Posts by fjtoth

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

MY COMMENTS: The 1st Century Jews (except the Sadduccees) believed that God alone resurrected the dead and that He DID NOT give this privilege to anyone else. Since Jesus knew this, He was claiming something that only God could do, especially when He claimed that He had the SAME LIFE in Himself that God The Father has in Himself, and when Jesus said that He would give life to ANYONE WHOM HE CHOOSES.

You believe this because you read it somewhere, but not in the Bible. Elijah and Elisha both performed resurrections from the dead by God's power. The Jews knew that Jesus had resurrected Lazarus, and the chief priests and Pharisees tried to kill both Jesus and Lazarus after that. They planned to murder both Jesus and Lazarus, not because they thought Jesus was pretending to be God, but because they were jealous of him. A great crowd of people were eyewitnesses of all this. (John 11:45-53; 12:1-11)

If, as you say, the Jews "believed that God alone resurrected the dead and that He DID NOT give this privilege to anyone else," should not the entire nation have embraced Jesus as God following the resurrection of Lazarus? And following the other resurrections that Jesus performed? Again, I say, you are trying to prove the Trinity without giving consideration to all the facts.

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

Also, John 1:18 points out very clearly that the Logos was God in a UNIQUE WAY that no one else is God.

This is an example of trying to prove your point without getting all the facts. The majority of translations and versions do not say "the Logos was God in a UNIQUE WAY that no one else is God." Very few renderings of this verse say the Son is God. Those that do simply don't make any sense. For example, this is what the New American Standard Bible says: "No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, he has explained him." Pray tell, if Jesus was God in the same sense that the Father is God, how can you escape the contradiction? It says "No one has seen God at any time." Yet, thousands saw Jesus with their naked eyes! Some saw him many times!

Note that in John 1:18 none of the following translations speak of Jesus as God:

"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (21st Century King James Version)
"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]." (American Standard Version)
"No man has seen God at any time; the only Son, who is on the breast of the Father, he has made clear what God is." (Bible in Basic English)
"No one has seen God at any time; the only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]." (Darby Translation)
"No man hath seen God at any time: the only begotten Son who is in the Bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (Douay-Rheims Bible)
"No one has ever seen God. God's only Son, the one who is closest to the Father's heart, has made him known." (God's Word Translation)
"No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him." (Hebrew Names Version)
"No one has ever seen God. The only Son-- the One who is at the Father's side-- he has revealed him." (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (King James Version)
"No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him." (New King James Version)
"The much-loved Son is beside the Father. No man has ever seen God. But Christ has made God known to us." (New Life Version)
"No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known." (Revised Standard Version)
"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him." (Third Millennium Bible)
"No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared [him]." (Webster Bible)
"No human eye has ever seen God: the only Son, who is in the Father's bosom--he has made him known." (Weymouth New Testament)
"No one has seen God at any time. The one and only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has declared him." (World English Bible)
"No one has ever seen God. But his only Son is very near to his Father's heart. He has told us plainly about God." (Worldwide English New Testament)
"No man saw ever God [No man ever saw God], but the one begotten Son, that is in the bosom of the Father, he hath told out." (Wycliffe New Testament)
"God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare." (Young's Literal Translation)

How do you explain that the Word is the "Son" of God if he never had a beginning? How can someone be a "Son" if he had no parent who existed before he was conceived, begotten or born? As God himself said, the Son was begotten by God at that point in history that God calls "Today." He said "I will be a Father to him and he shall be a son to me." At the time, he was speaking in the future tense, not of the eternal past. (Hebrews 1:5)

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

There is no way that the word "God" only meant that the Logos was a representative or spokesman for God in John 1:1, because it says the Logos was "God" BEFORE anything was ever created. At this time when the Logos was GOD, only the Logos and God existed (and the Holy Spirit based on other Scriptures). So, there is NO WAY that the Logos could have been merely a "representative" or "spokesman" of God BEFORE anything else existed. There would have been NO ONE for the Logos to speak to, and NO ONE for the Logos to represent God to.

May I suggest that you are not reading John 1:1 correctly? Here is what it says:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

It does not say, "In the beginning was Jesus" or "In the beginning was the Son." Neither does it say "In the beginning was God, and God was with God, and God was God."

But John does speak of "the beginning." You are assuming that this means "BEFORE anything was ever created" or "BEFORE anything else existed." Those are your words.

This seems to mean a lot to you, and you seem to believe that your interpretation of the wording is proof conclusive that "the Word" had no one to speak to "in the beginning." But let me point out to you that not everyone is in agreement concerning "the beginning" mentioned here. Neither is everyone in agreement as to exactly what John had in mind by inserting what seems to be poetry at the beginning of his Gospel, something none of the other Gospel writers thought to do. One theory is that "in the beginning" in John 1:1 is the same "in the beginning" as in Genesis 1:1. I'm not saying I agree with that, but suppose it were true. Were not the angels present at that time? (1 Kings 22:19; Job 38:4-7)

So, your argument is not very sound, even though you used the phrase "There is NO WAY . . ." You apparently are not taking everything into account as you attempt to explain some verses. Surely, if the angels were present, there could have been many joyful conversations as Job 38 and other passages clearly suggest.

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

Revelation 19:10 and 22:9 completely rules out giving any kind of "relative worship" to any created angels or men who are acting as God's representatives or spokesmen. That is FORBIDDEN as IDOLATRY by God in Revelation (and in Colossians by Paul).

Again, I urge you to examine the context. Revelation 19:10 says: "Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, 'Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.'"

Verses 1 to 3 tell us of "a great multitude in heaven" who exclaim "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God." Verse 4 mentions 24 "elders" and 4 "living creatures" who "fell down and worshiped God who sits on the throne saying, 'Amen. Hallelujah!'" Hallelujah, of course, means "Praise Jah!"

In verse 5, a voice near the throne says "Give praise to our God." Then in verse 6 the "great crowd" says, "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God, the Almighty, reigns." Verse 7 begins by saying, ""Let us rejoice and be glad and give the glory to him [God]." And then it mentions "the Lamb .. and his bride." In verse 9, the angel tells John it will be a great blessing to attend that marriage, and he adds: "These are the true words of God." And that moves John, as shown above in verse 10, to fall down and worship the angel. But he is told, "Do not do that; ... worship God."

In the entire chapter, not even a hint is given that Jesus should be worshiped. Instead, we three times read the exclamation "Praise Jah!," and we are told to "Give praise to our God" and to "Worship God!" Jesus is not that God. One of the names given to Jesus in verses 11 to 21 is "The Word of God." We should not fail to observe that little word "of". Jesus is "the Lamb of God," "the Son of God," "the Christ of God," "the Priest of God," as well as "The Word of God." If Jesus is "of God," doesn't that logically suggest that he is distinct from God? Never do we read of "the Father of God," which would only be reasonable if all members of the Trinity are equal. That expression doesn't appear even once in the Bible though we often read of "the Son of God" and of "sons of God."

Revelation 22:8, 9 says: "I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. But he said to me, 'Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God."

In the context, 4 individuals are mentioned: "the Lord God," "the Lamb," the angel, and John. If God wanted us to worship Jesus in the same way we should worship him the Father, one would think there would be at least one admonition to do so in this final chapter of the Bible. But there is none! We are commanded to worship no one but "the Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets." (Verses 6, 9)

We don't need a commentary to understand this. It's set forth plainly and clearly in both chapters of Revelation, as well as throughout the rest of the Bible.

By the way, to you and to everyone in this forum: "HAPPY NEW YEAR!"

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

You quoted from the NIV Study Bible. I do like and appreciate that Study Bible. I believe it to be a very good Bible from what I have seen in it. Have you ever read some other statements from that NIV Study Bible? Take a look at a few of them here:

In the NIV Study Note on Hebrews 1:8, it says that the writer of Hebrews was quoting Psalm 45:6 to prove that Jesus was fully God, was truly Deity. So, based on that, even if Psalm 45:6 applied to human kings in one sense, Hebrews quoted it to show that Jesus was the one, true God.

I think you should be aware by now that I don't look to commentaries or creeds to define my understanding of the Bible. Trinitarian scholars can be as much in error as any other scholars. My only reason for refering you to the NIV was to show that even Trinitarian translators and commentators disagree with your statement that "based on everything" you've read in the Bible, Psalm 45 was not directed toward a human king.

Isn't running to the commentaries of other men the same as a JW running to The Watchtower for support, instead of reading the Bible as God's love letter to each one of us personally? I tend to doubt you would have ever become a Trinitarian if you hadn't been converted by some other imperfect human. The very idea of a Trinity is absent from the Bible, so how could you have discovered it there? Men not only invented the term but the very idea. Perhaps the intentions of some were good. Perhaps they feared being thought of as polytheists because the Bible speaks of both the Father and the Son as God. But if such men had been led along by the holy spirit, they would have realized that "God" is not a name; it is a title that intrinsically belongs to the Father of Jesus Christ, just as is the title "Lord," but the Father may choose to bestow those honorary titles upon those who serve as his agents.

Jesus has not been God, Lord or Christ since all past eternity. He became such at a certain point in history. As stated at Acts 2:26, "Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made [in other words, 'appointed and anointed'] him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified." The very name "Christ" is a title with the obvious meaning that someone greater than he put him in the position that he now occupies. That does not denigrate him in our eyes. It exalts him, because we bathe in the realization that no other person in the universe is so dearly loved and honored by God.

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

So, even if the human kings were called "god," when the writer of Hebrews quoted Psalm 45:6, he, under inspiration from God, used "God" in a way that applies only to Jesus and no other angel.

You are not taking into account the context within Hebrews 1.

Verse 1 says in ancient times God spoke to the forefathers through the prophets. He did not speak himself, but he employed prophets. Verse 2 tells of how this changed. "In these last days," God began speaking through his Son.

If God is a Trinity, why did the writer not say God in ancient times spoke in the voice of the Father, and he now is speaking in the voice of the Son? There is no such point being made. The real point is that neither the prophets nor the Son were God. God gave the prophets and his Son the message to preach, and they did the preaching.

Verse 2 also says the Son was "appointed heir of all things." He has not always been the heir. At a point in historic time, he was appointed. He received the appointment not from himself but from God.

Verse 3 does not say the Son is God. Instead, he is "the radiance of [God's] glory and the exact representation of [God's] nature." The Son is neither God nor God's glory nor God's nature. He radiates the glory of God as the earth and moon radiate the light of the sun. The Greek word for "radiance" simply means "reflected brightness." Interestingly, the Son is "the exact representation." Of all who have represented God, none has done it more precisely or more exactly than his Son.

Verse 3 also says that the Son "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high." He did not sit down AS the Majesty, but NEXT TO the Majesty.

Verse 4 says the Son "become as much better than the angels," obviously meaning that he was not always "better." He arrived at or had "become" better at a point in history. The verse also says "he has inherited a more excellent name than they." If he were God Almighty, he would have had such an excellent name from all times past in eternity! To "inherit" means to receive something one did not formerly have.

According to verse 5, at a point in history God said to the Son "TODAY I have begotten you." The Son is not "eternally begotten" as Trinitarians claim. He was begotten at the point in time termed "Today." The verse also speaks of a future happening, not a past one, when God says, "I WILL be a Father to him and he SHALL be a Son to me." Jesus became God's only-begotten Son at the moment that prophecy was fulfilled, not before.

I think you fail to get the sense of verse 6. The angels are invited to worship when God "AGAIN brings the firstborn into the world." Christ will come AGAIN into the world at his return. Who will the angels worship at that time? Will they worship God, or will they worship his Son? According to Psalm 97:7, the verse from which this verse is cited, it will be God!

Verses 7 and 8 do not show that the Son is superior to the angels because he is called God and they are not. The angels are God indeed. This is shown in many instances within the Old Testament where "the angel of the Lord" is addressed as "the Lord" and is called "God" due to his high office as God's agent. The difference between the angels and the Son is that God makes the angels "winds" and "ministers," whereas he invites the Son to receive a "throne" and a "scepter." Sadly, Trinitarians fail to pay attention to the exact wording because they are seeking to prove something that they believe, something that cannot be found within the text at all.

Verse 9 gives the reason for the Son's exaltation to the throne. Keeping in mind what is stated above concerning his being "appointed" as heir, this verse 9 states: "You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; therefore [that is why] God, your God, has anointed you." Yes, who is it that anointed him? Did he act as God and anoint himself, similar to the way Napoleon appointed himself instead of having the pope do it? No, the Son did not appoint himself! God anointed him! If he were God, why would he need to be anointed? If he were God he would have from all past eternity been entitled to all that God has bestowed upon him, and he would not be in need of an anointing from God.

Just to be sure we understand the context of what he is saying, the writer of Hebrews in verses 13 and 14 makes another reference to the superiority of the Son over the angels. It is not because the Son is "God" and they are not, for indeed they are, according to many passages in the Old Testament. The superiority rests in the fact that the Son is invited to sit upon the throne at God's right hand. The angels, on the other hand, are "all ministering spirits, sent out to render service for the sake of those who will inherit salvation."

I believe a person will not be a Trinitarian if he is a careful reader of the Bible instead of being someone who parrots the pagan ideas introduced into the Catholic church in the 4th century.

Frank

218

The Duality -- The Father and The Son

by UnDisfellowshipped in

do jehovah's witnesses believe in two gods or one god?

do they believe in a "duality"?

do jehovah's witnesses and/or the angels worship jesus christ?.

fjtoth

Undisfellowshiped,

You wrote:

As I stated before, it is possible (though I wouldn't say probable) that Psalm 45:6 was directed originally to a human king, and that the human king was called "god" in the sense of being an anointed representative of God. However, based on what Hebrews 1:8 says, which is the inspired interpretation of Psalm 45:6, the word "God" in that verse is applied to Christ in a UNIQUE way that angels are NOT called "god."

What you are saying is that Psalm 45:6 was not inspired when written, that it became inspired only when it was quoted by the writer of Hebrews. The writers of Psalm 45 were the sons of Korah. Are you going to claim that all they wrote in other psalms was also uninspired, simply because of not being quoted in the New Testament?

Why is it so difficult for you to accept the Bible as it was written? The sons of Korah knew who they were addressing, and God moved them by his spirit to do the writing. Why do you find that so difficult to believe? For hundreds of years the Jews knew and understood why the Psalm was written, and they applied it to the kings sitting upon David's throne. Those Jews included faithful worshipers of God, including prophets and priests. But Trinitarians come along and in effect say those faithful people of God were misinformed. They only THOUGHT the sons of Korah were inspired, but the psalm really had no application until it was quoted in the New Testament. I don't find any logic at all in that sort of thinking.

Frank

24

How many JWs die for want of a blood transfusion?

by Gill in

does anyone have a rough or even accurate idea of how many jws lose their lives each year due to the no blood doctrine?.

fjtoth

Each leader of the Watchtower Society is responsible for far more deaths than those of the most notorious serial killer.

Recently the publication of the O.J. Simpson book and television special "If I Did It" were canceled and banned. The publications and other media used by the Watchtower Society are also dangerous and worthy of public condemnation!

Frank

14

UK News-JW Died Refusing Blood

by DannyHaszard in

patient died after refusing blood.

sheffield today, uk -10 minutes ago.

by fiona firth a jehovah's witness died in a sheffield hospital after refusing a blood transfus ... more .

fjtoth

"Jesus went through the land teaching and preaching about the Kingdom of God, and he went healing every disease and sickness among the people." (Matthew 4:22-24)

The Watchtower Society goes through the land murdering people who have diseases and sicknesses! Because it regularly gets away with it, it's the O. J. Simpson of religious denominations! No serial killer has ever brought more harm to victims and their families than the leaders of the Watchtower Society!