The use of "I, proper name" occurs three times in the book of Revelation. The first two times find it used to denote a speaker change. The third would logically do the same.
Mondo1
JoinedPosts by Mondo1
-
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.
-
-
-
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
Let me reply to your edits.
"Made appeal" has a footnote in the NWT . It reads: "Or, 'invocation; prayer.'" To whom did Stephen pray? Why —especially given the context—was kurios replaced with Jehovah in this instance, since Stephen is plainly directly addressing his comments to "Lord Jesus?"
Jesus was physically in the sight of Stephen, so I would not consider this an example of prayer.
You still have not responded regarding the indentity of the Alpha and the Omega. According to the NWT it seems that it is both Jesus and the One seated on the throne. But that would strongly indicate polypersonal deity...so there MUST be another explanation. I can hardly wait to read it.
No, they are not both the Alpha and the Omega, only the Father is the A&W. I can hardly see this even weakly indicating a polypersonal deity, much less a strong indication of such. The Bible never even hits at the idea of God being polypersonal. It is entirely imported into Scripture as a post-Biblical thought.
-
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
If you believe there are many true gods (plural, poly, many), how can you also be mono- (singular, one) -theistic? Or do you believe that since Jesus would be called a mighty god (lowercase "g") instead of "Mighty God" that means you aren't believing in multiple gods? (Isaiah 9:6)
I don't believe Jesus is called "Mighty God" or "a mighty God" though I wouldn't have a problem with it. All others who are called gods derive their godship from the one true God. There are not gods in the order of the Greek gods, etc.
I am just trying to get a clear picture of what your beliefs are. You seem to vascilate between polytheism and monotheism in your replies, as though you are unsure precisely what you believe about God.
I believe that there is only one who is truly and completely God in every sense of the word. We have to remember that the word god (el, qeos) meant more than one thing. It had more than one application. So the term could be used of others in a lesser, secondary sense, without conflicting with the thought of their being one god. Moser brought this out: “Moderns are often unaware that T??? [God] had a much broader semantic range than is allowed for G/god in contemporary Western European languages. “
Polytheism does not require the worship of more than one god, it only requires belief in more than one god. So, judging by your posts here (if you actually believe the angels are gods, that Jesus is a god separate from the god you worship, etc.) your stated beliefs show you are polytheistic, yet you call yourself monotheistic or at the outside Henotheistic.
Well, as I said, I am no more henotheistic than say, the Jews of the Qumran community. From the Dead Sea Scrolls we read this: “And exalt his exaltation to the heights, gods of the august divinities, and the divinity of his glory above all the august heights. For he is God of the gods … Sing with joy those of you enjoying his knowledge, with rejoicing among the wonderful gods … Praise him, divine spirits, praising for ever and ever the main vault of the heights … The spirits of the holy of the holy ones, the living gods, the spirits of everlasting holiness.”
So if you want to classify it as henotheism, I guess go ahead, but as the 1st century Jews demonstrated this same belief, what more needs to be said? I call myself a monotheist because of how I believe these others are gods and of course because my views parallel those of the 1st century Jews and yet they are classified as monotheists.
I hope you would agree that if any faithful Christian in the Bible record prays to Jesus, then it must be okay for any Christian to do so. To your knowledge, is any Christian in the Bible recorded praying directly to Jesus?
I think the entire issue is open to debate, but there is no explicit case of prayer to Jesus within the NT.
Mondo
-
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
Well my idea of different types of spirits is not really speculation, but based upon the fact that "God is a spirit" and yet the angels are spirits. I don't think anyone would argue that they are of the same order of spirits. With humans, we know from Peter that in the resurrection they became "partakes of the divine nature" and so they will certainly be like Christ, for they will be his brothers. Likely, their bodies will be changed to be made of the same "stuff" as God himself... which I would say is what has occured with Jesus. (Heb. 1:3)
-
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
My point is that elohim seems to be used consistently in the context to refer to one individual. What you seem to be suggesting is that elohim change from refering to one individual to another... I can't see how "let us" justifies that.
-
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
Correct. Little to do with nature. Yes I would agree that there can be different kinds of spirits. I'm not sure how you want me to go about characterizing the differences though, because the Bible doesn't do hardly do that at all, and so I could only speculate and I prefer not to do that.
-
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
Sunspots,
It is not necessary that I was there, though it would be helpful! Rather, we have numerous works outside of the Bible that reflect the mindset of the time and it is from these and the scholarly work that has been done in these areas that can help us to determine how certain things should be understood. Of course, we must make sure that our conclusions do not conflict with Scripture in doing so, for in such a case ur interpretation would be wrong. The point is simply that the most reliable way to read Scripture is to try our best to understand how they looked at it, now how our 20th/21st century mind does.
For qualifications, I do not claim anything special. I have studied some formally, but most of my study has been on my own. The fact that one does study and comes to learn certain things that can be substantiated historically tends to make one qualified to point these things out.
-
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
Context is the key. In Genesis 1-2 we have an established context within which elohim is used. There is no basis for arguing that elohim refers to one other than whom it contextually refers to, so I have to reject this idea. So contextually, I cannot see how one could conclude that without a theological pressuposition. Of course I will grant such if you can provide a contextual indicator for such a change, but I have not come across one.
-
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
I didn't say that.
-
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
Littletoe,
The issue is that they assumed something. Never assume. :)
I would argue that Jesus was an angel of sorts, for an angel is merely a messenger and he was undoubtedly "the angel of the convenant" spoken of in Mal. 3:1.