KingdomRose
New member
To even bother to answer your vomit-inducing diatribe would be casting my pearls before swine.
JESUS IS NOT YHWH
- Thread starter KingdomRose
- Start date
- Status
To even bother to answer your vomit-inducing diatribe would be casting my pearls before swine.
God's Truth
New member
God the Father came as a Man in the flesh, He did not pretend to come as a Man in the flesh He really did it.
While Jesus was a Man on earth He said the Father is greater. God in heaven is greater than a Man in the flesh.
Jesus says when you see him, you can say, "I see the Father".
So tell me why you do not think it is right to say Jesus is the Father?
See John 14:7 If you really know me, you will know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
Did you read that? Jesus says to his disciples that they can say they have seen the Father.
John 14:9 Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?
Jesus is speaking about his physical self.
John 12:45 The one who looks at me is seeing the one who sent me.
Did you read that? The one who looks at Jesus is seeing the one who sent him, the Father!
KingdomRose
New member
How does that show the Trinity? Just because three things are mentioned in the same paragraph doesn't make them all equal.....it doesn't even make them all PERSONS!
The really funny thing here is that the person speaking in that Scripture is not Jesus but ISAIAH!!! So you are trying to tell us that the Trinity is proved here, when it is Isaiah, Jehovah, and Jehovah's Spirit that are being referred to at the end of verse 16.
It is not God the Son (which can be found NO WHERE in the Bible) that is calling anyone to "draw near," but it is Jehovah who says this. And Jehovah has sent ISAIAH to warn the people of Israel.
:readthis:
God's Truth
New member
No one knows for sure how to say God's name. So no one can claim it is important to say it their way. God knows to whom we speak to.
KingdomRose
New member
No those two scriptures don't mean the same thing. The firstborn of all creation means that he was the first thing directly created by Jehovah; thereafter everything else was created through him.
The firstborn from the dead is a reference to an entirely different subject. We have left the issue of his creation and are now considering the fact that he was the first to rise from the dead back to heavenly life, which his co-rulers would do after him.
KingdomRose
New member
Where do you get these off-center ideas? They are truly comical. You quote Ephesians which speaks of only the Father being God. "One God and Father of all." So clear!
Then you post something that isn't anywhere in the Bible, and actually CONTRADICTS the scripture you just quoted! You can't find "God the Son" in the Bible anywhere, yet you say it and believe it. And what you know about the Holy Spirit is even LESS. Jesus never said that he and the Father make up the Holy Spirit. He always said that the Spirit was the Father's. It was His power or active force, not Jesus's. So Jesus never indicated that he himself made up part of the Spirit. :rotfl: It would be funny if it wasn't so silly.
KingdomRose
New member
Don't waste your time, Jacob. I'm serious. You'll get more runaround and mental gymnastics, just like Evil Eye gives us all.
Jehovah Witness
KingdomRose
New member
To GodsTruth, post #122....
You are incredibly out in left field, to put it nicely. Blah, blah, blah :blabla:
Your ridiculous post isn't even worth my time to respond to.
You are incredibly out in left field, to put it nicely. Blah, blah, blah :blabla:
Your ridiculous post isn't even worth my time to respond to.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Nope, "hath quickened" means it is done.
Oh, I understand, but you clearly don't. Paul is talking about not yet having a resurrected body.
Phil. 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
Yeah, I know you JW's are very audacious. As for me, I'm a member of the body of Christ, and my home is in Heaven.
glorydaz
Well-known member
To KingdomRose:
You are incredibly out in left field, to put it nicely. Blah, blah, blah :blabla:
Your ridiculous post isn't even worth my time to respond to.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Your "pearls" aren't even fit for swine. :chuckle:
beameup
New member
The official name of God, given by Charles Taze Russell of the Watchtower Society, is Jehovah
J-E-H-O-V-A-H is the TRUE NAME of God according to Jehovah's Witnesses, not "Yahveh" or something else.
Unfortunately for Russell, he had NO KNOWLEDGE of the Original Hebrew, so took the Roman Catholic LATIN name of Jehovah. :rotfl:
I'm sure these facts are now hidden from the gullible newcomers to "Jehovah's Witness'".
KingdomRose
New member
No, nothing is "hidden" from anyone. Charles Taze Russell didn't give God His name. God's name is YHWH--the Tetragrammaton--the Hebrew letters "Yohdh-He'-Waw-He'." It is rendered in various ways, most often depending on what language is being spoken, but to English-speaking people, "Jehovah" is most common. That is why JWs use that pronunciation. "Yahveh" is perfectly fine. But, as I have stated before, "Jehovah" has been in the King James Version since 1611, and also in the American Standard Version, both of those versions having been used by Russell and Jehovah's Witnesses for almost 100 years.
:thumb:
beameup
New member
Charles Taze Russell was ignorant of the original languages.
You are "stuck" with Jehovah as the "name of God". You can
go into all kinds of mental gymnastics, but the fact remains -
your founder gave you the "official" name of God as Jehovah.
I am familiar with the DECEPTION of the "Jehovah's Witnesses" since
1957 (when they were still stuck with the King James Version).
God's Truth
New member
Is that all Satan has given you to defend his false doctrines?
Pearls are reproofs and not doctrines.
SonOfCaleb
Active member
Indeed. Such is the comical nature of this dogma that even the Theologians of the 2nd and 3rd Century who dreamt this nonsense up -in their attempt to reconcile Greek, Babylonian and Roman pagan philosophy with the Bible- couldn't even agree collectively on the specifics of the dogma. Why? Because its simply nowhere to be found in the Bible! Neither the word Trinity nor the teaching.
The Jews didn't know anything about a so called Holy Trinity. The early Christians of 1AD didn't. The 'Early Church fathers' didn't seem to support this dogma either. (And i say 'seem' because there's much debate in academic circles over the 'Church Fathers' & the Trinity but the evidence is very scant) And yet here we are 2000 summi years later and Christendom is still attempting to fix the evidence around the objective rather than submitting herself to the abundance of evidence in the Bible that thoroughly debunks this doctrine.
SonOfCaleb
Active member
Luke 11:14-20
You do well to heed Jesus's words above. The Pharisees used your SAME specious logic when berating Jesus for expelling Demons claiming he did so by the power of Satan and his Demons. The onus is upon you to provide evidence in defense of your doctrine. But you are incapable and simply cannot provide any proof in support of your doctrine because your doctrine is indefensible. Hence why you're reduced to these empty accusatory retorts. If KR speaks for Satan then whom do you speak for? Note Jesus parting words: the Kingdom of God has really overtaken you. Be wary that it hasn't overtaken you also.
God's Truth
New member
You can't use scripture correctly and you certainly can't use it against me. Notice that all you have are false accusations too. What else do you got if you don't have the truth to defend your false doctrines.
- Status