by jonathan dough 204 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
PS
I am reading the works of the Apostolic fathers and it amzes me the difference in what they wrote VS the teachings of Paul in his letters and the teachings of Peter, James and the Gospels.
Differences or additions? Basics or secondary issues?
SOme of the stuff is the same, obviously, but already you can start seeing the development of doctrine that was not present in the works of the Gospels or the apostles.
Wouldn't you expect that as heresies developed?
Those heresies were foretold by Jesus of Nazareth in His parables - particularly Matthew chapter 13.
I believe Jesus is God, but not the Father.
John 8:58 sealed the deal for me.
Sylvia
DD,
Some of the things were different, the elevation of the position of Bishop to such a high status, ex:
Wherever the bishop appears, there let the people be; as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic Church. It is not lawful to baptize or give communion without the consent of the bishop. On the other hand, whatever has his approval is pleasing to God. Thus, whatever is done will be safe and valid. — Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8
Jesus never gave nor suggested such authority to his on disciples.
Wouldn't you expect that as heresies developed?
I was amazed how SOON these things developed, less than 100 years after Jesus's death and even less from the death of the last apostle.
I'm amazed, also, at the rapidity with which pre-Flood humans sunk into decline, e.g., Cain and other miscreants.
Ditto for post-Flood.
Sylvia
I'm amazed, also, at the rapidity with which pre-Flood humans sunk into decline, e.g., Cain and other miscreants.
Ditto for post-Flood.
Pre-flood we can "blame" the angels that corrupted man ( I like excuses )
Post flood, well, we can "Blame it on the rain"
PS
I was amazed how SOON these things developed, less than 100 years after Jesus's death and even less from the death of the last apostle.
True. Look at the Didache. It just missed the Cannon. It was written as early as 120 to 150. There are many things in it that the Church does not believe
Christ claimed the opposite, going so far as to take the title of the divine name, the I AM. In that sense he did preach it as essential truth, saying, if you do not believe that he is the I Am you will die in your sins.
Jonathan,
Your statement above is simply another example of why I suggest to others that they stand on their own two feet and do their own investigations. Why? Because the I AM is not a name or an identity in scripture but a simple Greek expression common of that time. It is not even capitalized in the KJV in most verses like John 8:58 for good reason. Such capitalization is an opinion not a fact anyway. Why? Because in Ex 3:14 the Jews themselves recognized this and did not translate the Hebrew hayah in this way. Their translators rendered it into Greek as Ego eimi ho Ohn in the Greek or I am the God as now found in the Septuagint when rendered back into English. Verse 14 was given to Moses as assurance to him that God exists and will make this existence known to him and the Jews with him. But God did tell Moses the Name of God which Moses continued to use many times over even in the historical texts of Genesis that preceded this event since Moses wrote after the fact and could not do that as he now knew it. What was the name of God then? Was it I am? No! It was: given in the very next verse like this: Ex 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. Can you see it? Perhaps not because it was so sacred to Jews that they concealed it and we only have it in capitals now as LORD in this case in the KJV. But it is the Hebrew name: Y@hovah yeh-ho-vaw’ and it does appear as a name for God many times over despite the fact that Jews rendered it LORD or GOD in most of their writings.
Now the blanket statement that you made that the divine name is I AM is not supported by any text anywhere in scripture. Your readers should be aware of this so that they can decide for themselves what to teach others. A bit more on this can be found at:
Christ claimed the opposite, going so far as to take the title of the divine name, the I AM. In that sense he did preach it as essential truth, saying, if you do not believe that he is the I Am you will die in your sins.
Jonathan,
Your statement above is simply another example of why I suggest to others that they stand on their own two feet and do their own investigations. Why? Because the I AM is not a name or an identity in scripture but a simple Greek expression common to that time. It is not even capitalized in the KJV in most verses like John 8:58 for good reason. Such capitalization is an opinion of the translator not a fact anyway. Why? Because in Ex 3:14 the Jews themselves recognized this and did not translate the Hebrew hayah in this way. Their translators rendered it into Greek as Ego eimi ho Ohn in the Greek or I am the God as now found in the Septuagint when rendered back into English. Verse 14 was given to Moses as assurance to him that God exists and will make this existence known to him and the Jews with him. But God did tell Moses the Name of God which Moses continued to use many times over even in the historical texts of Genesis that preceded this event since Moses wrote after the fact and could now do that as he now knew it. What was the name of God then? Was it I am? No! It was: given in the very next verse like this: Ex 3:15 And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever,
LOL.
Seriously, after I posted, I thought about how quickly things can get out of hand when we're "on our own."
For instance, at work, as soon as the boss leaves, some begin to slacken their grip.
Sylvia
DD,
True. Look at the Didache. It just missed the Cannon. It was written as early as 120 to 150. There are many things in it that the Church does not believe
So who's right? Are we to trust the Church in its power struggles to make sure what 's really god's word and have it included in the Bible cannon? Surely such struggling would make them very biased and corrupt their judgement. Not very reliable.
Father Greater than Son - John14:28, Son going back to his Father; they are in total unity but not equal. The same being(soul) cannot be greater or less than itself, it is what it is making the Father and the Son united without division as two seperate beings(life forms).
The Father is the Almighty God and Creator, Jesus is the Son of God, made by God, sent by God; and nothing else ever seen reflects the glory of the Father like Jesus Christ did and does. Jesus was telling his disiples that he has shown them the plans, will, love, and way to the Father; that was one of God's commanments to Jesus.
God has no god, He is God. Jesus has a God and Father. God dosen't have commandments, he gives his creations commandements in order to do his will, and to us to make us more like him. Jesus had commandments from the Father and followed them perfectly. Jesus had no fault or sin in God's eye - Son of God, much more than a man. Plus God is immortal and has to be alive to hear our and Jesus's prayers; Jesus died for three days.
Plus if the Son was the Father the Son; the Son would know the day and hour of his own return. But only the Father knows the day and hour. - Mat.24:36, Mark13:32, Acts1:7
You can twist the scriptures all day to fit your lies. If you worship the Son(Jesus) as the Father(Yahweh/Jehovah) then you break the first and biggest commandment Jesus taught us -- Mark12:29, Mat.4:10 ( and if your bible says LORD it means the Father's name = Jehovah in English, Yahweh in Hebrew. LORD = God, Father. Lord/lord means king, shepard, Son of God, Jesus. Worshiping anything other that the Father as the Father is not good for your spiritual development and NOT taught by Christ.
If the earth is God's footstool and the heavens(universe) are His throne (Isaiah66:1); and, if our flesh cannot see/behold the power and glory of God's face and live (Exodus33:20,23) how do you expect Mary's belly to hold that power and glory? Plus people seen the face of Jesus and lived. God will show the world His face when God himself returns Ezekiel 38:14-23; 39:21-23, 29. God is to Holy to tolerate the sin of this world or reside in this current wicked system of things. Jesus could and did live with us because he was sent to by God. I hope this helps you understand the differance between the Son and the Father.
