Is JW just another denomination?

by John Vogel 50 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

John Vogel

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.

No, I don't understand at all. A son is lower in rank than his father, yet still equal? How can someone be lower or less then and still equal to someone? Either they are equal (eq. not greater then or less then) or they are not equal.
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.
If we took a cup of water from the ocean. Would this cup of water be the ocean? No, it would not. It would be ridiculous to show someone a cup of water and say this is the ocean. We can say, this is ocean water, but it is certainly not equal to the ocean.
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
You 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.
When have I denied that jesus is the Son of God? I have done no such thing. What I do is deny that Jesus is God (or that Yahshua is Yahweh).
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.
Pardon me, but if there is ONE GOD, and you claim that both JESUS IS GOD and the FATHER IS GOD, then you are saying that Jesus the Christ is the same as the Father. What part of this do I not understand? Can you say that this person is God and that that person is God and that both of these are God and one person, but then say that they are not the same person? He is either the same person, or he is not the same person. Explain to me, so that I might be able to express your position correctly.
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.
So who is the Father then? You say God (the Father) is greater than Jesus because he is His father. Then how can you turn around and say that Jesus is equal to God (who is also the Father, mind you) and further say that Jesus is NOT the same person as the Father? This is where confusion comes in. Jesus is God and the Father is God. The father is greater (in rank) then the Son who is also God. But, there is only one God. Why, if Jesus is God, does Jesus not know the same things that God knows? Why, if Jesus is God does he say (repeatedly) "These words are not my own, but the one who sent me" or "I do not seek my own will, but the will of father", if he is God, again, why not just say so? Why go to such lengths to say that he seeks Gods will, if he is (afterall) God? It just doesn't make sense to me.
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.
But where in scripture does Jesus say that you must confess that he is God? If you can find me the scripture, I will be more then happy to enterain this theological line of reasoning with you. You can't just tell someone if they don't confess that Jesus is God they are denying God in us, without showing any scriptural basis for this. Well, I guess you CAN tell someone this, but I don't think it is a very sound thing to say.
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.
When you say "Jesus is God" you are saying (at least as far as I can tell) that the being of God is Jesus Christ. Now you are telling me that the person of the son is NOT EQUAL to the very being of God. You are saying that the person of the son is LESS THEN the being of God? Then this would tell me that no... Jesus is not God.
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.
This, I do agree with. the very being of God is how the Son exists and not the Son himself.
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
Except that Jesus isn't God, and we do not "burn in hell" when we die if we do not believe this, other then that...
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.
I'm sure I have. I've got a long way to go before I completely (if ever) understand all of nuances and idioms of ancient Hebrew and Greek. However, the point is very few people even take the time to know that these exist... seems to me a lot of Christians believe the english Bible was handed down to man just as it is... now THIS is ignorant.
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.
I don't see any contradictions and I don't need to lower Jesus (or raise God, for that matter) to prevent anything. For Christ's sake, look at what HE said about himself in relation to the father! He says His will is not his own, his words are not his own... he says there are some things that he does not know that the Father does know and that there are some things he cannot do, which the father can do. How can you then turn around and say he's God? I do understand how the Spirit of God can exist "in the flesh". And I understand that the Father is IN the Son and the Son is in the Father, that they are one IN SPIRIT, but that jesus is NOT GOD himself. He may be the light of God, but he is not the being of God.
I have really studied both sides of this issue, and I have prayed hard on this...
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.
What about the scriptures that supports the "other" side? let's assume Jesus is God. God sent Jesus, correct? Then did he send himself? No, he says in John 8:42 "I proceeded forth and came from God, neither came I of myself but He sent me."... this right here tells me that Jesus DID make a distinction between God and himself.
The Bible teaches that Jesus is not God, but a Servant of God (e.g. Matthew 12:18). In John 9:35, Jesus declares that he is the Son of Man. And anyone who knows the Bible as the will know that a son of man cannot be God. The Bible declares that God is neither a man nor a son of man (Numbers 23:19):
"How can he be called clean that is born of a woman? Behold even the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight. How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?" (Job 25:4-6)
Well, I will write more later... i want to say that I really believe you are wrong in your theology... either that or I am mistaken in what I think you believe, but there remains the fact that it could be me that is wrong, and I am more then interested in continuing this discussion as long as it takes to find out just who is wrong and who is going by the scriptures... I think if you can show me where I err, this would be an awesome thing, and I would appreciate your doing so... however, so far what you say still sounds contradictory and muddled.
To close I wanted to quote something from Theophilus Lindsey's (1723-1808) A List of False Reading of the Scripture. Lindsey asked those who worshipped Jesus what their reaction would be if Jesus appeared to them and asked the following questions:
Why did you address your devotions to me? Did I ever direct you to do it, or propose myself as an object of religious worship?
Did I not uniformly and to the last set you an example myself of praying to the Father, to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God? (John 20:17)
When my disciples requested me to teach them to pray (Luke 11:1-2) , did I teach them to pray to myself or to any other person but the Father?
Did I ever call myself God, or tell you that I was the maker of the world and to be worshipped?
Lindsey's belief in the Divine Unity is evident from these words of his:
The Infinite Creator should be worshipped in all places for He is everywhere....no place is more sacred than another, but every place sacred for the prayer. Whenever there is a devout humble mind that looks to God, God is there. A mind free from sin is the true temple of God.
DJ

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/48178/680518/post.ashx#680518 John, do yourself a favor and read this and take the time to look themALL up and pray for the holyspirit to guide you in your understanding of the scriptures. There are many more than these and bear in mind that by the word, the heavens and earth were made. Christian love, dj
John Vogel

Greetings DJ,
I took a look at the post. Believe it or not, I am very familiar with these verses, and others like them, which is not to say I do not appreciate your pointing these out to me and your wise advice to read these with the guidance of His Holy Spirit. The problem is that none of these say "Jesus is God", which seems to me an odd thing, if the argument is that Jesus is God, don't you think? There are many inherent problems with equating Jesus with God. For instance, God was tempted of Satan? How is this possible? God asked that the cup be removed from Him? How so? God asked God why he had forsaken himself? Why? The list could go on and on, and I could quote scripture after scripture showing problems inherent with the supposition that Jesus is God, as well as providing scripture in which Jesus makes a distinction between God and himself...
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. Seems this verse pretty much say's the Word is God, no doubt about it. I love the first chapter of John, and it does quite adequetly express the divine logic (which is the logos/Word of theos/God), by which all things were made, indwelling Jesus Christ. John 1:14 says "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth."(KJV)
Naturally, our inclination would be to say If in the beginning the Word was God, and the Word became flesh, then Jesus (the Word made flesh) is God. The Word of God brought us into existence (as we can read in Genesis Chapter one as well as John chapter one), and this Word was made ("ginomai": prlonged and middle form of the primary verb "cause to be" ) flesh.
The Word of God beget Jesus Christ. Contrary to some opinions, Jesus WAS created (or was caused) according to the word ginomai. The Word did not transform into Jesus, but actually caused Jesus to be. The Spirit was sent of the Father, that through Him the world might be saved. The Word of God is not the scripture or the bible, though the words of God are recorded therein. The Word of God has existed eternally, and this Word is revealed in Jesus Christ. That whosoever believeth in Him shall be saved.
The Word of God dwelt among us (took tabernacle in) in Jesus Christ. This is not to say God was Jesus Christ or Jesus is God. It is to say that the temple of God became the flesh of man, that God did dwell in the flesh, and that he does dwell in all those who believe on His Word, the Word of Jesus Christ. We do not worship the man, this is wrong to worship man or to deitify Jesus, IMHO. There is one God, by whom the World was Created, and one God by which we are saved, not the man of Jesus Christ, but by the sacrifice and by His resurrection and ascension we are not only saved, but we share with Him (Jesus) a place in OUR Fathers "house", eternally! I get excited just thinking about it, eternity with the one who created me, sounds pretty peachy :-D We are saved because we have believe in the name of Yahshua HaMashiach, Jesus the Messiah, the anointed one whom all the prophets and all the sages looked for and went to their graves (hell, that is) with the hope (faith) of resurrection, the faith of God's Salvation, YahShua!
Anyway, thank you for the post, sorry about the verbosity and God bless,
John Vogel
DJ

John,
Ok. I give......just do yourself a favor then and find out everything that you can about the jw's....that is if you are still interested in them (sorry, I didn't read all of the posts...lol.) They are a destructive manipulative cult. I was raised in it since I was a young kid of 11 and I left in my late thirties. I do know what I am speaking about!!! THey are deceptive and you will never know it until it's too late.
As far as the trinity goes.......I'm basicaly new at this but I do see it being taught thru-out the bible just not in so many words that some would like there to be.. Trinity or no trinity....the jw's are liars.
I cannot see your reasoning and you cannot see mine obviously. So we can agree to disagree for now. Maybe someday our paths will cross again, who knows. Take care Love in Christ Jesus, dj
DJ

Hey John,
What bible do you use anyway? love, dj
starScream

No, I don't understand at all. A son is lower in rank than his father, yet still equal? How can someone be lower or less then and still equal to someone?

A man is equal to a man regardless of whether or not the other man is his father or even his son. G.W. Bush is greater than his Father while at the same time they are both equal (being men), and his father is greater than he is because he is his Father. Different aspects are being measured with these three calculations of greatness. You, for some reason, take one measurement and then apply it to every aspect. Because the Father has greater rank you remove the sonship of the Son and compare him to his father as a cup of seawater compares to the ocean. You deny that Jesus is the Son of God if you make that analogy.
A Judge, under the law is both greater than his bailiff and at the same time equal. The Judge could be the son of the bailiff. So who is greater? It would depend upon what aspect you are measuring. If you are measuring in terms of humanity they have equality. If you measure in terms of office the son is greater. If you measure in terms of relationship the father is greater.
The Son of God has equal deity with God. Just as the Son of Man has equal humanity with Man. Deny his humanity while you are denying his deity, it would be using the same logic.
When have I denied that jesus is the Son of God? I have done no such thing
"If we took a cup of water from the ocean. Would this cup of water be the ocean?" You deny the deity of the Son of God with this false analogy. If the son does not have deity how is he the Son? You act as though 'son' is only a title not an intrinsic fact. That is how you deny he is the true Son of God.
I have done no such thing. What I do is deny that Jesus is God
Then for the very same reason you must deny Jesus is Man because he is only the Son of Man. If you apply your reasoning, Jesus is removed from actual existence altogether.
Pardon me, but if there is ONE GOD, and you claim that both JESUS IS GOD and the FATHER IS GOD, then you are saying that Jesus the Christ is the same as the Father.
Jesus exists in the same form as the Father, but he is not the Father. He is like the Father. He is ONE with the Father. That does not mean he is the Father. Your assertion here is unclear. I think that in your mind you keep going beyond what I say because you can't rest on one piece at a time.
Can you say that this person is God and that that person is God and that both of these are God and one person
We are not saying that the Father and the Son are one person. The Father is a different person. The Father AND (AND!!!!!!!) the Son are One. To answer that question (above) : I suppose so, but that is no part of what I am saying. I am not saying what you have just asked.
He is either the same person, or he is not the same person.
The Father is not the same person as the Son and I have not made that claim.
Why, if Jesus is God, does Jesus not know the same things that God knows?
Jesus completely submitted to the form of man, Phil 2:8. He had no power as God after his incarnation and before his death. Jesus grew in knowledge and wisdom throughout his life. He is now no longer bound to the human limits.
Why, if Jesus is God does he say (repeatedly) "These words are not my own, but the one who sent me" or "I do not seek my own will, but the will of father
He is not the Father. I don't know why you keep thinking we are saying he is the Father. How many times do I have to say he is not the Father before you figure it out. Can you give me a clue? 5? 10? 950? am i getting close?
if he is God, again, why not just say so?
At Rev 1:8 he claims to be God. Many things are revealed in the bible that God doesn't say directly. His apostles testify to him creating ALL things. If he did it, why didn't he say it? If he is not God, then why not just deny it by saying I am not God. He doesn't. When his opposers accuse (of blasphemy) him of claiming to be God he doesn't deny it he throws it in their faces. Why doesn't he say "I am God" to them? You know why. They tried to kill him for that without even saying those words.You don't even consider what he would say IF he is God. He would say exactly what he did.
But where in scripture does Jesus say that you must confess that he is God?
Correct me if I am wrong. Right now we are discussing whether or not he is God. You are saying he is God, want to end this discussion, and start discussing whether or not we must confess he is God?
You can't just tell someone if they don't confess that Jesus is God they are denying God in us,
The bible says Jesus is in us. The bible says the Holy Spirit is in us. The bible doesn't say the Father is in us.
When you say "Jesus is God" you are saying (at least as far as I can tell) that the being of God is Jesus Christ.
No. The very being of Jesus Christ is God. In his essential existence he exists in the form of God. It is easier to understand if you recognize he is the true Son of God. The problem is you are not understanding the Sonship so how can you possibly understand the Godship? What is a more complicated concept, Sonship or Godship? You don't even understand the simpler one.
Now you are telling me that the person of the son is NOT EQUAL to the very being of God
These are two entirely different concepts. Compare the person of the Son to the person of the Father. In that sense there is disparity in rank (but not in quality and certainly not in existence.) Then compare the existence of the Son to that of the Father. In that sense their is TOTAL equality or you deny he is the True Son of God. You are conceptualizing God's existence into the form of a physical creature, which is why you are not understanding. Stop putting limits on God's existence as if he could fit into a box of any measure.
You are saying that the person of the son is LESS THEN the being of God?
The person of the Son and the being of God are two different concepts. How could I have said that? I know the difference between the two concepts. When I say the being of God I'm talking about the tangible makeup of the Son in his spirit existence. When I am talking about the person of the Son I am talking about the intangible identity.
Except that Jesus isn't God, and we do not "burn in hell" when we die if we do not believe this, other then that...
I (using the word we is an odd way of putting it, if you don't mind me saying) certainly am not going to any such place, although the place of "burning" was prepared for the devil and his angels (according to Jesus) which is also the inheritance of sinners. Matt 25:41
seems to me a lot of Christians believe the english Bible was handed down to man just as it is... now THIS is ignorant.
That is an ignorant statement. Talk about blowing something out of proportion. but that is a whole other subject.
he says there are some things that he does not know that the Father does know
He said that while he was living as a man, and willingly subjected himself to that role completely. Phil 2:8
and that there are some things he cannot do,
So then you are saying the Father is not God because the Father could not perform the greatest act of the love among other things. John 15:13. Phil 2:8 still applies.
which the father can do.
which the son can do.
How can you then turn around and say he's God?
He created all things that were created, for one. He claimed to be God, Rev 1:8. So I try to understand what you say is a contradiction before lowering Jesus to a place below the True Son of God and denying his own words. I am not turning around and saying he is God. It is established that he is God. You are turning from that and saying he is not God. Why don't you see the confirmation of it before you try to deny it. You are "reading the book backwards." If it was proven to you in the bible that Jesus was God what would you do? Say he is not because xyz? But would you first believe it? You are debating, not trying to learn. I'm not trying to attack your motive. You are denying confirmation though. I'm sorry but you are trying to prove a negative when the bible already proves the positive. Maybe you should approach the side of confirmation first.
An atheist will look right into the face of evidence for God and say we can't know for sure it is evidence. I don't mean to compare your motives to that of an atheist but your tactics and resistence are similar for whatever reason.
I do understand how the Spirit of God can exist "in the flesh".
It didn't say Spirit of God. It said all the fullness of the Godship. And it didn't say "in the flesh." It said in bodily form. col 2:9
And I understand that the Father is IN the Son and the Son is in the Father, that they are one IN SPIRIT,
God is spirit, which you don't seem to understand or are taking for granted without applying.
but that jesus is NOT GOD himself.
Jesus is not the Father. The only form Jesus had before the incarnation was that of the Father. He is a different identity and tangibly, entrirely one with that identity of the Father. That doesn't mean he is the Father but that he shared the form of his Father and in his very existence is God. You just aren't accepting the entire reality. You are limiting it because you, in your mind, are unintentionally "putting God in a box."
The words you use describe that reality but you don't understand the reality you describe.
he is not the being of God.
Correct, the person of the Son is not the very being of God nor is the Father the very being of God. The Son exists out (like "made" (made implies creation so I use the word out) out of) of the very being of God. Just as the Father's existence is out of the very being of God. You still don't realize the difference between substance and identity. The Father and Son are One. Their substance is spirit. They are one in spirit you say. Yes, they are entirely one spirit, not one person.
let's assume Jesus is God. God sent Jesus, correct?
The Father, who is God, sent Jesus. Correct.
Then did he send himself?
The Father sent the Son. The Father is not the one that came so why would I say the Father sent himself?
this right here tells me that Jesus DID make a distinction between God and himself.
Jesus is more than God. He is also man. That alone means there is distinction. Yes their is disctinction between Jesus and God just as there is disctinction between Jesus and Man. You are still seeking to deny Jesus' deity instead of understanding it. You will never understand it yourself until you understand what I am saying (for our conversation that is, Im not saying you need me of course) and you can't understand what I am saying if you don't want to (just so you know).
let's assume Jesus is God
you are going to have to do that for more than 1.3 seconds if you are going to understand it. If you would simply rely on the scriptures that confirm it for the time being you could understand how it is true in the face of what you THINK denies it.
The Bible teaches that Jesus is not God, but a Servant of God
The bible does not teach that Jesus is not God. Jesus also serves man. So you are saying he is not man? I already told you Jesus is subordinate to the Father. Jesus is not the Father. You keep bringing up scriptures to deny Jesus' deity when they don't deny his deity, they deny him being the Father. You ignore the scriptures that make his deity undeniable.
And anyone who knows the Bible as the will know that a son of man cannot be God. The Bible declares that God is neither a man nor a son of man (Numbers 23:19):
First of all the declaration was made in the present tense over 1000 years before the incarnation. So in the context you use it does not deny Jesus is God. Second of all, it was saying is that "he is not a man that he should lie." Jesus himself could say that at any time past or future. It says "he is not a son of man that he should change his mind....(meaning) 'break a promise."
You just remove the context of what is being said to deny Jesus is God. With the very same scripture in the context you use, you can call Jesus a liar or a promise breaker.
The context you use is clearly invalid and completely arbitrary on your part. I said I was wrong if I called you biased. You are being biased if you choose to continue in your usage of this scripture with the context you apply. Neither way, in or out of context, does it deny the deity of Christ.
"How can he be called clean that is born of a woman? Behold even the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight. How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?" (Job 25:4-6)
Wow, you have used the words of Job's accuser against Jesus (so it seems) too. Amazing. This man, Bildad, saying this, was accusing Job. His words are not binding as canon any more than Korah's are.
You choose to say that Jesus is a maggot (my bible has both) and a worm when the bible does not call him a maggot or a worm (but the Lamb of God, the Lion of Judah) then when he claims to be God you tell him, "No you cannot be God because you are a maggot and a worm. Bildad, the accuser of the righteous Job said so!"
It is truly amazing. When the Jews who said he was calling himself God you say they were wrong and instead seek the words of a Job's accuser for support.
Job 24:1 "Why does the Almighty not set times for Judgement?" is what Job said. So does this mean God does not set times for Judgement?
It is certainly a more valid question because it was posed by Job than it is what was posed by Bildad, Job's accuser. To make such a claim still removes the context even when it comes from job.
I am starting to wonder if you are not just grabbing "proof-texts" without even knowing the circumstances. There is no way you would have posed that text as evidence had you done the simplest of research.
Well, I will write more later... i want to say that I really believe you are wrong in your theology...
Well, I really know you are wrong in your theology and that last scripture you posted tells me you are barely researching some of your proofs.
but there remains the fact that it could be me that is wrong, and I am more then interested in continuing this discussion
Im not interested in being right or wrong just so that you know. I welcome the discussion. I'm sure you know things that I don't know and can teach me as well. Some of what you claim is not true though.
I think if you can show me where I err, this would be an awesome thing,
You need to understand a few things that you are taking for granted before you should bother to go on. One is the Son of God. There are many so-called or adopted sons of God. Jesus however is truly the Son of God. He compares to his Father in a way similar to a man comparing to his father, or a dog comparing to his father....
however, so far what you say still sounds contradictory and muddled.
That is because you have not understood the simpler concepts first. You have taken them for granted. That is not your fault most people do and they are easy to overlook.
Did I ever call myself God, or tell you that I was the maker of the world and to be worshipped?
Jesus claimed to be God. The Apostles say he was the maker of the World. God said that All his angels would worship him and even called him God. The Apostles worshipped him.
Did I not uniformly and to the last set you an example myself of praying to the Father, to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God? (John 20:17)
When my disciples requested me to teach them to pray (Luke 11:1-2) , did I teach them to pray to myself or to any other person but the Father?
Jesus did not pose these questions and he wouldn't pose them either. His Apostles did pray to him. Was this Lindsey fellow an Apostle of Christ? If not why do you pose his philosophy which supersedes the actions and teachings of the Apostles? Lindsey's game was just silly and extrememly ignorant.
A mind free from sin is the true temple of God.
The Apostles said the Body was the temple of God.
John Vogel

John,
Ok. I give......just do yourself a favor then and find out everything that you can about the jw's....that is if you are still interested in them (sorry, I didn't read all of the posts...lol.) They are a destructive manipulative cult. I was raised in it since I was a young kid of 11 and I left in my late thirties. I do know what I am speaking about!!! THey are deceptive and you will never know it until it's too late.

I'm not really that interested in the JW's. I think the posts in this thread were informative enough to show me that JW and the Holy Spirit are incompatible, ergo wouldn't follow them if they paid me ;) Any organization which seeks to control and manipulate does not originate from God.... of that i am quite certain. Jesus Christ is not about manipulation or control, nor is the gospel. "the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance..." Galations 5:22-23
As far as the trinity goes.......I'm basicaly new at this but I do see it being taught thru-out the bible just not in so many words that some would like there to be.. Trinity or no trinity....the jw's are liars.
I just think it's a very important thing to know. I mean, if Jesus is God, then I am totally missing something. If he isn't God, then maybe you are totally missing something? Or maybe God is leading us toward our own understanding, in His own way. Perhaps we are both missing something... Surely men of low degree are vanity, and men of high degree are a lie: to be laid in the balance, they are altogether lighter than vanity.(Psalms 62:9)... we cannot really hope to understand (in our carnal minds) the depth or height of God, but we can know Him (His Spirit in us) through Jesus Christ. That's the good news, the kingdom of God has come to man! WooooHooo! :-D
I cannot see your reasoning and you cannot see mine obviously. So we can agree to disagree for now. Maybe someday our paths will cross again, who knows. Take care Love in Christ Jesus, dj
Actually, I can see your reasoning, as I've used that reasoning myself. I was raised to believe in Jesus as God and the Bible as the Word of God. I can definitly see the reasoning you have used, that the Word of God is Jesus Christ, and that the Word is God. That Jesus called himself "I AM", that Jesus said "I and my father are one", all of these can lead credence to the idea of Jesus being God. Earlier I said that in a sense, Jesus is God. In a spiritual sense. Physically, however, and carnally, Jesus is man, in the flesh. I'd rather not agree to disagree over such an important issue, but I will agree to agree that Jesus Christ is God's salvation... let's agree to that, then shall we, and we will leave the other issue open, until you have the time or the desire to take up the issue again.
I'm sure our paths will cross again, after all we are following the same path, if we are following the Good Shepherd.
God bless and keep you in Him,
John
John Vogel

DJ wrote:

Hey John,
What bible do you use anyway? love, dj
It depends on what I am using it for. For studying, I use several differen translations, as well as cross referencing with Strongs Concordance and Vines Expository dicitionary. For reading, for enlightenment and enjoyment, I enjoy the KJV, because this is the one I grew up reading.
John Vogel

starScream,
You have quite a few good points, and I can't believe that I used the words of Job's accusers to make my point. I am very relieved, however, to see that you are checking the scriptures behind me and keeping me straight, and I sure wasn't straight that last post. I was in a hurry, and didn't think through what i was saying, I just posted without really proofing, even and the quote by Lindsey just happened to be something I received via email, and thought a good point, I still do.
I don't really have the time to post right now, and I won't do like I did earlier and post in haste (regret in leisure). I want to clarify a couple issues you have brought up, and i want to try and clarify my own position, in regards to God, but I need to take the time so that I don't end up becoming even more muddled then I allready am ;)
I want to thank you again, for taking the time to clarify your own understanding of the trinity, and helping me to see what you are saying when you say Jesus is God, and the Father is God, and they are the same but different. I think I am starting to get a gist of what you believe, though I must say I actually did believe that Jesus was God for over 20 years, and only after having had an "experience' and really digging into the scriptures, did I change my own mind about who jesus is (and even who God is). Anyway, will write more when I have time... thank you for caring enough to share.
May God bless and keep you in Him,
John
starScream

I can't believe that I used the words of Job's accusers to make my point.

Ultimately, I figured you didn't realize who the speaker was.
I am very relieved, however, to see that you are checking the scriptures behind me and keeping me straight,
Oh, you can rest assured that I'm going to do that, heh
and I sure wasn't straight that last post. I was in a hurry, and didn't think through what i was saying, I just posted without really proofing
I thought it was pretty good post overall. Ive been in hurry also in some posts so I know what you mean. I could tell towards the end you were rushing, as you admitted in the post.
even and the quote by Lindsey just happened to be something I received via email, and thought a good point,
pretty much what I guessed.
I still do.
Well, we can discuss it.
I want to clarify a couple issues you have brought up, and i want to try and clarify my own position, in regards to God, but I need to take the time so that I don't end up becoming even more muddled then I allready am ;)
I have understood your position and arguments very well for the most part, IMO. You have been very articulate and clear in what you are saying. But feel free to say things from different angels if you think I haven't understood you.
I want to thank you again, for taking the time to clarify your own understanding of the trinity
If I (or whoever) ever convince(s) you, I am sure you are going to be great at explaining it to others.
and helping me to see what you are saying when you say Jesus is God, and the Father is God, and they are the same but different.
Naturally it can be confusing. You will run into similar confusion over the simple concept of "the Son of God" with Muslims. They reject it as impossible altogether so maybe it isn't confusion with them. You never know what a particular group of people are going to find confusing or downright impossible.
I think I am starting to get a gist of what you believe, though I must say I actually did believe that Jesus was God for over 20 years
I thought (and believed) Jesus was the "Son of God" for over 10 years before I learned that it was actually true.
thank you for caring enough to share.
I care but that isn't why I share.
Peace out

Is JW just another denomination?

Share this