God is Jesus

by evangelist 178 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

Kenneson

Gravedancer,
Isn't it Nietzsche who is dead?
cujw

Evangelist,
When dealing with JWs, I recommend you initially use their Bible, because they don't trust anything other than their translation. The good news is that even their own Bible supports the idea of the deity of Christ, though most JWs and most Christians are not aware of it. Therefore, first ensure that the JW you're speaking with agrees that their Bible, the New World Translation (NWT) is authoritative and trustworthy, then present them with the following verses as written in the NWT.
Jn 5:17-18. Jesus calls God His Father, and the Jewish religious leaders prepare to stone Him. Why? Because as the verse says, they realized that Jesus, by calling God His Father was making Himself the equal of God. They wanted to stone Him because they considered what He was doing blasphemous.
Jn 14:7. Jesus tells His disciples that to see Him is to have seen the Father. Why? Because in their essence, Father and Son (and Holy Spirit) are One God.
Isa 9:6. This is one of the most famous verses in all of Scripture and it clearly says that the baby born in Bethlehem will be called, “Mighty God.” Note the use of the capital G, a clear indication by JW standards of a reference to deity.
Matt 1:23. The baby born to the virgin Mary was to be called, Immanuel, meaning, "With us God (or God with us)." Jesus was God with us, having stepped briefly into our space-time continuum.
Jn 20:27-29. Here, the disciple, Thomas, the one who doubted, called Jesus his Lord and God. If he had been mistaken, Jesus could have and would have corrected him, but instead, Jesus tells him that those of us who believe without seeing Him will be happy. And what will we believe that will make us so happy? The same thing Thomas realized, that Jesus is Lord and God.
Rev 1:8; 21:5-7; 22:13. Each of these makes reference to Jehovah as Alpha and Omega, First and Last, Beginning and End, and most good JWs will agree that Jehovah God is the One Who is being referred to. However, in Rev 1:17, the speaker refers to Himself as the "First and Last" again suggesting that He is Jehovah. In verse 1:18, though, the speaker says that He once became dead and is now alive forevermore--so here we have a reference to Jehovah Who claims to have died once. Since God the Father never claimed to have died, the speaker could only be Jesus, the Second Person of the Godhead, and the One Who died for our sins.
There are many other references that could be taken directly from the JW's own Bible, poorly translated as it is, that specifically refute their doctrine that denies the deity of Christ and the truth of the Trinity.
If you need any more help with this, contact me directly at [email protected], and in either case, please let me know how things go.
Yours in Christ,
cj
AlanF

To Kenneson:
: I don't think anyone would deny that I am human (I exhibit the attributes of man--I think, I reflect, etc.),
You only partly answered my question, and you did not answer it in the manner in which I asked it. Let's try again:
Tell me, are you a true human or a false human? Why do you answer so?
I did not ask the question that you answered (your answer was essentially "I am human"), because the proper question to the answer you gave is, "Are you human?"
Nor was my question question about your truthfulness:
: but as to whether I am truthful or a liar, you will have to ask those who know me. Of course, I
like to think of myself as truthful.
Note that my question has two parts: (1) Are you a true human or a false human? (2) Why do you answer so? I am interested in your reasoning about your answer.
To evangelist:
: What god died for ùs and shed his blood so we can be righteous?
Jesus.
Now note the bolded "God" in your quote below:
: the bible says :1Tm:3:16: And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
The problem is that this passage is one of a number that have serious textual problems. You quote from the KJV, which is based on the traditional manuscript Textus Receptus. However, most scholars today recognize that Textus Receptus is a relatively late manuscript that has many problematic areas. Translating this as "God was manifest..." is an example of this. Even that bastion of trinitarianism, the NIV Committee on Bible Translation, admits that on manuscript evidence, "God" is probably wrong. The NIV renders 1 Timothy 3:16 as:
"Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body..."
It has a footnote on verse 16: "Some manuscripts God". Now, if there were any good way to justify the reading "God" here, you can bet that the NIV Translation Committee would have found it, but they did not, and so they used the more likely reading, "He", from earlier manuscripts.
The New American Standard Bible also reads "He" here, and in a footnote on verse 16, my NASB Hebrew-Greek Key Study Bible states, "Some later mss. read God".
Why do some manuscripts read "He" while others read "God"? Because of the way Greek was written in the 1st century, and the way copyists abbreviated certain common words. I can't reproduce the capital Greek letters (uncials) on this board, so if you want to see what the original passages looked like in ancient Greek, check it out in a library. Anyway, the word translated "He" in the NIV is OS (OMICRON SIGMA) (this word actually means "who", but in Greek the "he" is implied, so that we have "he who" or just "he"), whereas the word for "god" or "God" is THEOS (THETA EPSILON OMICRON SIGMA). The capital THETA looks like a capital OMICRON that has a short horizontal line in the middle. Very often copyists would abbreviate THEOS as THS to shorten manuscripts by saving two letters, since the word is used so often. Generally the copyist would add a faint horizontal line above the whole abbreviation so as to indicate that it was an abbreviation, but apparently not always. Thus, if the short horizontal line in the OMICRON became faded, and/or the faint horizontal line above the whole abbreviation became faded, it would be difficult to tell what the original word was. Manuscripts have been found where it is difficult or impossible to say for sure whether these lines were or were not in the original text, since many of them are extremely faded. The footnote apparatus in The Greek New Testament (UBS4 = Nestle/Aland 27th ed.) indicates that the best 4th and 5th century manuscripts, namely, Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus, originally read OS, although later "correctors" added the horizontal line indicating an abbreviation.
To summarize, very often theos was abbreviated as ths, which visually, in Greek uncials, looks much like os. Manuscripts have been found that contain a clear theos, a clear os, a clear ho, and various unclear representations of these. Thus it is impossible to say for certain, on manuscript evidence alone, just what the original manuscripts said. It is significant, though, that the best manuscript scholars today come down on the side of what is found in the best and most ancient manuscripts, namely, that "He" or "Who" should be the proper translation in 1 Timothy 3:16.
What about context? Relying on the best ancient manuscripts, we have something like, "(he) who was manifested in the flesh..." Well, who was manifested in the flesh? Obviously Jesus Christ was. John 1:14 says, "And the Word became flesh..." (NASB) Nowhere does the NT say that "God became flesh". Thus the NASB renders 1 Timothy 3:16 this way:
"And by common confession great is the mystery of godliness: He who was revealed in the flesh..."
Here, who "He" is, is not explicitly stated, but the overall context and the rest of the verse clearly indicate that it was Jesus Christ. Taking this into account, the more interpretive New Living Translation has:
"Without question, this is the great mystery of our faith: Christ appeared in the flesh..."
The NLT has a footnote on this passage that states:
"In this short hymn, Paul affirms the humanity and divinity of Christ. By so doing he reveals the heart of the Good News, "the great mystery of our faith" (the secret of how we become godly). `Appeared in the flesh' -- Jesus was a man; Jesus' incarnation is the basis of our being right with God..."
Given all this, it is clear that at best, manuscript evidence for the rendering "God was manifest" is poor, that evidence for "He (Christ) was manifest" is good, and that contextual evidence makes the latter rendering certain. Thus, your statement that:
: I hope this is a fact that God is Jesus.
is shown to have no basis in 1 Timothy 3:16.
AlanF
Kenneson

Alan F.,
Since I don't answer your question according to your liking,
why don't you pose it to yourself and give us your answer.
Then maybe I can see where you are coming from. And I might be
in a better position to answer it.
evangelist

hello AlanF
I agree 1000% what you are saying and your post is so good that I will print and put your post on my fest platter.
By the way I made the small god in 1 tim 3:16 because many were talking about gods and I was trying to state that no way a god can be manifested to die for us praise God.
Also cvjw thank you very much for your help and I will use your advice, and I will contact you as soon as they come next week.
By the way I was never a Jehovah witness but I like staying as a penticostal evangelist praise God
God Bless you all
God Bless you
Kenneson

Evangelist,
You might want to read an article entitled "Did God Die on
the Cross?" at http://www.christianitytoday.com
Go to Search Site on the right and type in the title "Did God
Die on the Cross?"
Kenneson

Alan F. writes: "Well, who was manifested in the flesh? Obviously Jesus Christ was. John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh..."
Yet, the Word obviously also pre-existed since vs. 1 says the Word was with God. John 6:62: "Does this shock you? What if you were to
see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before?"; John 7:38:
"I tell you what I have seen in the Father's presence..." ; John 4:13:
"No one has gone up to heaven except the one who has come down from
heaven, the Son of Man" and vs. 31 "The one who comes down from heaven
is above all." So then the Word obviously existed before He became
flesh. No where do we read that the pre-existent Word was created or
had a beginning. If God is an eternal Father than Jesus is an eternal Son. Otherwise, there would be a time when God was not
a father. And he would have become a father either at the time
that the Word was created or when Jesus was born on earth.
Now where are we told that the Word was created?
Kenneson

And yes, God was manifest in the flesh. John 14:8-11 "Philip said to him, 'Master, show us the Father, and that will be enough for us." Jesus said to him, 'Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say 'Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on my own. The Father who dwells in me is doing his works. Believe me that I am in the Father is in me, or else, believe because of the works themselves." Jesus is the perfect revelation of the Father. He reveals God in the flesh. How can
you know the Father except through Jesus? John 6:46 says: "Not that any man has seen the Father, except he who is from God; this one has seen the Father." And again at John 1:18 "No one has ever seen God.
The only Son, God, who is at the Father's side, has reveled him."
Who is Jesus if not God manifested in the flesh?
Kenneson

That should have read John 3:13 and 31, rather than 4:13. Sorry
for the typo.
AlanF

To Kenneson:
: Since I don't answer your question according to your liking,
That's not quite correct. You're not answering the question at all.
: why don't you pose it to yourself and give us your answer. Then maybe I can see where you are coming from. And I might be in a better position to answer it.
Alright, let's try again. Here's the question:
Tell me, are you a true human or a false human? Why do you answer so?
Now, you can answer, "I am a true human" or you can answer "I am a false human".
See, that's not so hard!
Once you decide which way to answer, you should explain how you decided one way or the other. I can't give you any hints on how to do that. Assuming you're at least of average intelligence, this should not be a problem.
:: Well, who was manifested in the flesh? Obviously Jesus Christ was. John 1:14 "And the Word became flesh..."
: Yet, the Word obviously also pre-existed
Right. But existed before what? I think it's clear that in John 1, "the beginning" refers to the beginning of our physical universe. Many commentators see this as a reference back to "the beginning" in Genesis 1:1, which is obviously talking about the creation of the physical "heavens and earth". So it certainly cannot be stated with much assurance that John 1 is referring to "everything other than God". Specifically, the Bible appears to indicate that angels are created beings, and that they live in some sort of "place", right? John 14:2 says, "In my Father's house are many rooms; if it were not so, I would have told you. I am going there to prepare a place for you." Clearly, these "rooms" and "places" must have been created, and in all likelihood John believes that they were created before "the heavens and the earth".
: So then the Word obviously existed before He became flesh.
That's what John 1 indicates.
: No where do we read that the pre-existent Word was created or had a beginning.
Only according to the trinitarian worldview. Other posters have supplied scriptures in these latest Trinity-related threads that specifically state that Jesus had a beginning. For example, look at DakotaRed's postings here: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=26044&site=3
: If God is an eternal Father
You're not understanding the English properly. Such passages do not say that the Father has eternally been a Father. They state that God -- the Father -- is eternal. God could certainly be eternal, but if there were a point in "time" (time from his point of view) at which he created his Son, then at that point he became the Father as well.
You have to use some Common Christian Sense here. Isaiah 9:6 is said by all Christians to be a Messianic prophecy, and it calls the Messiah "Eternal Father" (NASB). Now, does the Bible indicate that Christ ever had any offspring? No. Then how could he be called "Eternal Father"?
: than Jesus is an eternal Son.
Not at all. A being who exists from eternity to eternity can have a son at some point, and from then on be called a father. His fatherhood has nothing to do with the length of his existence.
: Otherwise, there would be a time when God was not a father.
Precisely.
: And he would have become a father either at the time that the Word was created or when Jesus was born on earth.
Right.
: Now where are we told that the Word was created?
Proverbs 8:22-31:
"The LORD possessed me at the beginning of His way, before His works of old. From everlasting I was established, from the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth... When He established the heavens, I was there ... Then I was beside Him, as a master workman; and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him." (NASB)
"The LORD created me at the beginning of his work, the first of his acts of old. Ages ago I was set up, at the first, before the beginning of the earth... When he established the heavens, I was there ... I was beside him, like a master workman; and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always, rejoicing in his inhabited world and delighting in the sons of men." (RSV)
"Yahweh created me, first-fruits of his fashioning, before the oldest of his works. From everlasting, I was firmly set, from the beginning, before the earth came into being... When he fixed the heavens firm, I was there ... I was beside the master craftsman, delighting him day after day, ever at play in his presence, at play everywhere on his earth, delighting to be with the children of men." (NJB)
The NJB has a marginal note on this: "The expression `first-fruits of his fashioning' (lit. `first-fruits of his way' or `of his ways', according to the versions) is linked to the title `first born of every creature' given to Christ by Paul, Col 1:15, and to the title `principle of God's creation', Rv 3:14."
"The LORD created me at the beginning of His course As the first of His works of old. In the distant past I was fashioned, At the beginning, at the origin of earth... When He made the heavens above firm ... I was with Him as a confidant, A source of delight every day, Rejoicing before Him at all times, Rejoicing in His inhabited world, Finding delight with mankind." (Tanakh)
Now of course, trinitarians take issue with the application of "Wisdom personified" here to Christ, but consider the simple fact that, because God does not change, he must always have possessed wisdom. Therefore he could not have created it. How could he have created wisdom if he did not have the wisdom to begin with? Note what The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (Edited by Raymond E. Brown, etc.; Prentice Hall, 1990, p. 457) says about this:
"22-31. Wisdom's superiority over all things is due to her origin before them. 22. qanani: LXX, Syr, and Tg translate "(The Lord) created me." Variations are "begot," "brought forth," or "formed," paralleling the vbs. in vv 24-25. This means Wisdom would be the first product of creation. Hebr qnh ordinarily means "get," "possess" (cf. B. Vawter, JBL, 99 [1980] 205-16), and is so rendered by Aq, Sym, Theod, and Vg. Then the Lord utilizes Wisdom in creation, and no indication of her exact origins is given. re'sit darko means "first fruit," "firstborn," "at the beginning of his way," or "principle," "model," depending on the verbal sense of qnh... 27-30. Wisdom witnessed the creation and came to know its secrets."
In view of the above, I think that Proverbs 8:22-31 undoubtedly refers to Christ, which then is a clear statement that Christ is a created being.
Several NT passages are clear references to the creation of Jesus:
Colossians 1:15-16:
"And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities -- all things have been created by Him and for Him." (NASB)
"He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities -- all things were created through him and for him." (RSV)
"He is the image of the unseen God, the first-born of all creation, for in him were created all things in heaven and on earth: everything visible and everything invisible, thrones, ruling forces, sovereignties, powers -- all things were created through him and for him." (NJB)
Revelation 3:14:
"The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:" (NASB)
"The words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of God's creation." (RSV)
"Here is the message of the Amen, the trustworthy, the true witness, the Principle of God's creation:" (NJB)
I don't see how it could be any clearer -- Jesus is called the first-born of all creation.
Of course, trinitarians once again claim that some of the wording in these passages means something different from the above, but I've considered their arguments and I find them to be entirely circular, in the sense that the language related arguments are terrible, and the only reason for accepting them is that not to do so destroys the doctrine of the Trinity. What these translators are doing is exactly the same as the translators of the JW New World Translation did in a number of cases: they let their doctrinal biases dictate how they translated, when other considerations would lead much more strongly to a different rendering.
To evangelist:
: I agree 1000% what you are saying and your post is so good that I will print and put your post on my fest platter.
Good! What's a "fest platter"?
: By the way I made the small god in 1 tim 3:16 because many were talking about gods and I was trying to state that no way a god can be manifested to die for us praise God.
Who says? Are not all things possible with God?
AlanF

God is Jesus

Share this