I was thinking the same thing about you with your "absurd" comment. I merely replied in kind. You did nothing in this most recent post but do a broken record. You said that "the NT clearly identifies Christ as our maker and creator." Well I already demonstrated otherwise. Never is Christ given the title of "Creator" and never is he shown to be the source of creation. He is always seen as the intermediate agent. God was not merely the architect, but he was the source of it all. (1Cor. 8:6) Hence only he is ever, Biblically, given the "creator" title. Jesus is, at most, Scripturally called "a master worker" or "chief architect". (Prov. 8:30)
Mondo1
JoinedPosts by Mondo1
-
396
Who is Jesus? Is he God?
by BelieverInJesus ini live in memphis.
months ago, i had some jw's come by and talk with me.
i'm a believer in the holy bible.
-
-
-
137
New World Translation Brackets!!
by gold_morning infor what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.
the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".
at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.
-
-
Mondo1
LL
I can hardly see what the divine name being added to the New Testament has to do with declaring a different good news.
-
137
New World Translation Brackets!!
by gold_morning infor what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.
the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".
at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.
-
-
Mondo1
Hellrider,
Well those aren't very specific! Mantey was definitely upset theologically, as his letter to the WT shows, and within his letter his issues were definitely unjustified. Stafford really brought this to light in his response. It seems that most of the John 1:1 issues were based upon an abuse of the converse of Colwell's rule, and so those lacked any validity at all.
The obeisance/worship issue is hardly justified either, for Bible translations regularly translate that different. They translate it as worship for Christ because that is what *their theology* teaches, but they translate it other was in other places. So it isn't a matter of bias, just interpretation in translation. There is a difference.
And finally, on the Lord/Jehovah issue, I don't think there is any ambiguity at all. The Bible is very clear on who they are.
Mondo
-
137
New World Translation Brackets!!
by gold_morning infor what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.
the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".
at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.
-
-
Mondo1
No, I do not deny that they have added it, but frankly, if I had to choose between adding it and taking it away, as long as there is some level of justification in adding it (i.e. that it is a quote or allusion to an OT passage and the context does not demand that it not be present), I'd rather see it added then removed.
-
239
Revelation 1.17 Jesus divinity? Or just "the first" raised from the dead"?
by Hellrider ini have been having an argument in this thread, which originally was about the trinity (oh no, not again.... http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/121719/1.ashx.
...with mondo1, about what the text in revelation 1.17 means.
i don`t want this thread to turn into another trinity-thread, let`s just keep it to the phrase "the first and the last", and revelation, and jesus` status in this text.
-
-
Mondo1
You had said: "This "resurrected man" with an archangel's voice, is he human (like me or you)? Or spirit, you know like say..., an angel?"
My reply was if he was a man or a spirit, and I said both, not in that he had a dual nature, but in that a resurrected man is spirit.
-
396
Who is Jesus? Is he God?
by BelieverInJesus ini live in memphis.
months ago, i had some jw's come by and talk with me.
i'm a believer in the holy bible.
-
-
Mondo1
Littletoe,
My position is 100% in line with the grammatical structure used in those texts, which demonstrates clearly that Jesus is not the source of creation, but the intermediate agent. Numerous sources testify to this. Dana and Mantey state: "Here God the Father is thought of as the original cause of creation, and the ????? as the intermediate agent." Marvin Vincent: "The preposition dia is generally used to denote the working of God through some secondary agency, as dia t?? p??f?´t??, through the prophet (Matthew 1:22, on which see note)." The New Linguistic and Exegetical Key: "The prep[osition] w[ith] the gen[itive] describes Christ as the intermediate instrument of creation (Abbott; Lightfoot)." And even Origen! "Thus, if all things were made, as in this passage [John 1:3, which uses the same grammar as Colossians 1:16] also, through the ?????, then they were not made by the ?????, but by [one] stronger and greater than He."
So don't call my position absurd, when grammatically it is explicit. You should research your arguments a bit better first. The Father is explicitly shown to be the source (1Cor. 8:6).
Mondo
-
396
Who is Jesus? Is he God?
by BelieverInJesus ini live in memphis.
months ago, i had some jw's come by and talk with me.
i'm a believer in the holy bible.
-
-
Mondo1
So, there you have it, Mondo1 says that even if Jesus is the Creator, He is only a lesser Creator than The Father. That's the same argument the Watchtower uses in the "Reasoning" book, where they said that even if Jesus is God (Romans 9:5), and not just "a god," it still means that Jesus was a lesser, inferior god than Jehovah.
This isn't a WT argument. Even Trinitarian scholars recognize that Jesus took on the role as the intermediate in creation. BDAG discusses this sufficiently, as do many others. For Romans 9:5, that would be quite true, for there is no basis in concluding that God is polypersonal. One must assume that a priori to come to the conclusion that Jesus is qeos in the same way as the Father. As the Bible does nothing to lay out a polypersonal God, there is no reason to assume that he exists in such a way.
Trinitarians acknowledge that The Father is the Ultimate Source, but they also believe Jesus had a much, much, much larger role in creation than gravity or dirt.
I would agree with that. I only took these two things as an example to show how it applies and how if these things could be included, how much more so could Jesus.
In fact, as I have pointed out repeatedly in this thread, The Father Himself gives Jesus MUCH MORE credit for creation than you do at Hebrews 1:10.
Sure he does. This perfectly parallels Jesus as Wisdom and Understanding (Prov. 8:14) when in Proverbs 3:19 it says: "Jehovah by Wisdom founded the earth, by understanding he established the heavens." Albert Barnes notes: This thought, developed in Prov 8, is the first link in the chain which connects this ‘Wisdom’ with the Divine Word, the Logos of John’s Gospel."
Mondo
-
396
Who is Jesus? Is he God?
by BelieverInJesus ini live in memphis.
months ago, i had some jw's come by and talk with me.
i'm a believer in the holy bible.
-
-
Mondo1
So, are you saying that the Hebrew word "OLAM" took on a "special theological meaning" of ETERNITY when it applied to YHWH? That's interesting, considering the fact that earlier in this thread you made these statements:
No, that is not what I'm saying, I'm saying olam means olam, it does not have a special theological meaning.
So, then, the Hebrew word "OLAM" could very well take on the additional meaning of "ETERNAL EXISTENCE" when applied to JESUS in Proverbs 8:23 and Micah 5:2, just as easily as it could take on this extra meaning when it is applied to YHWH!
If those words were taken in isolation, certainly, but they are not. In Proverbs 8 we have 22 and 24-26 that clarify the meaning. In Micah we have several things, the least of which is 5:4 where it speaks of "Jehovah HIS God."
And of course, the Hebrew word "OLAM" was used for normal people and things, NOT just God:
Exactly.
-
239
Revelation 1.17 Jesus divinity? Or just "the first" raised from the dead"?
by Hellrider ini have been having an argument in this thread, which originally was about the trinity (oh no, not again.... http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/121719/1.ashx.
...with mondo1, about what the text in revelation 1.17 means.
i don`t want this thread to turn into another trinity-thread, let`s just keep it to the phrase "the first and the last", and revelation, and jesus` status in this text.
-
-
Mondo1
I didn't say Jesus is both flesh and spirit, possessing a dual nature. Not once. Obviously you misunderstood. As for where they got Jesus is Michael, I'd venture to say from the Protestant reformers.
-
137
New World Translation Brackets!!
by gold_morning infor what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.
the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".
at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.
-
-
Mondo1
LL,
I wonder how accurate and reliable the research material that you came across was. Most criticisms of the NWT are unjustified.
Mondo