John 1:1 and God being "with" God.

by hooberus 37 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  herk

  hooberus,
  

  Strong's says that theos means "a deity," not simply "deity." There is a difference. You want us to believe that theos can mean "God by nature," and it does not. Either a Person is the Almighty God, or he is not. Romans 15:5, 6 clearly shows that the God of Jesus Christ is his Father, and therefore Jesus is not on an equal plane with the Father, as you are so eager to insist. It would be pointless for you to argue, as trinitarians sometimes do, that the Father is the God of Jesus' human nature since the text specifically identifies the resurrected Jesus as the "Lord Jesus Christ."

  Angels, Moses, the judges and kings of Israel, as well as Jesus, are all called "God" due to being the agents of the Almighty. However, none of them is equal to the God they represent. Even the devil is called ho theos at 2 Corinthians 4:4, but he is Almighty God only in the minds of those who worship him.

  Thomas called Jesus ho theos. But a comparison of Hebrews 1:8, 9, with Psalm 45:6 will show that the kings of Israel were also addressed in that way. In Psalm 45, a king is called Elohim, and this is translated as God with a capital "G" in many Bibles. Hebrews 1 translates Elohim as ho theos. Now note this footnote on Psalm 45:6 in the NIV Study Bible:

  O God. Possibly the king's throne is called God's throne because he is God's appointed regent. But it is also possible that the king himself is addressed as "god." The Davidic king (the "LORD's anointed," 2 Sa 19:21), because of his special relationship with God, was called at his enthronement the "son of God (see 2:7; 2 Sa 7:14; 1 Ch 28:6; cf. 89:27). In this psalm, which praises the king and especially extols his "splendor and majesty" (v. 3), it is not unthinkable that he was called "god" as a title of honor (cf. Isa 9:6). Such a description of the Davidic king attains its fullest meaning when applied to Christ, as the author of Hebrews does (Heb 1:8-9).

  The NIV Study Bible uses "God" in the main text but uses "god" in its footnote. Nonetheless, the Hebrew word is translated as ho theos in the New Testament, the same expression that Thomas fittingly applied to Jesus, the ultimate king to sit upon the Davidic throne.

  Your use of "human" as a comparison is meaningful. Each fully developed human is an individual being separate and distinct from all other humans. Within "human" nature there is more than one human. Using your comparison, there would have to be more than one God within the "God" or "Deity" nature. It is astounding to me that you seem unable to discern that from every angle you are unwittingly pointing to the existence of three unique Gods within your Trinity.

  herk
• 

  donkey

  Who said Enron's accounting techniques weren't scriptural?

  1+1+1=what do you want it to be?
• 

  Farkel

  Regarding John 1:1 (and I've said this before):

  With regards to dubs this verse is a MAJOR dilemma, but not for trinity debates. No!

  Dubs believe there is only ONE TRUE(TM) GOD: Jehovah.

  Therefore dubs are monotheistic: there is only ONE God and all other gods are false. Note: ALL the other so-called "gods."

  Hindus, on the other hand are polythestic: they believe there are many gods and all of them are gods, but having rankings as such gods go.

  The NWT version of John 1:1 says the the "Word was a god." The WTS makes a BIG DEAL about the little "g" when referring to the "Word" as opposed to the BIG "G" when referring to Jehovah. I don't know why they are squacking about it when the whole damn thing is THEIR TRANSLATION ANYWAY, AND THEY PUT THE BIG "G" AND THE LITTLE "g" THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE!

  Nonetheless, the "word" was a god. The WTS tells us the "word" was the "logos." Then it tells us the "word" who was the "logos" was Jesus. Why they just couldn't tell us the "word" was "Jesus" is beyond me. But then again, the WTS likes to put people through hoops. They sound more important and knowledgeable, that way.

  Well, if the "word" (Jesus) was "a" god, was he a true "god" or a false "god?" If he was a true god, then dubs believe in more than one true god (polythesim) and this violates the Bible which clearly states there is only ONE TRUE god. If Jesus was NOT a god, then John 1:1 is a lie. If Jesus WAS a god, but not a true god, then monothesim stands, but Christianity falls.

  It's not a pretty picture for the True Believers(tm).

  Farkel
• 

  hooberus

  It would be pointless for you to argue, as trinitarians sometimes do, that the Father is the God of Jesus' human nature since the text specifically identifies the resurrected Jesus as the "Lord Jesus Christ."

  What if the resurected Jesus is still human?
• 

  herk

  hooberus,
  

  What if the resurected Jesus is still human?

  Trinitarians claim that Jesus is both God and man, not simply a man. Romans doesn't say that the Father is the God of Jesus the man but that he is the God of the "Lord" Jesus Christ. This is their relationship now, as it was during Christ's mortal life on earth. The following texts also refer to the Godship of the Father over Jesus following the exaltation of Jesus to heavenly glory:
  

  • 2 Corinthians 1:3 - "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort"
  • 2 Corinthians 11:31 - "The God and Father of the Lord Jesus"
  • Ephesians 1:3 - "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"
  • Ephesians 1:17 - "the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory"
  • 1 Peter 1:3 - "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"
  • Revelation 1:6 - "His God and Father-- to Him be the glory and the dominion forever and ever"
  • Revelation 3:16 - The glorified Christ speaks of "the name of my God, and ... the city of my God, ... from my God."

  If the Holy Spirit is a member of the Trinity, where is he? Why is it never mentioned that the Holy Spirit is also the God of our Lord Jesus Christ? Why do trinitarians ignore this essential factor if salvation depends upon recognition of a three-Person Godhead that includes "God the Holy Spirit"?

  Additionally, Mark 16:19 and many other texts place the glorified Jesus, not upon the throne of God but at God's right hand. And "God the Holy Spirit" is never included in such vivid verbal descriptions. Thus the New Testament writers viewed the Father as the God who is worshiped by Jesus. They never expressed the view that Jesus is the God worshiped by his Father or worshiped by the Holy Spirit. Neither did they suggest that the Father and the Son view the Holy Spirit as their God. Equality within a trinitarian godhead would not be equality if only one member is viewed by the others as the god whom they worship.

  Why do trinitarians choose to reject the simple inspired testimony of the New Testament writers and prefer to accept a pagan concept that was introduced into Christianity many years after the Bible was completed?

  herk
• 

  hooberus

  Herk, before I answer your point about the Father being "the God of the 'Lord' Jesus Christ", I think that it is important to point out that Trinitarians do not believe that Jesus Christ is two separate persons, but that the Lord Jesus Christ and the man Jesus Christ are the same person.

  The Hypostatic Union doctrine teaches that the one person Jesus Christ has two natures. It does not teach that each of these natures is a separate person.

  Trinitarians do not believe that "the Lord Jesus" (Romans 10:9) is a separate person from "the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5). But instead that the phrases the "Lord Jesus" and "man Christ Jesus" are referring to the same person.

  Do you understand this? If so, then I will proceed to answer your point.
• 

  herk

  hooberus,

  the phrases the "Lord Jesus" and "man Christ Jesus" are referring to the same person. Do you understand this? If so, then I will proceed to answer your point.

  I've spoken to trinitarians for 60 years, and I don't remember a time until now when one of them questioned my understanding of the principal teaching they endorse. What I believe about Jesus as a person should be easy to grasp from what I've written above in this thread. It is the trinitarians who are confused, not those who accept the plain statements of Scripture.

  An overwhelming majority of the people I've met in my lifetime who have said they believe in the Trinity have been unable to explain it in simple terms, if at all. The average churchgoer has no comprehension of Jesus as a God-man and will often say "That's not what I believe" when the idea is read to him or her from church statements of belief.

  Some have admitted, "If knowing God and Jesus is essential for eternal life, why is it so difficult for us to know a clear distinction between the two?" Or, "I've never understood why God is so coy--why he hides from us--by making it so difficult for us to know who or what he really is." Such reactions are a clear illustration of the fact that the Trinity is both unscriptural and unreasonable.

  Even in public debates, some teachers of the Trinity have confessed they are not in agreement with other trinitarians on certain points, and yet the teaching they defend is viewed by nearly all trinitarians as of such great weight and so fundamental to Christianity that they despise communion with those who reject their opinions.

  Had God intended that none but the scholarly seminary graduate or worldly wise Christian be saved, he would have prepared the Bible for them, filled with hazy terms and theoretical notions and nuances. But 1 Corinthians 1 assures us that God chose the weak and lowly to confound the wise and intellectual. The implication is that the ones shut out from the simplicity of the gospel are those who think they are better at deciphering who God is by their use of mental gymnastics on the Trinity.

  Jesus said "the good news is preached to the poor." (Matthew 11:5) That was his business and mission. The gospel of God was a gospel that the poor and less educated could understand in plain and intelligible language.

  There would not be such confusion among trinitarian churchgoers if the Bible made it plain that God is a triune deity or if sound reason pointed to such a comprehension of God. Instead the Bible is very clear that God is One and that he is a "he" and not a "they." While some passages can be confused, trinitarians ignore the totality of Scripture.

  Truth appeals to our reason. Human reason can grasp divine truth when it is revealed to us. There is absolutely nothing about the Trinity teaching that is either reasonable or scriptural.

  herk
• 

  herk