Is Jesus God?

[betsy123]

Originally Posted by Lazy afternoon View Post
Isa 42:5 Thus says God the LORD, Who created the heavens and stretched them out, Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it, Who gives breath to the people on it, And spirit to those who walk on it:
Isa 42:6 "I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness, And will hold Your hand; I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people, As a light to the Gentiles,
Isa 42:7 To open blind eyes, To bring out prisoners from the prison, Those who sit in darkness from the prison house.
Isa 42:8 I am the LORD, that is My name; And My glory I will not give to another, Nor My praise to carved images.

LA

Please refer to posts #394.

Like I've pointed out:

***Many titles that are God's have been bestowed on Jesus, and vice versa.

***God has made many definitive declarations.
As an example: God does not share His glory with anyone!

***Jesus had made so many claims about Himself.
He even let Thomas believe that He (Jesus), is God!


Refer to this compilation of Biblical evidence:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread...IS-GOD-HIMSELF



There is a clear distinction between Jesus,Son of God, and God/Jesus being One and the Same.
It is important for us to equally believe BOTH!

It's well and good that you guys keep quoting verses depicting Jesus as the Son of God........HOWEVER, you can't ignore the other verses that also show God and Jesus are One and the Same!




The belief that Jesus is God Himself, falls neatly into places.
It is consistent with the rest of the Scriptures.
The consistency of the Bible - from beginning to end - is one of its powerful
evidence as the Word of God.



Jesus is also Yahweh! (in the flesh).
Because, if He's not God Himself - that makes Jesus a usurper, a liar and thus -
not credible.
We can even say that would make Jesus, demonic - deceitfully misleading people!
That's the dilemma of non-Trinitarians.
Non-Trinitarian belief is loaded with contradictions from the Scriptures, and it makes God/Jesus and the Bible, unreliable.


Thus I ask:

How can God/Jesus teach something that knocks down His own credibility?

 

[NWL]

Again explain what I'm sidestepping by answering the questions below, what does YHWH the Father not sharing his glory have anything to do with the questions I asked, if you can't explain the reason why then you have no reason NOT to answer the questions.

Again explain and answer, here they are again.

Again, to who's glory is it to that we bend the knee to Jesus according to Phil 2:8-11, the Fathers or Jesus?

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

If a human was not sacrificed [upon Jesus death] what was, God? You've already implied it was God that was sacrificed so answer me this, how can God die? And don't you even think to say it was Jesus humanity that died since you've already denied the fact that "God sacrificed a human", so deal with the problem you've created.

You're missing the point. You're still giving me all these bits and pieces!
Read below. And also #401.

All you keep doing is repeating pointless statements, what does it mean that I'm "giving you bits and pieces", where have I only given you bits and pieces? And in particular what information am I leaving out to justify you not answering each and everyone of the questions I've asked.

Next time you reply how about you don't reply with a broad statement that doesn't really explain anything in your attempt not to answer the question I have posed you.

Here they are again, lets see what you make up this time, please answer:

Again, to who's glory is it to that we bend the knee to Jesus according to Phil 2:8-11, the Fathers or Jesus?

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

If a human was not sacrificed [upon Jesus death] what was, God? You've already implied it was God that was sacrificed so answer me this, how can God die? And don't you even think to say it was Jesus humanity that died since you've already denied the fact that "God sacrificed a human", so deal with the problem you've created.

Read below. And also #401.

How does your post 401 justify not answering any of the questions I've asked, if you don't or can't explain then you have no reason NOT to answer.

 

[7djengo7]

Did you fail to see the preceding lines in Phil 2?...
If Jesus is in very nature, God - and He is EQUAL with God - who else can He be?

Hi betsy123. Remember that NWL does not care about what is written in the Bible; instead, NWL reveres a non-Bible--an anti-Bible--called "The New World Translation". It is well, also, to bear in mind that N(ew)W(orld)L(iar) is (because of the brainwashing he's received at the hands of his programmers/handlers at the Watchtower Society) Satanically driven to deliberately attempt obfuscation, as much as he can, against his marks.

He will come at you with a dark cloud of un-Biblical, meaningless jargon in futile hope of, somehow, thereby, saving face for his irrational, anti-Christ Russellism. For instance:

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

We find nowhere, in Scripture, any such meaningless jargon as NWL's "worship the Father through Jesus". Neither in Philippians 2, nor anywhere else.

There are numerous places where Jesus instructs and directs people to worship God and not himself, based then on implication, it is clear, that Jesus did not want people to worship him directly.

NWL, of course, will never be able to answer even the least bit coherently for his jargon, "worship him directly". In the Bible, of course, we do not find such nonsense as NWL promulgates; we never find NWL's imaginary distinction: "directly worship"/"indirectly worship". NWL will never give you anything that amounts to more than a loud fart, if you prod him about his nonsense.

There are numerous places where Jesus instructs and directs people to worship God and not himself

It sure does look like NWL is saying that Jesus commands people to worship NOT Jesus--that is, to NOT worship Jesus--does it not? Nowhere, in Scripture, do we ever find Jesus instructing or directing people to NOT worship Jesus. Nowhere. So, N(ew)W(orld)L(iar) has simply lied, once again.

And yet, look at what the hypocrite, NWL, says:

Where have I said I don't worship Jesus? You are a man of assumptions and false accusations my friend. I do worship Jesus since this is the method that the father deems all persons to worship him. I worship the Father by worshiping Jesus, who passes all glory to his father. This a basic truth.

Why, other than rank hypocrisy, would anybody say, out of one side of his mouth that we are not to worship Jesus, and then, out of the other side of his mouth, say "I do worship Jesus"? If Jesus really commanded NWL to not worship Jesus, then NWL is plainly stating that NWL is flagrantly disobeying what he claims Jesus has commanded of him.

NWL will say something like "We are not to DIRECTLY worship Jesus". Of course, that's NWL's un-Biblical, meaningless jargon at play--his imaginary distinction between "worshipping directly" and "worshipping indirectly". Watch how NWL will (because he has no choice but to) pathetically embarrass himself in pretending to try to explain his imaginary distinction between "worshipping directly" and "worshipping indirectly". Here are two meaningless phrases:

• "worship Jesus directly"
• "worship Jesus indirectly"

Guess what: NWL will never be able to coherently answer for either of them.

Observe, also, that NWL has another failed, pet piece of jargon: "we worship the Father through Jesus". It's funny to observe NWL's "worship THROUGH" in light of NWL's "worship DIRECTLY". See, now NWL has caused himself more embarrassment: How is worshiping an object, A, THROUGH some other object, B, worshiping A DIRECTLY? Would it not, rather, seem at least a little more like approaching reasonableness to say, instead, that "worshiping THROUGH" is "worshiping INDIRECTLY", so that, when NWL says that God the Father is to be "worshiped THROUGH" Jesus, NWL means that God the Father is to be "worshiped INDIRECTLY"?

So, now, let's ask NWL:

• NWL, you tell us that we are not to "directly worship" Jesus, whatever that's supposed to mean. So, what about God the Father? Are we to "directly worship" God the Father? Yes or No?
• And, NWL, when you tell us that we are to "worship God the Father THROUGH" Jesus, are you saying that we are to "worship God the Father DIRECTLY", or, rather, are you saying that we are to "worship God the Father INDIRECTLY"? Which is it?
• Are we to "DIRECTLY worship" God the Father, or are we to "INDIRECTLY worship" God the Father?

Of course, if NWL says that to worship God the Father "THROUGH" Jesus is to worship God the Father "DIRECTLY", then he further manifests just how much a clown he has made himself to be. To go THROUGH point B to get to point A is, of course, to NOT go to point A DIRECTLY.

And, if NWL says that to worship God the Father "THROUGH" Jesus is to worship God the Father "INDIRECTLY", then, bearing in mind that NWL commands that Jesus is only to be worshiped "INDIRECTLY", we ask NWL: Then WHO is to be worshiped "DIRECTLY", if neither Jesus, nor God the Father?

NWL, for the purpose of deliberately attempting to obfuscate, uses little language games (whether invented by himself, or by his programmers/handlers at the Watchtower Society) in a futile hope of propping up his self-destructing heresy, Russellism.

Also, bear in mind, that N(ew)W(orld)L(iar), in fact, neither worships Jesus, nor God the Father.

 

[NWL]

Hi betsy123. Remember that NWL does not care about what is written in the Bible; instead, NWL reveres a non-Bible--an anti-Bible--called "The New World Translation". It is well, also, to bear in mind that N(ew)W(orld)L(iar) is (because of the brainwashing he's received at the hands of his programmers/handlers at the Watchtower Society) Satanically driven to deliberately attempt obfuscation, as much as he can, against his marks.

He will come at you with a dark cloud of un-Biblical, meaningless jargon in futile hope of, somehow, thereby, saving face for his irrational, anti-Christ Russellism. For instance:

We find nowhere, in Scripture, any such meaningless jargon as NWL's "worship the Father through Jesus". Neither in Philippians 2, nor anywhere else.

NWL, of course, will never be able to answer even the least bit coherently for his jargon, "worship him directly". In the Bible, of course, we do not find such nonsense as NWL promulgates; we never find NWL's imaginary distinction: "directly worship"/"indirectly worship". NWL will never give you anything that amounts to more than a loud fart, if you prod him about his nonsense.

It sure does look like NWL is saying that Jesus commands people to worship NOT Jesus--that is, to NOT worship Jesus--does it not? Nowhere, in Scripture, do we ever find Jesus instructing or directing people to NOT worship Jesus. Nowhere. So, N(ew)W(orld)L(iar) has simply lied, once again.

And yet, look at what the hypocrite, NWL, says:

Why, other than rank hypocrisy, would anybody say, out of one side of his mouth that we are not to worship Jesus, and then, out of the other side of his mouth, say "I do worship Jesus"? If Jesus really commanded NWL to not worship Jesus, then NWL is plainly stating that NWL is flagrantly disobeying what he claims Jesus has commanded of him.

NWL will say something like "We are not to DIRECTLY worship Jesus". Of course, that's NWL's un-Biblical, meaningless jargon at play--his imaginary distinction between "worshipping directly" and "worshipping indirectly". Watch how NWL will (because he has no choice but to) pathetically embarrass himself in pretending to try to explain his imaginary distinction between "worshipping directly" and "worshipping indirectly". Here are two meaningless phrases:

• "worship Jesus directly"
• "worship Jesus indirectly"

Guess what: NWL will never be able to coherently answer for either of them.

Observe, also, that NWL has another failed, pet piece of jargon: "we worship the Father through Jesus". It's funny to observe NWL's "worship THROUGH" in light of NWL's "worship DIRECTLY". See, now NWL has caused himself more embarrassment: How is worshiping an object, A, THROUGH some other object, B, worshiping A DIRECTLY? Would it not, rather, seem at least a little more like approaching reasonableness to say, instead, that "worshiping THROUGH" is "worshiping INDIRECTLY", so that, when NWL says that God the Father is to be "worshiped THROUGH" Jesus, NWL means that God the Father is to be "worshiped INDIRECTLY"?

So, now, let's ask NWL:

• NWL, you tell us that we are not to "directly worship" Jesus, whatever that's supposed to mean. So, what about God the Father? Are we to "directly worship" God the Father? Yes or No?
• And, NWL, when you tell us that we are to "worship God the Father THROUGH" Jesus, are you saying that we are to "worship God the Father DIRECTLY", or, rather, are you saying that we are to "worship God the Father INDIRECTLY"? Which is it?
• Are we to "DIRECTLY worship" God the Father, or are we to "INDIRECTLY worship" God the Father?

Of course, if NWL says that to worship God the Father "THROUGH" Jesus is to worship God the Father "DIRECTLY", then he further manifests just how much a clown he has made himself to be. To go THROUGH point B to get to point A is, of course, to NOT go to point A DIRECTLY.

And, if NWL says that to worship God the Father "THROUGH" Jesus is to worship God the Father "INDIRECTLY", then, bearing in mind that NWL commands that Jesus is only to be worshiped "INDIRECTLY", we ask NWL: Then WHO is to be worshiped "DIRECTLY", if neither Jesus, nor God the Father?

NWL, for the purpose of deliberately attempting to obfuscate, uses little language games (whether invented by himself, or by his programmers/handlers at the Watchtower Society) in a futile hope of propping up his self-destructing heresy, Russellism.

Also, bear in mind, that N(ew)W(orld)L(iar), in fact, neither worships Jesus, nor God the Father.

As usual, you try and use word games to try and win arguments, the sad part is whilst you may think what you say sounds smart,rather it makes you sound silly and uneducated.

Answer these questions and you will solve your conundrum:

Who did Paul thank indirectly and directly in Romans 1:8 when he says “First of all, I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of you”.

Who indirectly and who directly gave the law in the OT out of God and Moses according to John 1:17, that states “the Law was given through Moses”.

When Peter said to Christians in 1 Peter 2:5 “[you are] to be a holy priesthood, in order to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” who were people directly offering sacrifices to and who were they indirectly offering sacrifices to?

As you can see your repeated claim that worshipping the Father through Jesus is unbilical in itself is umbilical, many persons have done things through people, Jesus himself said “no one comes to the Father expect through me”(John 14:6), thus taking Jesus words for what they say, if we wish to do anything for, or to the Father the actions and thoughts have to be through Jesus, this is basic.

Lets wait and see if you play word games and personal attacks to try and prove yourself right instead of using actual scripture references, nothing ever changes with you.

 

[7djengo7]

Who did Paul thank indirectly and directly in Romans 1:8 when he says “First of all, I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of you”. [sic]

Paul wrote:

"I thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Paul did not write:

• "I DIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."
• "I INDIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Which, if either, would you say Paul should have written, instead of what he did write?

Who indirectly and who directly gave the law in the OT out of God and Moses according to John 1:17, that states “the Law was given through Moses”. [sic]

John wrote:

"For the law was given by Moses"

John did not write:

• "For the law was DIRECTLY given by Moses"
• "For the law was INDIRECTLY given by Moses"

Which, if either, would you say John should have written, instead of what he did write?

When Peter said to Christians in 1 Peter 2:5 “[you are] to be a holy priesthood, in order to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” who were people directly offering sacrifices to and who were they indirectly offering sacrifices to?

Peter wrote:

"...to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

Peter did not write:

• "...to DIRECTLY offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."
• "...to INDIRECTLY offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

Which, if either, would you say Peter should have written, instead of what he did write?

Your persistently writing things like​

As you can see [sic] your repeated claim that worshipping [sic] the Father through Jesus is unbilical [sic] in itself is umbilical [sic],

indeed,​

...makes you sound silly and uneducated.

"unbilical"??
"umbilical"??

:cattyfan: <--You should try letting your cat write your posts for you. Could be an improvement!

Here's something else you wrote which also "makes you sound silly and uneducated":

many persons have done things through people,

(For instance, Satan has done many things against God and man through your programmers/handlers at the Watchtower Society, a.k.a, the Russellite people!)

Jesus himself said “no one comes to the Father expect through me”(John 14:6),

Jesus said:

"no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Notice that Jesus said NEITHER​

"no man cometh DIRECTLY unto the Father, but by me."​

NOR​

"no man cometh INDIRECTLY unto the Father, but by me."​

Which (if either) would you say Jesus should have said, instead of what He did say?

thus taking Jesus [sic] words for what they say, if we wish to do anything for, or to the Father the actions and thoughts have to be through Jesus, this is basic.

Of course, as you can't even begin to try to explain your own words, why would any intelligent person think that you have even the slightest clue about Jesus' words? Obviously, no intelligent person would think you do.

Lets [sic] wait and see if you play word games

I can only assume, here, that you're inviting me to play games of "Let's Find The Missing Apostrophe!" and "Where Are The Question Marks??" No?

and personal attacks to try and prove yourself right instead of using actual scripture references, nothing ever changes with you.

I am right, though. And, of course, you are wrong.

As you can see, in this very post, I have simply used the actual Scripture references you mentioned, so that you can see, as well as I can see, that your meaningless jargon ("directly" and "indirectly") is nowhere to be found in those actual Scripture references.

Now, here are two things you wrote:

I do worship Jesus

I worship the Father by worshiping Jesus, who passes all glory to his father.

When you say, "I do worship Jesus", are you saying, "I do DIRECTLY worship Jesus", or, "I do INDIRECTLY worship Jesus"? Which?

When you say, "I worship the Father", are you saying, "I DIRECTLY worship the Father", or, "I INDIRECTLY worship the Father"? Which?

When you say, "...by worshiping Jesus", are you saying, "...by DIRECTLY worshiping Jesus", or, "...by INDIRECTLY worshiping Jesus"? Which?

When you say, "...who passes all glory to his father", are you saying, "...who passes all glory DIRECTLY to his father", or, "...who passes all glory INDIRECTLY to his father"? Which?

One either worships Jesus, or not. One either worships God the Father, or not. You, of course, worship neither Jesus, nor God the Father.

Remember, also, (as I've already pointed out) that you wrote

Jesus instructs and directs people to worship God and not himself

So, were it true (and it's not!) that you worship Jesus, then it would be true that you are flagrantly disobeying what you, here, claim Jesus "instructs and directs" you to do. Of course, so far, not so much as a peep out of you to try to justify that glaring inconsistency of yours. Why? Because, as you and I both know, you have no hope of justifying it.

 

[7djengo7]

Again, to who's [sic] glory is it to [sic] that we bend the knee to Jesus according to Phil 2:8-11, the Fathers [sic] or Jesus?

Which are you saying, here?

1. "we bend the knee DIRECTLY to Jesus"
2. "we bend the knee INDIRECTLY to Jesus"

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

Which are you saying, here?

1. "If we DIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"
2. "If we INDIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"

 

[TrevorL]

Greetings again 7djengo7,

Which are you saying, here?

1. "we bend the knee DIRECTLY to Jesus"
2. "we bend the knee INDIRECTLY to Jesus"

1. "we bend the knee DIRECTLY to Jesus"

Which are you saying, here?

1. "If we DIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"
2. "If we INDIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"

1. "If we DIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus".

Jesus is the appointed means whereby we can approach the Father, because Jesus through his crucifixion, death and resurrection has opened the way to salvation. Ultimately the work is from God the Father and when we bow to Jesus it is to the glory of God the Father.

Kind regards
Trevor

 

[betsy123]

Here they are again, lets see what you make up this time, please answer:

Again, to who's glory is it to that we bend the knee to Jesus according to Phil 2:8-11, the Fathers or Jesus?

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

Good thing you asked that:

It's God (Father), who receives the worship -

because, Jesus is God (in the flesh)!

If a human was not sacrificed [upon Jesus death] what was, God? You've already implied it was God that was sacrificed so answer me this, how can God die? And don't you even think to say it was Jesus humanity that died since you've already denied the fact that "God sacrificed a human", so deal with the problem you've created.

Jesus (God in the flesh), sacrificed Himself for mankind.

God made Himself human (as the human Messiah - Jesus), the ultimate sacrificial "lamb" to redeem mankind.


God made Himself human so He can die for us!
So He died. What of it?
He rose, too.....didn't He?

You seem to imply that God can not do that - or anything else He want to do.
If He wanted to become human so He can suffer and die for us - who sez He can't do it? Jehovah's Witnesses?

You seem to imagine He's bound by some laws!

Do you doubt His omnipotence, as well?

Here:

Psalm 19

The Perfect Revelation of the Lord

To the Chief Musician. A Psalm of David.

14
Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart
Be acceptable in Your sight,
O Lord, my strength and my Redeemer.




Psalm 78
35 And they remembered that God was their rock, and the high God their redeemer.

All you keep doing is repeating pointless statements, what does it mean that I'm "giving you bits and pieces", where have I only given you bits and pieces? And in particular what information am I leaving out to justify you not answering each and everyone of the questions I've asked.

Next time you reply how about you don't reply with a broad statement that doesn't really explain anything in your attempt not to answer the question I have posed you.



How does your post 401 justify not answering any of the questions I've asked, if you don't or can't explain then you have no reason NOT to answer.

It's your argument that's pointless.
Not only does it contradicts the Scriptures....your belief also defies logic!


I have to keep repeating it.... because you keep ignoring it!

Here is your dilemma again:



***Many titles that are God's have been bestowed on Jesus..... and, vice versa.


Here is one rich sample:

Isaiah 54:5
"For your husband is your Maker, Whose name is the LORD of hosts;
And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, Who is called the God of all the earth.



See how intricately they are connected!


Yahweh is our Creator - the Lord of Hosts.
Jesus Christ is the Husband of the Church!
Jesus is the Holy One of Israel - the Redeemer (Messiah).
Our MAKER (Creator) is JESUS CHRIST!


***God has made many definitive declarations.
As an example: God does not share His glory with anyone!

***Jesus had made so many claims about Himself.
He even let Thomas believe that He (Jesus), is God!

Refer to the evidences given so far in this thread:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?133025-JESUS-IS-GOD-HIMSELF







Jesus is Yahweh! (in the flesh). He has to be!

Because, if He's not God Himself - that makes Jesus a usurper, a liar and thus -
not credible.

We can even say, that would make Jesus, demonic - deceitfully misleading people!

Non-Trinitarian belief is loaded with contradictions from the Scriptures, and it makes God/Jesus and the Bible, unreliable.


How can God/Jesus teach something that knocks down His own credibility?

 

[NWL]

to who's glory is it to that we bend the knee to Jesus according to Phil 2:8-11, the Fathers or Jesus?

If we worship the Father through Jesus who is receiving that worship ultimately, Jesus or the Father?

Good thing you asked that:

It's God (Father), who receives the worship -

because, Jesus is God (in the flesh)!

So going back to the reason why I asked the question and since you've admitted that people bending the knee to Jesus and worshiping the Father through Jesus is worship to the Father, then how does this show Jesus and the Father are one in a trinity (with the HS) since its not to Jesus that worship is actually going to but rather the Father. What you've admitted and what the overall bible shows it that its to the Father worship ultimately goes.

(John 4:23) ".. [Jesus said] Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him.."

No mention of Jesus or the HS, just the Father alone, out of Jesus own mouth.

If a human was not sacrificed [upon Jesus death] what was, God? You've already implied it was God that was sacrificed so answer me this, how can God die? And don't you even think to say it was Jesus humanity that died since you've already denied the fact that "God sacrificed a human", so deal with the problem you've created.

Jesus (God in the flesh), sacrificed Himself for mankind.

God made Himself human (as the human Messiah - Jesus), the ultimate sacrificial "lamb" to redeem mankind.

God made Himself human so He can die for us!
So He died. What of it?
He rose, too.....didn't He?

You seem to imply that God can not do that - or anything else He want to do.
If He wanted to become human so He can suffer and die for us - who sez He can't do it? Jehovah's Witnesses?

You seem to imagine He's bound by some laws!

Where have you answered my question? Instead of answering my question you've written a number of broad and generalized statements and have not been specific in your answer by using ideas such as the 'Godman' to try and get around answering the question.

Again what part of Jesus died, his human part? His God part? You've previously stated to me "Furthermore - you're saying God sacrificed a human, (a practice He abhors and forbid)" in such a manner to show implied disagreement with the said quote, so you obviously can't believe that God sacrificed Jesus human part so which is it? His God part, if you suggesting Jesus sacrificed his Divine God side then answer the question how is it possible that God can die.

Confirm for us you believe God died and explain how it is possible God died when he is eternal.

Do you doubt His omnipotence, as well?

What have I said that could possibly be taken to suggest that I doubt his omnipotence? Stop creating strawmen.

It's your argument that's pointless.
Not only does it contradicts the Scriptures....your belief also defies logic!

I have to keep repeating it.... because you keep ignoring it!

Here is your dilemma again:

***Many titles that are God's have been bestowed on Jesus..... and, vice versa.

Again you are vague, what belief of mine have I given that defies logic? What understanding of mine contradicts scripture? Broad and baseless comments.

How is YHWH having titles and Jesus having the same titles a dilemma?

If Jehovah alone is a savior and yet makes another savior to save a group of people through, how many saviors are there, one or two?

(Judges 3:15) Then the Israelites called to Jehovah for help, so Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Eʹhud the son of Geʹra, a Benʹja·min·ite who was left-handed.

(Isaiah 43:11) I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”

E'hud is a savior according to Judges 3:15, Jehovah is the only savior according to Isaiah 43:11, how many saviors do we see in the above, 1 or 2?

 

[NWL]

Which are you saying, here?

1. "we bend the knee DIRECTLY to Jesus"
2. "we bend the knee INDIRECTLY to Jesus"

Which are you saying, here?

1. "If we DIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"
2. "If we INDIRECTLY worship the Father through Jesus"

We worship Jesus directly, this worship, in turn, goes to the Father.

(John 14:6) "..Jesus said...No one comes to the Father except through me.."

(Philippians 2:10, 11) "..in the name of Jesus every knee should bend...and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.."

Worshipping the Father means to give him worship the way he instructed it, his instruction was to worship him through his Son, thus to worship the Father we worship the Son, again, this, in turn, goes to the Father.

You can try and argue it as much as you want and try and play as many word games as you want, unless you're willing to change what the Bible actually says you will never change the fact that Jesus himself said that we are to approach the Father through him, and that scripture states that every knee bends, not to Jesus own glory but for the glory of God the Father. Bowing to Jesus equals worshipping the Father.

(John 4:23) "..[Jesus said] true worshippers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for indeed, the Father is looking for ones like these to worship him.."

True worshippers worship the Father, no mention of Jesus or the HS is found in John 4:23. If you don't worship the Father alone by the direction he has ordained -that being through his Son- then you aren't a true worshipper, fact!

 

[NWL]

Paul wrote:

"I thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Paul did not write:

• "I DIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."
• "I INDIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Which, if either, would you say Paul should have written, instead of what he did write?

I don't subscribe to the two examples you've given so I won't be as arrogant to entertain your usage of what Paul "should" have written. But to answer your question aside from the poor language Paul directly thanked Jesus Christ but his thanks were intended for God. Now answer me this, if Paul directly thanked Jesus who was the final recipient, Jesus or God according to the verse?

John wrote:

"For the law was given by Moses"

John did not write:

• "For the law was DIRECTLY given by Moses"
• "For the law was INDIRECTLY given by Moses"

Which, if either, would you say John should have written, instead of what he did write?

I don't subscribe to the two examples you've given so I won't be as arrogant to entertain your usage of what John "should" have written, as you put it. But to answer your question aside from the poor language the Law was given to Israel directly from Moses. Now answer me this, since it was Moses that gave the law directly who was originator of the law, God or Moses?

Peter wrote:

"...to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

Peter did not write:

• "...to DIRECTLY offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."
• "...to INDIRECTLY offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ."

Which, if either, would you say Peter should have written, instead of what he did write?

You've used a translation that has translated the Greek "dia" word in the above verse as "by" instead of "through". I'm not suggesting that "by" is an incorrect translation since it's not, neither would I say "through" in place of "by" is incorrect since bibles vary on either word in the said passage. What I say next applies to the usuage "through" in many Bibles.

I don't subscribe to the two examples you've given so I won't be as arrogant to entertain your usage of what Peter "should" have written, as you put it. But to answer your question aside from the poor language the Peter offered the sacrifices directly to Jesus. Now answer me this, if the sacrifices were offered through Jesus, who was Peter's intended final recipient according to the verse, Jesus or God the Father?

Your persistently writing things like​

indeed,​

"unbilical"??
"umbilical"??

:cattyfan: <--You should try letting your cat write your posts for you. Could be an improvement!

Here's something else you wrote which also "makes you sound silly and uneducated":

Lol. The difference I see in both our errors is that mine was simply a typo, something the most fluent typist are guilty of, whereas your error lies within your idea's and your means to communicate them, to try and put them on the same level is quite humorous and shows a lot about the way you reason and your character.

Jesus instructs and directs people to worship God and not himself

So, were it true (and it's not!) that you worship Jesus, then it would be true that you are flagrantly disobeying what you, here, claim Jesus "instructs and directs" you to do. Of course, so far, not so much as a peep out of you to try to justify that glaring inconsistency of yours. Why? Because, as you and I both know, you have no hope of justifying it.

I've explained this to you many times djengo, if you don't agree with it that's fine, just stop bringing the same point up over and over again despite a lack of rebuttal other than word games and character attacks, I'll explain it again.

We are to worship the God the Father, Jesus himself states this in John 4:23 which I have shown you many times. Being instructed to worship the Father does NOT contradict me making the claim that the correct way to worship the Father is by doing so through the Son. Again the understanding is in the wording, to worship the Father means to worship the Son since it was the Fathers instruction that we must worship him by worshiping through Jesus.

In the OT people worshipped the Father directly (not sin offerings however), when his son came this changed and God permanently set Jesus up as High Priest and mediator, the process of worshipping the Father changed from worshipping him directly to worshiping through the one whom he commanded namely Jesus.

 

[7djengo7]

We worship Jesus directly, this worship, in turn, goes to the Father.

Jesus did not want people to worship him directly.

Thanks! You are really quite shameless in your charlatanry!

If Jesus did not want people to "worship Jesus directly", then whom did Jesus want people to "worship directly"?

 

[7djengo7]

Who did Paul thank indirectly and directly in Romans 1:8 when he says “First of all, I give thanks to my God through Jesus Christ concerning all of you”.

Paul wrote:

"I thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Paul did not write:

• "I DIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."
• "I INDIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."

Which, if either, would you say Paul should have written, instead of what he did write?

I don't subscribe to the two examples you've given so I won't be as arrogant to entertain your usage of what Paul "should" have written. But to answer your question aside from the poor language Paul directly thanked Jesus Christ but his thanks were intended for God. Now answer me this, if Paul directly thanked Jesus who was the final recipient, Jesus or God according to the verse?

So, according to you, Paul neither "DIRECTLY thanked his God through Jesus Christ", nor did Paul "INDIRECTLY thank his God through Jesus Christ". Is that it?

Paul directly thanked Jesus Christ but his thanks were intended for God.

"[Paul's] thanks were intended for God", you say. Now, by that, do you mean that Paul was thanking God the Father, or, on the contrary, do you mean that Paul was not thanking God the Father? Which is it?

And, if you mean that Paul was thanking God the Father, then, would you say that Paul was "DIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, or, would you say, on the contrary, that Paul was "INDIRECTLY thanking" God the Father? And, if you mean, instead, that, when Paul wrote "I thank my God", Paul was not thanking God the Father, why, um, well....have fun trying to explain that.

If you would say that Paul was "DIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, then why do you refuse to (as you say, above) "subscribe" to the modification of what Paul wrote by your own jargon, as follows: "I DIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."?

If you would say that Paul was "INDIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, then why do you refuse to (as you say, above) "subscribe" to the modification of what Paul wrote by your own jargon, as follows: "I INDIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."?

It's amusing that you are so miserably riddled with inconsistency that you have forced yourself into actually, selectively (as your calculation calls for) trying to disown the imposition of your own jargon onto what Paul wrote, by saying "I don't subscribe" to it.

Now answer me this, if Paul directly thanked Jesus who was the final recipient, Jesus or God according to the verse?

What verse are you talking about, here, when you say "Paul directly thanked Jesus"? In what verse does Paul say "I thank Jesus"? Not Romans 1:8, of course. Now, there is, in fact, a verse in which Paul says

And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful... (1 Timothy 1:12 KJV)

But, of course, we're talking about the verse you brought up: Romans 1:8. Also, guess what else is nowhere to be found in Romans 1:8: your nonsense phrase, "the final recipient". That's just one more game piece you've tried to impose upon us in your language game; since, as you and I both know, you can't deal honestly with the light shined upon your false teaching, you are forced to try to obfuscate the situation you have put yourself in. You do that by means of your un-Biblical, nonsense jargon.

Oh, and, by the way, would you say Jehovah's Witnesses are altogether really gung ho into praying to Jesus? Since you say "Paul directly thanked Jesus", I'm curious as to what (laughably futile) ploy you will resort, in order to try to explain how Paul's thanking Jesus was NOT a prayer of thanksgiving to Jesus. Have fun trying to tell us how Paul (who clearly acknowledged, in 1 Timothy 1:12 KJV, that "I thank Christ Jesus our Lord") was somehow NOT praying to Jesus in his thanking Jesus.:Clete:

 

[7djengo7]

In the OT people worshipped the Father directly (not sin offerings however), when his son came this changed and God permanently set Jesus up as High Priest and mediator, the process of worshipping the Father changed from worshipping him directly to worshiping through the one whom he commanded namely Jesus.

From the above, it is clear that, in your thinking, "worshiping X through Y" is "worshiping X indirectly".

Jesus did not want people to worship him directly.

Yet, you do say:

I do worship Jesus

So, you do say you worship Jesus, you just (in obedience to what you pretend He commands) do not worship Jesus "directly". Now, if you worship Jesus, but not "directly", that means you worship Jesus "indirectly". (There is, of course, no escape for you from this; you're not exempt from the law of the excluded middle.)

According to you, to worship God the Father "indirectly" is to worship God the Father "through" someone/something other than God the Father, namely, "through" Jesus.

Thus, by exact analogy from your own use of your own jargon ("worship directly" and "worship through") we see that, according to you, to worship Jesus "indirectly" is to worship Jesus "through" someone/something other than Jesus. So, when you worship Jesus "indirectly", "through" whom, or what, do you worship Jesus?

Compare:

• To worship X "indirectly" is to worship X "through" Y.
• To worship [God the Father] "indirectly" is to worship God the Father "through" [Jesus].
• To worship [Jesus] "indirectly" is to worship Jesus "through" [????].

Please tell us what name you would replace the four question marks with. "Through" whom, or what, do you worship Jesus "indirectly"?

 

[betsy123]

So going back to the reason why I asked the question and since you've admitted that people bending the knee to Jesus and worshiping the Father through Jesus is worship to the Father, then how does this show Jesus and the Father are one in a trinity (with the HS) since its not to Jesus that worship is actually going to but rather the Father. What you've admitted and what the overall bible shows it that its to the Father worship ultimately goes.

It goes to the Father ONLY if you believe Jesus is God Himself!

If not, you commit idolatry in Jesus Christ!

You go against the very First Commandment:


Exodus 20
20 And God spoke all these words, saying:

2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.

3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.

4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them.
For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God,


If you don't believe Jesus is God Himself - then, you're bowing down to,
and serving a likeness of God.


That must be one of the reasons - if not the only reason - why it is important to equally believe that Jesus is not only the Son of God, but that Jesus is also God Himself.



Jesus had stated that the First Commandment is the most important of all.


--------------------


You have not read my posts!
Either that - or, everything pretty much goes over your head! Read again!
That's all been explained!


Are you a Jehovah's Witness?
I asked because they (JW) tend to have their blinders on when arguing for their belief!
They don't read their opponents argument/rebuttals, but just keep plowing on ahead like as if nothing was given at all!

I suppose they're forbidden to read materials that aren't published by JW or WatchTower!



If you're going to engage in a discussion, you've got to address the argument that's been given to you! Otherwise, you're simply preaching - repeating the false teachings of JW (on the pretext that you're "discussing").

I'm not here to read your preaching based on false teachings - I'm challenging that belief!
You're being misled - and in turn, also, misleading others!


How can Christians just stand by and watch others - especially brothers and sisters - fall off a cliff, without doing anything to warn them?

I know that JW members don't consider any non-JW members to be their brothers and sisters.

Your heart may be in the right place (of wanting to practice your faith in God), but that it's unfortunate you've been deceived by false preachers - thus, even if we may have major differences in our belief, I do think of you as a brother.

It's in that spirit that I continue to challenge you.




My point isn't going to go away, NWL.

READ IT!

I have to keep repeating it.... because you keep ignoring it!

Here is your dilemma again:



***Many titles that are God's have been bestowed on Jesus..... and, vice versa.


Here is one rich sample:

Isaiah 54:5
"For your husband is your Maker, Whose name is the LORD of hosts;
And your Redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, Who is called the God of all the earth.



See how intricately they are connected!


Yahweh is our Creator - the Lord of Hosts.
Jesus Christ is the Husband of the Church!
Jesus is the Holy One of Israel - the Redeemer (Messiah).
Our MAKER (Creator) is JESUS CHRIST!


***God has made many definitive declarations.
As an example: God does not share His glory with anyone!

***Jesus had made so many claims about Himself.
He even let Thomas believe that He (Jesus), is God!

Refer to the evidences given so far in this thread:
http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?133025-JESUS-IS-GOD-HIMSELF







Jesus is Yahweh! (in the flesh). He has to be!

Because, if He's not God Himself - that makes Jesus a usurper, a liar and thus -
not credible.

We can even say, that would make Jesus, demonic - deceitfully misleading people!

Non-Trinitarian belief is loaded with contradictions from the Scriptures, and it makes God/Jesus and the Bible, unreliable.


How can God/Jesus teach something that knocks down His own credibility?

Which part of that isn't clear enough?



Lol. If you can't answer that - why don't you go to your elders and ask them that question?
Hand it to them!


If you insist on just regurgitating JW materials that doesn't address what I've repeatedly said - then, I suppose I'll have to deal with JW and WatchTower head-on, right here on this forum!
I have a way of doing that - and I've done it before!

We don't need you as a "middle-man," right? I'll have to go straight to the source!
I'll be forced to create a thread about them!

 

[newbirth61]

Jesus cannot be God if Jesus ascended to his God... Jesus cannot be God if God sent him to be the savior of the world... Jesus cannot be God if God made him Lord and Christ...

 

[newbirth61]

What do you think? Present Scripture for your answer whether negative or positive

Jesus never said that he was God. In fact Jesus said that God was his Father and God the Father spoke from heaven and said that Jesus is his Son.

John 10:36
Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Matthew 3:17
And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased

John 20:17
Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God.

 

[NWL]

It goes to the Father ONLY if you believe Jesus is God Himself!

So the evidence so far suggest that worship despite being given to Jesus goes to the Father and not to Jesus himself yet this is somehow "only if you believe Jesus is God", that isn't what the scripture say though is it. Moreover you're excusing the point and simply throwing in that random statement.

We literally have the fact "worship and given to Jesus isn't for his glory but rather for the Father glory" and you just throw "because Jesus is God" in there like it changes anything. Throwing your idea into the equation when you aren’t; even backing up what you say with scripture is hardly evidence of anything, try harder. Once again worship given to Jesus is clearly demonstrated as being to the Fathers glory and not Jesus.

If not, you commit idolatry in Jesus Christ!

You go against the very First Commandment:

Exodus 20
20 And God spoke all these words, saying:
2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
4 “You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
5 you shall not bow down to them nor serve them.
For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God,

If you don't believe Jesus is God Himself - then, you're bowing down to,
and serving a likeness of God.


That must be one of the reasons - if not the only reason - why it is important to equally believe that Jesus is not only the Son of God, but that Jesus is also God Himself.

Wrong, you have misconstrued the entire context of Exo 20:1-4 and simply cherry-picked words in order to try and bolster your point. Re-read Exo 20:1-4 again:

"..Then God spoke all these words: 2 “I am Jehovah your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. 3 You must not have any other gods besides me. 4 “You must not make for yourself a carved image or a form like anything that is in the heavens above or on the earth below or in the waters under the earth.." (Exodus 20:1-4)

As you can see the commandment wasn't what you made it out to be, namely worshipping someone in the likeness of God, but rather making a carved image in the likeness of God. There is a difference when Man, who cannot see God creates an image of God and worshipping that image and God himself creating an image of himself and commanding others to worship the perfect image of him. Only God is capable of creating an image that so perfectly resembles him, and that is exactly what Jesus is, a created image of God, "He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation" (Colossians 1:15).

You have not read my posts!
Either that - or, everything pretty much goes over your head! Read again!
That's all been explained!

Are you a Jehovah's Witness?
I asked because they (JW) tend to have their blinders on when arguing for their belief!
They don't read their opponents argument/rebuttals, but just keep plowing on ahead like as if nothing was given at all!

You do realise it took about four post of me repeating the same three questions over and over for me to get an answer, you are in no position to speak to me on the merits of answering questions.

I am one of Jehovah's Witnesses, it is displayed as such on my profile.

If you're going to engage in a discussion, you've got to address the argument that's been given to you! Otherwise, you're simply preaching - repeating the false teachings of JW (on the pretext that you're "discussing").

I'm not here to read your preaching based on false teachings - I'm challenging that belief!
You're being misled - and in turn, also, misleading others!


How can Christians just stand by and watch others - especially brothers and sisters - fall off a cliff, without doing anything to warn them?

I know that JW members don't consider any non-JW members to be their brothers and sisters.

Your heart may be in the right place (of wanting to practice your faith in God), but that it's unfortunate you've been deceived by false preachers - thus, even if we may have major differences in our belief, I do think of you as a brother.

It's in that spirit that I continue to challenge you.

I made a reply to this in my last post to you (#409), I will cop and post what I said, maybe this time you'll answer the question you ignored, something you accuse me of ironically.

How is YHWH having titles and Jesus having the same titles a dilemma?

If Jehovah alone is a savior and yet makes another savior to save a group of people through, how many saviors are there, one or two?

(Judges 3:15) Then the Israelites called to Jehovah for help, so Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Eʹhud the son of Geʹra, a Benʹja·min·ite who was left-handed.

(Isaiah 43:11) I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”

E'hud is a savior according to Judges 3:15, Jehovah is the only savior according to Isaiah 43:11, how many saviors do we see in the above, 1 or 2?

My point isn't going to go away, NWL.

I've dealt with your point, two people sharing titles does nothing to my understanding of the scriptures, it doesn't contradict anything, however it does with your belief system, answer my above question in bold about saviors.

 

[NWL]

Thanks! You are really quite shameless in your charlatanry!

If Jesus did not want people to "worship Jesus directly", then whom did Jesus want people to "worship directly"?

Djengo your posts bore me, you go around in circles and refuse deal with any points or questions I make, what’s more you have the audacity to load you responses with ridiculous wording. Take a look and see all the questions you ask (non rhetorical question have been extracted), does a reasonable person ask such so many questions.

1. If you would say that Paul was "DIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, then why do you refuse to (as you say, above) "subscribe" to the modification of what Paul wrote by your own jargon, as follows: "I DIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."?
3. If you would say that Paul was "INDIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, then why do you refuse to (as you say, above) "subscribe" to the modification of what Paul wrote by your own jargon, as follows: "I INDIRECTLY thank my God through Jesus Christ..."?
5. If Jesus did not want people to "worship Jesus directly", then whom did Jesus want people to "worship directly"?
7. Now, by that, do you mean that Paul was thanking God the Father, or, on the contrary, do you mean that Paul was not thanking God the Father?
9. And, if you mean that Paul was thanking God the Father, then, would you say that Paul was "DIRECTLY thanking" God the Father, or, would you say, on the contrary, that Paul was "INDIRECTLY thanking" God the Father? And, if you mean, instead, that, when Paul wrote "I thank my God", Paul was not thanking God the Father, why, um, well....have fun trying to explain that.
11. Oh, and, by the way, would you say Jehovah's Witnesses are altogether really gung hointo praying to Jesus?
13. Thus, by exact analogy from your own use of your own jargon ("worship directly" and "worship through") we see that, according to you, to worship Jesus "indirectly" is to worship Jesus "through" someone/something other than Jesus. So, when you worship Jesus "indirectly", "through" whom, or what, do you worship Jesus?
15. Please tell us what name you would replace the four question marks with. "Through" whom, or what, do you worship Jesus "indirectly"?

If you wish to engage with me ask a reasonable amount of questions and don't make it pain staking in the process.

Once again we worship the Father by worshiping through Jesus, what is utterly silly to do is apply words into the argument that aren’t directly found in scripture (your indirectly, directly nonsense) and then get upset that what the scriptures says -which are also my belief- do not adhere to your unbiblical wording which ironically in itself is your "extra-biblical" jargon.

You can apple anything of your man made wording to the fact that Jesus said "no one comes to the Father expect through me", no amount of word play will ever change those words.

 

[NWL]

From the above, it is clear that, in your thinking, "worshiping X through Y" is "worshiping X indirectly".

Jesus did not want people to worship him directly.

Yet, you do say:

I do worship Jesus

This is what happens when you don't bother to try and understand the other side of the argument and cherry pick words out of paragraph and misquote me.

My statement in full was actually "I do worship Jesus since this is the method that the father deems all persons to worship him", as you can see I made a clear classification that to worship the Father means to worship the Son, you cannot take my words out of the context of the complete statement I made.

I meant what I said when I said "Jesus did not want people to worship him directly", he didn't, Jesus did not want people to worship him with the mind frame that all worship was going to him and him alone. Jesus wanted people to worship the Father directly, which in turn meant that they have to go through him as he said, "no one goes to the Father expect through me".

I do not mean to insult when I ask this since you do not write as if English is your second language, but is English your second language? I do not understand how a native English speaker could not understand the basicness of what I and the scriptures plainly say. I already know what you're thinking by my reply, "how can you say you Jesus didn't want him to worship him directly when you just said Jesus wanted people to worship the Father directly, which in turn meant that they have to worship through him". Let's wait and see if you start running in circles again.