by woman 13 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Flat_Accent how about "It's not just a god, it's Jesus God!
Thanks for your understanding!NWT makes it sound as if Peter was stating that after Jesus was resurrected he was called Jesus God. Clearly, it is obvious after reading in several bible translation that "Jesus God resurrected" is an error.
Woman, in this sentence, the word "Jesus" is the object of the verb "resurrected", not the subject.
The word "God" is the subject. Subject and object do not qualify each other.
The sentence does not say "Jesus who is also God" resurrected.
To fill the meaning of the sentence out, and to put it into contect,. Peter is telling the men of Israel the wonderful news that the Old Testament prohecies about the Christ have been fulfilled. He reminds them that Daniel foresaw "the resurrection of the Christ" and said that he would not be "forsaken in Hades", and his flesh would not become corrupted, just as david had prophesied before him (verses 26 and 27.)
Verse 32 then says, using a much more modern form of sentence construction,
We are all witnesses of the fact that God has resurrected this (man) Jesus.)"
God resurrected Jesus. Not applying the word God almost as part of Jesus' name, which is what your interpretation entails.
This is nothing to do with the question of whether Jesus is God or not. I am talking about what this sentence actually means.
Indeed, verse 33 makes it even plainer. It says
"Therefore because he was exalted to the right hand of God and received the promised holy spirit from the Father, he has poured out this which YOU see and hear. "
If you take "God" in verse 32 as part of Jesus' name, that would mean that Peter was saying that Jesus was exalted to the right hand of himself, which is obviously nonsense.
Therefore, your question
Do you ever recall stating that Jesus was God resurrected?
contains a complete misunderstanding. It doesn't say anywhere and is completely incorrect that "Jesus was God resurrected".
Imagine. Put it into the context. The Israelites were aware of all the stories about Jesus,. that he was going around healing the sick and telling people stories about God. They knew of his trial and his subsequent putting to death. Now here are these followers of his telling people that he's come to life again. Extraordinary! And Peter is telling them that yes, this has happened, and that it fulfils the peophecies from all that time ago.
He is saying, this is what happened, and God did it! he is not saying Jesus is God. And by verse 33 he is not only saying that, he is saying that God, after resurrecting him and raising him up to sit at his right hand, has poured out his spirit on him and that jesus has then poured that spirit on "us", in other words, on the people gathered there, so that they suddenly found themselves talking in all those different languages, which is what had just happened before Peter made that speech.
Now do you see?
It is all a misunderstanding because times have moved on and people no longer understand old fashioned sentence construction.
I know this is a WT article but the priciple applies to their other publications.
To be honest, the whole of the NWT is a really bad lesson in the use of the English language.
A lot of it used to really throw me. I think that because they have 'fudged' such a lot of it and altered it so much, when you put it all together it just doesn't read very well. In fact it reads very badly and if that is so how can you learn from it?
Their criticism of the NIV and the NEV is well known but at least these bibles actually read coherently.
Jesus and God are both invented, anyone can call them anything they wish, it doesnt necessarily mean they are right or true.
