refers to "those that are called gods" as well as that there are "many gods"... by the same word, Strong's G2316:
1 Corinthians 8:5 κα ? γ ? ρ ε ? περ ε ? σ ? ν λεγ ? μενοι θεο?(refers to those that are “called gods”)ε ? τε ? ν ο ? ραν ? ε ? τε ? π ? τ ? ς γ ? ς ? σπερ ε ? σ ? ν θεο ? (refers to the “many” gods) πολλο ? κα ? κ ? ριοι πολλο ?
So, while John 1:1 and 2 Corinthians 4:4 uses bothθε ? ς andθεο? , and Acts 7:43 uses θεο?, and 1 Corinthians 8:5 uses another version altogether, the SAME word, "theos"... Strong's G2316... was originally used in ALL of these cases... at least, as far as the Greek was concerned. Thus, the word "theos" can refer to the MOST High God, as well as lesser gods, as well as Christ... as well as Satan.
My point? The Greek word used at John 1:1 doesn't tell us anything. Who or what does? The Most Holy One of Israel Himself ("this is my SON"), Christ, ("I do nothing of my OWN initiative), the various apostles... and the temple:
The MOST Holy, Sovereign, and Temple Sanctuary = JAH of Armies, the Father and MOST High God
The HOLY, High Priest, and Temple Cornerstone = JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, the Son and LAMB of God
The HOLY SPIRIT and "Shekanah" Light = JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH, the Son and True Light, as a
glorified "life-giving" Spirit (2 Corinthians 3:17)
Here is where wisdom comes in: the TRUE words spoken by my Lord, as recorded at Matthew 28:19 are...
"Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them... in the NAME of the Father, INTO the Son... WITH holy spirit." Matthew 3:11; John 1:33; John 20:22; Acts 19:1-6; 1 Corinthians 12:13
Why does it not SAY that? Because... the "stylus" of the "secretaries" has been FALSE... as was prophesied. Jeremiah 8:8
Thus, the statement that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one and the same is false. And thus, "Woe, to [the]... scribes..."
May you have ears to hear what the Holy SPIRIT says... and get the sense of it... if you so wish it.
Again, I bid you peace!
A slave of Christ,
SA
-
cameo-d
Jesus said "I am the son of man."
He certainly did not have the nature of the old testament god.
The OT god (which is actually a compilation of gods) ruled by fear and terror.
Jesus spoke of love and kindness. His mission was to set people free from this fear, tyranny, and from the Pharisees with all their made up rules and regulations.
Jesus was not a god. Nor was he the son of the old testament god(s).
-
AGuest
Jesus was not a god. Nor was he the son of the old testament god(s).
My Lord was not a god, literally, when he walked in the flesh as gods do not die (only mortals die). Then, he emptied himself out and took on a slave's form (i.e., took on mortality). The question asks, however, "IS [he, JAHESHUA] a god?" and the answer is yes. He is a spirit being, as is Satan. Both are real spirit beings, and thus "gods." Then, there is the MOST High God... the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies... as well as many other gods, both real and false. A "god"... is an "immortal." Mortals are those who die, as well as are subject to the limitations, desires, and needs of a physical body.
Spirits... are immortal, meaning they don't die... and they aren't dependent upon physical sustenance or subjected to the limitations... or desires... of a physical body (unless they put ON such a body). As a "life-giving SPIRIT," indeed the HOLY SPIRIT... my Lord is immortal... and thus, a god. Satan, too, is an immortal, and thus the "god" of this [physical] system of things. Thus, a god is not necessarily someone/thing to be worshipped.
My Lord is also the Son of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which, in some great part is the "God of the [Old] Testament/Covenant," JAH of Armies. While what is written about That One [God] in the Bible contains quite a number of falsehoods, He is the One who initiated the Old Law Covenant with Israel, which Covenant was mediated by Moses. How He is portrayed in the collection of scriptures, histories, chronologies, etc., is very often inaccurate, to which Christ came to bear witness, as dear Cameo-d states.
But my Lord is a god (immortal)... and Son of the Most High God, the Most Holy One of Israel, JAH of Armies... the God of the Old Covenant... as well as of the New [Covenant].
I bid you all peace.
A slave of Christ, an immortal spirit being and thus a god,
SA