by John Vogel 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Hi John - and welcome.
My beef with the WTS is not mainly about doctrine although there's plenty about that too.
It was when I discovered that they would also lie that my eyes were really opened.
A WT article in 1991 quoted from a booklet published in the 1930's which they said was entitled "millions now living may never die".
It wasn't called that. It was called "millions now living WILL never die"
My JW sister seemed unable to see the difference.
BTW the WTS doesn't do misprints.
Dear John,
You seem to have much in commoon with two posters here Aguest and Noko. They are x jw's who do not accept the trinity. They also only use the Hebrew pronunciation for Jesus. You may want to hook up.
Though I think these are seriously biased, they are none-the-less informative opinions, based (it would seem) on their own POV concerning the WTBTS.
They are not "seriously biased". The Watchtower actually develops most bizarre biblical interpretations.
What Jehovah's Witnesses believe Bible is God's Word and is truth 2 Tim. 3:16, 17
Some other interesting ones:
u Be no part of the world.
Do not take blood transfusions.
Do not participate in nationalistic activities, such as voting.
The United Nations is the image of Satan’s organization and will be destroyed .
The Watchtower 2001 11/15 We laud Jehovah as the Universal Sovereign, 'dwell' in him as our Source of security, and declare the good news of his Kingdom. (Matthew 24:14) Therefore, 'no calamity will befall us'....Anointed Christians are like alien residents living in tents apart from this system of things.(1 Peter2:11) Whether our hope is heavenly or earthly, we are not infected by such spiritually deadly plagues as its immorality, materialism, false religion and worship of 'the wild beast', the United Nations.-Revelation 9:20,21; 13:1-18.....Angels have been given power to protect us. They guard us 'in all our ways.' We enjoy angelic guardianship as Kingdom proclaimers and do not stumble spiritually.
Yet the Watchtower was a NGO member with the United Nations for about 10 years.
In summary: It is not just another denomination. It is a deceiving, money-making, mind-controling cult .
I can't tell if you are a JW or are saying their interpretations to get their doctrines are wierd but since you cited scriptures I am obligated to refute them. (or did you just cut and paste from a JW website to be helpful?)
God's name is Jehovah
No such word was ever found in the bible.
Christ is God's Son and is inferior to him
That is a rather odd thing for a Son to be but the scriptures cited don't show that.
Christ was first of God's creations
Rev. 3:14, he was the first thing created for being the ORIGIN of God's creation?
Col. 1:15 according to the chapter the 'firstborn' (pre-eminent one) created All that was created so the assertion is proven wrong with the "proof-texts."
Christ died on a stake, not a cross
Even the Watchtower has now confessed it is inconclusive.
Christ's human life was paid as a ransom for obedient humans
Actually it was for all but was recieved by those that believe.
Christ was raised from the dead as an immortal spirit person
With a physical body
Christ's presence is in spirit
While he is also still a man. Col 2:9
People God approves will receive eternal life
That is those that believe
There is only one road to life
and his name is Jesus Christ.
The human soul ceases to exist at death
Not according to Jesus. matt 10:28
Hope for dead is resurrection
And is the curse for those that died in their sins. Heb 9:27
Only a little flock of 144,000 go to heaven and rule with Christ
"Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, HYPOCRITES! Because you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven from men; for you yourselves do not go in, neither do you permit those on their way in." - Jesus, Matt 23:13
It doesn't even say the 144,000 go to heaven.
The 144,000 are born again as spiritual sons of God
They're all Jewish male virgins and have never told a lie. rev 14:4
Taking blood into body through mouth or veins violates God's laws
Making blood more important than a human life is sacrilege
A clergy class and special titles are improper
Such as John Class, Governing body, Presiding Overseer, Circuit Overseer, District Overseer, Watchtower President.
Very nicely put, Star Scream.
First of all neither his name nor title are "Doubting Thomas." That is a man-made name that people have called him and perpetuated oh so often at his proclaimation at John 20:28. He is an Apostle of Christ. You are making Christ less than what this Apostle made of him. Jesus did not say, "Wait just a minute Thomas..." But if you have a desire to deny his full identity then that is your prerogative. There is ample evidence that Jesus is the Almighty. There is nothing else he is identified as in his pre-existence.So he is either a second true God, not really the Son of God or exactly what he is called in the bible.
I am not making Christ less then the apostle made of Him. I just think we need to really understand who Jesus is and who God is, and no... they are not equal! To say so would contradict what Jesus Christ says in John 14:28 " Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I." Notice, Jesus himself says "My Father is greater than I". Now, if Jesus says "I and my Father are one", and he also says "My Father is greater then I" what does this tell us? I can tell you this much, this is no contradiction or bad translation, this is Jesus revealing the nature of the Word, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Truth, AKA Yahweh (or God)!
It isn't I that deny the identity of Yahshua (or Jesus), it is the religion of "Christianity", the various denominations which cannot seem to even agree on the basics, that deny Yahshua... at least as far as I am concerned. I can understand how you might identify Jesus the Christ as the Father, even as Jesus has made several distinctions in the bible. In one manner of speaking, Jesus IS GOD, but God is not Jesus. God is greater then Jesus, because God is not man, nor is he the son of Man, God is greater then his creation, greater then any man, including Jesus Christ.
How could he have seen God?He saw the man Jesus Christ who is God in the flesh. Col 2:9 Any who tries to understand it can. Anyone who's prerogative is to reject it can. No he did not see the very being of God. He saw the physical image of God and right now it sounds as though doubting Thomas, as you call him, has a faith far greater.
I'm sorry, but the appellation I applied to Thomas is quite appropriate. He would not believe that Jesus arose from the grave until he actually SAW Jesus in the flesh:
"The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. " John 20:25
This is the only reason I (and others) apply this label, as far as I know. I agree he was an apostle of Jesus Christ, and I really meant no disrespect, just to state that Thomas went from doubting that he even rose from the dead (as he said he would) to (supposedly) claiming he was God.
Could it be possible that Thomas was not referring to Jesus Christ when he said "My God"? Could it be that he was saying "My Lord" (or my Master") to Jesus because he recognized him, and saying "My God" to the Father by which hand Jesus had been resurrected, perhaps even recognizing that God was with Him?
Paul write in 1John 4:12 " No man hath seen God at any time.Actually John wrote it, but that isn't important. It is true, no can see God in his very being and live. We can see God in the flesh. That isn't like seeing God though. Do you understand? If you see God in the flesh you see a man. He may also be God in his very nature but all you see is man.
Right, John wrote 1John, LOL, sometimes I guess I think Paul wrote the whole New Testement, sorry bout that.
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be obtuse, but I do not understand how the Spirit of God can possibly be bound by the flesh.I don't understand how we can not see God in his very being, and yet it would seem to me, if you say Jesus is God, then you are saying that Jesus is the very being of God, which is what i have issues with. I agree, if you see God in the flesh, you see a man. God is in me, and in you, and in all who profess that Jesus Christ is the anointed Son of God, and believe in His Word. I would say yes, I know God is in us, but I wouldn't go so far as to say we are God.
did not expect to find Jesus being God in the bible. I was raised a JW. When I was born again I read it without bias and found that Jesus is truly the Son of God, very God in the flesh. You ought to not reject it before you understand it.
I did not have such a handicap, having been raised by semi-religious baptist parents, and gone through a "normal" church upbringing, to believe that Jesus is God and that we are sinners, who will burn in hell if we do not believe in Him. I think that's pretty standard Christian teaching, and I think it's very misinformed teaching, not from the Word of God, but from the teachings of man.
I know that sounds pretty arrogant, but it's my honest opinion, based on the years of research I have done on the bible, and seeking understanding and wisdom from God. I don't think very many people really take the time to know the bible, the nuances of the Greek and Hebrew, the idioms of the respective languages, the very subtle (and sometimes often great) mistranslations , or misinterpretations of the "how many different?" copies of the texts. I don't think very many people even know the changes our "bible" has gone through, or about the councel deciding the books that were kept and the books that were tossed. How many are aware that the Bible mentions books outside of itself, even going so far as to tell the reader to refer to this book or that book, which (as far as most know) doesn't even exist.
Anyway... I'm sorry to have gone off on a tangent, but to be honest, when you said "You ought to not reject it before you understand it." pertaining to reading the bible without bias, you hit a nerve. My only real bias, when I read the bible, is the truth. My very reason for reading the bible, is that I might understand His will in or for me, to follow where he leads, and not where some man-made religion leads me. I have really studied both sides of this issue, and I have prayed on this issue very hard, I know that in one sense Jesus is God, but in that same sense so are you and I. I also know that Jesus, himself, made a distinction between God and himself, as well as made it clear that he was "one with the Father" (spiritually I believe).
The trinity, as far as I can see, is a man-made doctrine based for the most part on verses such as 1John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."Well that just isn't true. That scripture was altered to make a trinity proof text. The bible calls the Father, God; the Son, God; and the Holy Spirit, God. The apostles made it clear that Jesus was truly the Son of God, very God in the flesh. That he was not and is not an angel, that he created ALL things that were created and Jesus himself claimed to be God. There is no way around it unless you don't want Jesus to be God.
There are so many reasons that Jesus must be God I could go on and on.
I don't think it has anything to do with who or what I want Jesus to be. I want to know Him as he is, not as I want Him to be.
If the Father needs the Son for a task does that mean the Father is not God? IMO, you don't want Jesus to be God. If you did, you would understand. But you don't so you can't.
Understanding comes from God, and if you are correct about Jesus being God, I have no doubt that God will make this clear to me. At this point in time, everything I see points to ONE God. Emanuel does not mean "God is us" it means "God with us" which is who Jesus is. I don't believe we were ever meant to worship Jesus, but we are meant to believe in Yahwehs Salvation, AKA Yahshua (AKA Joshua AKA Jesus). Did God dwell in man? Yes, I believe that he did and does. Is God a man? No, I don't believe he is, or ever was a man. I believe the kingdom of God is within, as Jesus teaches. I believe that if we believe in His Word, which he has given us through Jesus Christ for our salvation, that we will know Him within us, even as we are known by Him. Would this make us God? I don't believe so, it would only make us a part of God, a part of the whole, which is greater then all of the parts.
Jesus calls himself the Good Shepherd. Then when a man calls him Good Teacher he snaps back, "Why do you call me Good? There is no one Good but one, and that one is God." How was it relevant for him to jump all over such an expression? It wasn't unless you realize he is claiming to be God.
I don't get your argument here, but I do understand the verse you post above and I know why Jesus "jumped all over" the expression. I know that Jesus calls himself the "good shepherd". I also know in this same chapter Jesus says "I and my father are one." John 10:30, for which he was nearly stoned "... because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."
The question I ask myself, is in this same context, how did Jesus answer the charges? First he pulled the scripture on them, and agreed that God had call those "whom the word came to" gods. (shades of JW?), and Jesus also says that this scripture "cannot be broken". Furthermore he says that "the father sanctified [him] and sent [him] into the world"... questioning how he could be blaspheming, if this is so, when he claims to be "the son of God". If he doesn't do the work he was sent to do (the work of the Father), he says, don't believe him. But if he does the Work of God, even if they don't believe him, believe the works... "that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him."
Nowhere do I see Jesus accepting their accusation that he is making himself out to be God. First he shows that there is a different "sense" of the word which pertains to those who "have been given the Word" (not saying he is God, but that in the scripture others were called "gods".) Then he says, he merely claims to be "the son of God", sanctified by God (not God himself, but sent by God as far as I can tell).
What do you want? For him to stand in the temple and say hey pharisees I AM THE GOD OF YOUR FOREFATHERS! He would be dead in two seconds. Every time he came close they tried to stone him.
They wanted to stone him several times, because they believed that he made himself out to be God. I believe that in a spiritual sense he was God with us, that the Word of God did dwell in the person of Yahshua, and that the same Word by which Yahshua was anointed we are anointed in Yahshua. I also believe that what he did while he was among us (men that is), we also can do. Those works and even greater works then these. Why? "Because I go unto unto my Father." (John 14:12)
I don't see the duality of God that so many seem to see, or the triality as the case may be. I see one God, who moved through Jesus Christ. I believe that the same Spirit who moved through Yahshua is Yahweh, and this same Spirit is sent in His name (Yahshua) by the Father (Yahweh) to those who believe in Him.(John 14:12-17)
Oh so when the Apostles Confess it you say, 'Well that doubting Thomas, you can't trust that guy!' Or you try to make it into a contradiction without understanding. But your position is clear. When given the option you lower Jesus. Well, what I do to Him I also do to the Father, and so do you.
I never said "you can't trust that guy!" and I did not mean to imply this either. Neither do I need to make anything into a contradiction (or make anything into anything at all). I take great offense at your implication that I would try to lower Jesus, as if I could or would ever desire to do such. Personally, I think many Christians lower Jesus every time they open their mouth and spout off nonsense without any inkling of wisdom or understanding, but I usually keep that opinion to myself. What I do to the least of Yahwehs creation I do to Him. I don't lower Yahshua (or Jesus), I just recognize (as did Yahshua) that Yahweh is greater then he is. Perhaps I could now accuse you of lowering the status of God? I'd rather not accuse you of doing anything, but hopefully seeking to know Yahweh and to serve Him as a good and faithful steward and of following the teachings of Jesus the Christ. If I were to judge you at all, this would be the way I would prefer to judge you. Not on your understanding (or lack of understanding as the case may be) but on your desire to know and serve Yahweh.
Brother, you will see Him for who and what He is if you wish to.
It is my most heartfelt desire to know Him as He is and to follow Him as well as I am able, as well as HE enables me.
God bless and keep you in Him,
John Vogel
DJ:
John,Where did you get your opinion that Jesus is not God? Where did you get your John 1:1 translation? Johannes Greber, a spirit medium is where the jw's got their "a god" translation. Also, John......Do you worship Jesus? The jw's do not. If they did......then according to their teachings they would be worshipping the created Michael the archangel. Jesus is not Michael.
No, DJ, I do not worship Jesus. Nor do I think that Jesus ever taught us to worship him. I believe that the commandment "Thou shalt have none other Gods before me" sums up how I feel about Jesus worshipping. Yahshua (or Jesus) teaches us that we should believe on His name, not that we should worship Him. He never tells us to bow down to Him or to worship him, at least not that I can recall, and I have diligently applied myself to knowing the scriptures, and understanding the Word of God. I know I am not perfect in my understanding, so if you can show me where Jesus tells us to worship him (Or implies that we should do so) then I will certainly examine the scripture for the truth :) BTW, I'm quite sure Jesus isn't Michael ;)
Zechariah 12:10. The LORD says that "they will look upon ME whom they pierced".
Actually the Hebrew word used in Zechariah 12:10 is the word ayth ('e^th) which you will find is not actually translated in English. It is generally used to point out more definitley the object of a verb or preposition, though it can be translated as "self" or "me". Other translations read "The one which they have pierced, and personally I feel this is a much smoother translation in context (eg: ayth asher). Of course, you (and KJ) might be right in your translation, in which case God is saying they shall look upon Himself whom they have pierced. This still would not neccesarily mean that Jesus is God, as "what you have done to the least, you have done to me" ;)
Zechariah 11:13 The LORD being bought for 30 pieces of silver.
This may foreshadow the Price paid to Juda for the betrayel of Jesus, but I don't believe that the LORD is being bought here, at all, and I don't believe that Yahweh is saying he will be sold or bought, or that He (as God) would be betrayed for 30 pieces of silver. AFAIK 30 pieces of silver was the standard price for a common bond-servent, and is used in other places, which have nothign whatsoever to do with the price paid to Judas.
Isaiah 44:6 "Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel, and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: I am the First and the Last; besides me there is no God."
This does not say anything about our redeemer bein Jesus Christ or Jesus being God, nor is the indefinite object pointing to the redeemer of the LORD (Yahweh). This is simply saying that God is the redeemer of Israel (Jacob), as he has identified himself (see Isa 43:1), as well he has redeemed the land of Israel he has delevered them from bondage and danger) see Exodus 6:6 and exodus 15:13. Also see Isaiah 29:22 and 44:23 and Jermiah 31:11.
John,
Matt 27:9 is very clear about the fulfilling of prophesy of the 30 pieces of silver purchasing he savior and being used to buy a potter's field.
Besides, who is going to save Jerusalem from all her enemies in the day of the LORD? Yahweh (Zech 12:9) or Jesus (Revelation 19:15)?
To say so would contradict what Jesus Christ says in John 14:28 " ...for my Father is greater than I." Notice, Jesus himself says "My Father is greater than I".
You should know that the Greek word that is used for greater refers to rank. Naturally as a man he as at the very least obligated to recognize God (his Father) in greater rank. I myself believe that even in his prehuman existence was in submission, therefore lower in rank. However you deny that he is the Son of God if you make him inferior. Do you understand that? A son is naturally lower in rank than his Father yet still equal. You don't seem to understand that.
I can tell you this much, this is no contradiction or bad translation
No, it is not a contradiction for the Father to be greater in rank while at the same time the Son to be his equal.
It isn't I that deny the identity of Yahshua (or Jesus), it is the religion of "Christianity", the various denominations which cannot seem to even agree on the basics, that deny YahshuaYou are wrong. You are denying that he is truly the Son of God. 'Christianity', confessing that Jesus is the Son of God cannot reduce him to a mere finite nature lest they reduce the Father to that as well. You reduce the Son to merely a finite nature and deny that he is truly the Son of God.
I can understand how you might identify Jesus the Christ as the Father,
Like the JWs, apparently you will just never express our position correctly for some reason no matter how many time we tell you THE FATHER IS A DIFFERENT PERSON THAN THE SON.
In one manner of speaking, Jesus IS GOD, but God is not Jesus.
Incredible. You have finally understood the nature of Jesus, or at least confessed it.
God is greater then Jesus, because God is not man, nor is he the son of Man
Wow, you are on a role in understanding the trinity. You ought to try out for trinitarian of the month. I will nominate you.
God is greater then his creation, greater then any man, including Jesus Christ.
Now you have some misunderstanding. God (the Father) is greater than Jesus because he is his father. Jesus was never created and the bible never says he was and actually makes that impossible. Jesus has taken on the form of man and exists in dual status, one as the uncreated Son of God and the other in the form of created man.
I'm sorry, but the appellation I applied to Thomas is quite appropriate. He would not believe that Jesus arose from the grave until he actually SAW Jesus in the flesh:
Why stop there then? Why not just call Peter Satan or Anti-Christ anytime you want to downplay something he said. Jesus called Peter Satan. Peter denied ever knowing Jesus three times! How about just call Paul a Christ killer when it suits you. Jesus said to him that he was persecuting him. Paul had Christians killed. How about call John the braggart. Shall we go on?
I really meant no disrespect, just to state that Thomas went from doubting that he even rose from the dead (as he said he would) to (supposedly) claiming he was God.
No you had a specific reason for using the title doubting Thomas. Its okay, I accept your apology I'm sure he does also.
Could it be possible that Thomas was not referring to Jesus Christ when he said "My God"?
at john 20:28 it says: In answer to HIM not them. The body of scripture supports such a confession and there is no basis in the passage to say that Thomas was not speaking to him, it directly says he was speaking to HIM.
I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be obtuse, but I do not understand how the Spirit of God can possibly be bound by the flesh
I don't either. No one has said the spirit of God was bound by the flesh. It was the person of the Son that was.
I don't understand how we can not see God in his very being, and yet it would seem to me, if you say Jesus is God, then you are saying that Jesus is the very being of God
No one has said (the person of the Son)Jesus IS the very being of God. He exists out of the very being of God and now also out of the very being of man. Both Son of God and Son of Man. The very being of God is different than the Person of the Son. The very being of God is how the Son exists, not the Son himself. Your intangible perosn, John, is different than the very being of John, which is just like any flesh and blood man.
I know God is in us, but I wouldn't go so far as to say we are God.
Of course we are not God. At the same time the bible doesn't say the Father is in us. So either you confess Jesus is God, the Holy Spirit is God or you deny God is in us.
believe that Jesus is God and that we are sinners, who will burn in hell if we do not believe in Him. I think that's pretty standard Christian teaching, and I think it's very misinformed teaching, not from the Word of God, but from the teachings of man.
It is from the word of God. It's not a misinformed teaching. The only part that can be said another way is the burining in hell would not be literal because it is described in other ways. To say it is misinformed is inaccurate.
I know that sounds pretty arrogant, but it's my honest opinion,
It is not as arrogant as it is ignorant but that is okay, like you said, it's your honest opinion.
I don't think very many people really take the time to know the bible, the nuances of the Greek and Hebrew, the idioms of the respective languages,
You seem to have missed a few yourself.
"You ought to not reject it before you understand it." pertaining to reading the bible without bias, you hit a nerve.
Well I can appreciate the fact that I hit a nerve but you do not understand it. You see contradictions that don't exist and then lower Jesus to prevent contradiction which does not exist. You don't understand how Jesus can be God in the flesh. You say Thomas was talking to two people at john 20:28 when it says he spoke to one, all because you don't understand.
My only real bias, when I read the bible, is the truth.
That is the truth from your point of view. I'm not accusing you of being dishonest, and if I accused you of being biased then I was wrong. You still are not accepting that Jesus is truly the Son of God though because you making a TRUE father/son situation that has never existed in the history of the universe.
My very reason for reading the bible, is that I might understand His will in or for me, to follow where he leads, and not where some man-made religion leads me.
I can certainly appreciate that.
I have really studied both sides of this issue,
there are more than two. I assure you. Unfortunately you don't understand the right one. It is not your fault. You just have't had certain things explained to you so that you would not discount scriptures that support the right side.
and I have prayed on this issue very hard,
I'm sure we all have.
I know that in one sense Jesus is God,
very good. Now you just have to understand how that is the case.
but in that same sense so are you and I.
Wow, now you have totally reduced Jesus to being no more the Son of God than you are.
I also know that Jesus, himself, made a distinction between God and himself, as well as made it clear that he was "one with the Father" (spiritually I believe).
Yes, there is distinction between Jesus and God, particularly between Jesus and the Father. Now you just have to understand how that is true.
I don't think it has anything to do with who or what I want Jesus to be. I want to know Him as he is, not as I want Him to be.
I think you think you are being honest. IMO you are afraid to let him be all that he truly is. You are being honest in your endeavor. That is okay, I was afraid to let him be all that he was at one time. I was afraid that I would offend the Father to let his Son be equal to him. I was afraid that to believe Jesus is God and not the Father was polytheism. You may still deal with these fears if you aren't already. There is nothing wrong with that.
Understanding comes from God, and if you are correct about Jesus being God, I have no doubt that God will make this clear to me.
Me neither. You seem to have done a massive amount of studying. You have been very candid so far. You have confessed you believe Jesus is God. You just don't yet understand it.
At this point in time, everything I see points to ONE God.
I don't see any more than one myself either. And there in lies the problem for those that deny Jesus is God, not those that confess it. If Jesus is not God then you have either a second true God or Jesus is not the True Son of God.
I don't believe we were ever meant to worship Jesus,
now I know you have seen this Heb. 1:6. There are plenty of others as Im sure you are aware. The Father is not jealous of his Son.
Would this make us God? I don't believe so, it would only make us a part of God, a part of the whole, which is greater then all of the parts.
We are not part of God.
I don't get your argument here
ok... Jesus claims to be the "Good Shepherd." Later a man calls him "Good Teacher." Then Jesus says why do you call me Good? No one is Good but God. If Jesus is saying that this man calling him Good Teacher is calling him Good then Jesus calling himself Good Shepherd is calling himself God.
Nowhere do I see Jesus accepting their accusation that he is making himself out to be God.
Nowhere is he denying that he is God. He can't say, "yes I am God." They would kill him. Because he is God and he isn't going to let them kill him all he can do is throw it back in their faces and that is what he did. You don't even consider what he would do if he was God. If he was God he would do exactly what he did. It tells me you don't even consider that he could be God.
(not saying he is God, but that in the scripture others were called "gods".)
Well duh, he isn't going to come right out and say he is god. I mean no disrespect but come on man. He is throwing it in their faces. I'm not saying he is claiming to be God with all of these statements (although in my opninon this one is borderline here that you have mentioned) but he doesn't deny it.
Then he says, he merely claims to be "the son of God"
That was the foundation of their accusation! MERELY the son of God? Then his Father was a mere Father. Fathers do not have mere sons. They have sons. Mere fathers have mere sons.
They wanted to stone him several times, because they believed that he made himself out to be God.
and he wouldn't deny it but throw it in their faces
I believe that in a spiritual sense he was God with us,
no, he simply was God with us.
that the Word of God did dwell in the person of Yahshua,
The person of Yshua is the Word of God. All the fullness of the Godship did not dwell within him but dwells in bodily form. col 2:9
I take great offense at your implication that I would try to lower Jesus, as if I could or would ever desire to do such.
Pardon me but if Thomas answered to Him (as it says he did, to Him) "my Lord and My God." and was calling Jesus His God and you say he was not, You are in fact lowering him if you deny his deity.
Personally, I think many Christians lower Jesus every time they open their mouth and spout off nonsense without any inkling of wisdom or understanding,
if you can't "lower Jesus, as if I could" how can they. Your words are true though. People do lower Jesus when they deny he is truly the Son of God.
I just recognize (as did Yahshua) that Yahweh is greater then he is.
That isn't what he said. He said the Father (not YHVH) was greater than he is. You make him inferior to the Father, whereas Jesus made himself subordinate -- big difference.
Perhaps I could now accuse you of lowering the status of God?
You lower the status of God or you deny Jesus is the True Son of God. I do neither. I confess Jesus is subordinate to the Father as Jesus claimed his Father had greater rank. You invent this notion of his inferiority which makes him either not the true Son of God or makes the Father a creature as well. You can't accuse me of lowering the status of God because I haven't. I have only given Jesus his full status as the True Son of God. If that lowers the Father you don't know the similarity between a Father and Son.
God bless and keep you in Him,
God bless by the righteousness of our God and Savior, Jesus Christ.
