According the the Insight Book's definition of "God", should Jesus be worshipped?

by pirata 10 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  pirata

  jgnat's thread, http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/210513/1/How-many-gods-are-there, made me realize something:

  Here's the definition of 'God' straight from the Insight book:

  *** it-1 p. 968 God ***

  Anything that is worshiped can be termed a god, inasmuch as the worshiper attributes to it might greater than his own and venerates it.

  Now JWs agree that Jesus is a god, just not the almighty God. There's no question that the Bible calls Jesus [a] god (whether or not you have the [a] there is irrelevant to this discussion). That's fine. So what is the justification for calling Jesus a God, but not worshipping him, if the very definition of a god is "anything that can be worshiped"? Even Satan is spoken of as being worshipped since he is God of this system of things: *** g 2/06 p. 29 Is There Only One True God? *** The apostle Paul described the Devil as “the god of this system of things.” (2 Corinthians 4:4) As “the ruler of this world,” the Devil has promoted countless false gods. (John 12:31) Hence, all worship addressed to man-made gods is, in effect, worship rendered to Satan. But Satan is not a god who merits our worship. He is a self-appointed ruler, a usurper. In time, he himself, as well as all forms of false worship, will be eliminated. When that happens, all humanity—yes, all creation—will forever acknowledge Jehovah as the only true and living God There's more good information on how JW views of worshipping Jesus have changed over the years here: http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/worship-jesus.php
• 

  pirata

  The latest printed information of this is interesting:

  *** g 2/06 p. 29 Is There Only One True God? ***

  For example, some Bible verses allude to Jesus Christ as a god. (Isaiah 9:6, 7; John 1:1, 18) Does this mean that Jesus is to be worshipped? Jesus himself said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Luke 4:8) Clearly, although Jesus is mighty in power and divine in nature, the Bible does not portray him as an object of worship.

  The article mentions that the Bible "alludes" to Jesus as a god. That's kind of interesting because I thought the Wording in John 1 couldn't be any more clear.

  Luke 4:8 though, seems like a valid objection against worshipping Jesus. Any thoughts on this?
• 

  Chariklo

  Jesus himself said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Luke 4:8) Clearly, although Jesus is mighty in power and divine in nature, the Bible does not portray him as an object of worship.

  Is it just me? To me, that second sentence is a patent non sequitur. I don't find at all that it follows logically from the previous sentence, even though the WT predispose the mind of the reader to agree with the statemtn by inserting that word "Clearly" so that all the seep will nod sagely and murmur "yes, of course, it's clear".

  No, it's not clear. Luke 4: 48 merely proclaims that there is only one God. It says absoluy=tely nothing, zero, zilch about whether or not the Bible portrays him as an "object of worship", and that phrase itself predisposes the mind to think "no, not an object of worship". Jesus was a man. A man is not an object. "An object of worship" sounds like a statue of an idol.

  Weasel words as ever from the WT.

  My second sentence of that pair, couched in WT-like words, would read "Clearly the Bible is not talking here about whether or not Jesus is to be worshipped; it is merely saying that there is only one God."
• 

  godrulz

  Jesus was worshipped in the Gospels and Revelation 4-5 (equally with the Father). Heb. 1:6 has YHWH commanding all God's angels to worship Jesus. Created beings are never worshipped (forbidden in Rev. John/angels). Jesus is not created, but uncreated Creator, worthy of worship.

  A stone idol can be worshipped as a false god, but this would be condemned idolatry. Either Jesus is true God worthy of worship or He is mere creature not worthy of worship. There is no escaping trinitarian implications if He is Deity/worshipped (He also has the names, attributes, titles, works, etc. of God). There is one true God and many false or so-called gods, not God by nature (Gal. 4:8; I Cor. 8:4-6). Compromised talk of divine, god-like, etc. blurs the distinction between Almighty God and things that are not God. Only God can and should be worshipped. WT waters down the meaning by substituting 'obeisance' in English when the same Greek word is used of worship of Jehovah.
• 

  Chariklo

  I wasn't talking about the doctrine, Godrulz. I was answering pirata's question

  Luke 4:8 though, seems like a valid objection against worshipping Jesus. Any thoughts on this?

  My thoughts are "No, it isn't a valid objection" for the reasons I gave above.
• 

  pirata

  @godrulz, Yes, accepting the trinity would make this a moot point.

  @Chariklo, good point. Jesus was objecting to Satan's invitation for Jesus to worship Satan. Instead Jesus quoted the scripture as a statement that he would only Worship God and serve him only. There is no implication here that Jesus was NOT to be worshipped.
• 

  Honesty

  Any JW who begins worshiping Jesus stops worshiping the faithful slave and soon becomes a former JW.

  The slave doesn't condone competition.
• 

  godrulz

  In fairness, I think the WT rejection of the trinity (Satanic, pagan, Catholic, blah blah) is the real reason they refuse to see Christ as God worthy of worship. This may be held in sincerity (though they have countless evidence that they should know better) to exalt Jehovah alone, but they are wrong in their assumption. It is true that those who follow the real Jesus, including worshipping Him, will renounce the false JW cult and be set free. One cannot remain in the organization with loyalty and live for God in Christ. So, the WT will certainly try to keep people from being part of 'Christendom' or keep them from accessing non-filtered information. It is possible that some are power and money hungry and know better, but do not have the fortitude that Raymond Franz had. It is hard not to hate the WT. When I see the changed lives of those who have found Christ after leaving WT, it also makes it hard to not love the victims who are a prayer away from truth and freedom.
• 

  Knowsnothing

  If Jesus really was to be worshipped, it should be a clear command throughout the Bible, and not some obscure text as Hebrews 1:6, which can be translated as obeisance.

  @ pirata, as some have pointed above, things such as idols can be worshipped, and we know that people or entities can be worshipped. However, just because one can or may worship someone/thing, doesn't mean they should.

  (Romans 1:7-8) . . .May YOU have undeserved kindness and peace from God our Father and [the] Lord Jesus Christ. 8 First of all, I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of YOU, because YOUR faith is talked about throughout the whole world.

  (Romans 15:6) . . .that with one accord YOU may with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

  If you wish to review texts that speak of the Father being the only God, may I suggest here?

  Pirata, while Jesus isn't to be worshipped, IMO, I believe the Society does not give enough emphasis on him. If that's what your getting at, I totally agree.
• 

  Band on the Run

  For Christians, Jesus is God. Some religions term themself Christian but what is point unless Jesus is God. I could be wrong but without Jesus beiing God, aren't these groups primarily Jewish. Stephen was stone for proclaiming Christ's divinity. My problem is that we see the nature of Christ as the defining belief of Christianity. His nature is paramount. Without Godhead, he is just a prophet or a spirit worker. The Incarnation is God in our midst. God sends angels and other spirits frequently so what is the import of Jesus that he divides theological time. Jews were livid and zealous persecuting Christians. Other messiahs appeared without the vehemence. Several were embraced far more than Jesus himself.

  I am curious for the reasons for the change in Jesus. It annoys me that the Witnesses style themselves Christian. They are Jehovists. The folly of Christ is not that he is super angel material. The New Testament is unclear about the nature of Christ. Early creeds quoted by Paul and others suggest the church saw Christ as divine. The Gnostics show that not everyone had the same view of Jesus. I'm wondering whether the Jewish Christians believed one thing and the Greek Christians another. I always remark that the Trinity is an extrapolation from the Bible but the nonTrinity view is also an extrapolition. It seems bizarre to me to report the sayings and acts of Jesus, the apostles, the epistles and Revelation and not expressly address the core issue.

  I've never seen this discussed in scholarly literature yet it must exist. Has anyone else read why the NT authors and, by logic, the later church that canonized the NT, did not address Christ's nature clearly.

  Jesus as a spirit does not sound like folly to me. Victorians depicted angels all over the place as cutesy creatures. The Bible always says that they are terrifying in aspect. Obviously, I am not neutral on this subject. Growing up in the Witnesses, I absorbed the generic Jesus in our culture. It wasn't until I was an adult that I clearly understood that Jesus is not God. I only realized in college when I took a course on church history.