The Hebrew has "YHWH" in verse 2.
I was referring to the actual verse that he quoted - he changed "Lord" to "Jehovah."
Is Jesus God?
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
I was referring to the actual verse that he quoted - he changed "Lord" to "Jehovah."
I've answered that, too. I'll repeat the gist of my response to that:
Jesus isn't like any other human saviors (those who saved Israel).
Jesus saved MANKIND by dying for our sins! To compare the prophecied Messiah (Jesus) to saviors who'd been annointed by God to save Israel, is to diminish what Jesus Christ had undergone for man, and the importance of such act to mankind.
If we take a close look at what JW teaches - a lot of it is about downgrading Jesus Christ!
Your understanding of the Scriptures has been warped by the false teachings that has been given you!
You're in a state of denial too. All the arguments JW give has been contrary or in conflict with the Scriptures! It is inconsistent with the Bible!
It's more than just sharing titles too! Read them again!
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Peter and John, according to you, "believed Jesus was...not God himself". Since, by "God himself", you mean God the Father, all you are saying is that Peter and John "believed Jesus was not God the Father". Bravo!
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
But, you have to remember: NWL doesn't worship Jesus; NWL doesn't serve Jesus Christ.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
At least you admit, here, that "what was not said" in Scripture is that Jesus is not God the Son.
You admit, of the Bible, that "what it does not say" is that God is not Triune.
You are, thereby, admitting that you did not learn your doctrines (that Jesus is not God the Son, and that God is not Triune) from Scripture; you are admitting that those beliefs of yours are extra-Biblical.
Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that Jesus is not God the Son?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.
Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that God is not Triune?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.
Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that God is not Triune?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Since, by "God", you mean God the Father, here is what you have just told us:
Well done, Professor! A+ for you!
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
You imagine you have lit upon some analogy between Acts 5:3-4 KJV and Matthew 25:33-46 KJV? Is that what you're trying to get at? If not, what? Now, why ever did you just copy/paste the Matthew passage, and then merely write part of a sentence, all broken up by ellipses, rather than actually try to spell out for us, as clearly and exactly as you can, the nature of your supposed analogy? Let's hear your explanation, right away, please! Very, very curious, here!
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds (according to your supposed analogy) to the Holy Spirit in the Acts passage?
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to God (in the phrase "but unto God") in the Acts passage?
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to the men mentioned, in the Acts passage, in the phrase, "not lied to men"?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to those who "gave [Jesus] meat" in the Matthew passage?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to "the least of these [Christ's] brethren" in the Matthew passage?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to Christ in the Matthew passage?
Go ahead, Professor, please flesh out for us, as clearly and concisely as you can, the analogy you suppose inheres between the two Scripture passages. We sit humbly and patiently at your feet, waiting to be made wise by your wisdom.
7djengo7
This space intentionally left blank
Now, feel free to try this out, also, just for fun:
You do believe the Trinity is "biblically [false]", don't you? Then, by all means, please show us where (according to your imagination) "the scripture says that God is [not] a Trinity". Should be no problem for you, right? I mean, after all, you learned "that God is [not] a Trinity" from Scripture, did you not?
Remember, as some of your fellow anti-Christs (as well as, perhaps, yourself) take great pride in pointing out, the word 'Trinity' cannot even be found in the Bible. And why not? Because the Bible does not teach "that God is [not] a Trinity".
What part of the Bible does not say that do you not understand???I will agree not to discuss anything that the scripture does not say if you will agree to same. It's that simple. Let's discuss only what the scripture say. Can you do that???
You seem to have an understanding problem.I will not be discussing anything that the scripture does not say. For example the scripture does not mention Trinity therefore the Trinity cannot be a point of discussion... the scripture does not say Jesus is God therefore Jesus is God cannot be a point of discussion. That would be like adding to the scripture.
Thomas said to Jesus "the Lord of me and the God of me."
You say "Jesus is not God."
Who's right, you or Thomas?
You imagine you have lit upon some analogy between Acts 5:3-4 KJV and Matthew 25:33-46 KJV? Is that what you're trying to get at? If not, what? Now, why ever did you just copy/paste the Matthew passage, and then merely write part of a sentence, all broken up by ellipses, rather than actually try to spell out for us, as clearly and exactly as you can, the nature of your supposed analogy? Let's hear your explanation, right away, please! Very, very curious, here!
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds (according to your supposed analogy) to the Holy Spirit in the Acts passage?
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to God (in the phrase "but unto God") in the Acts passage?
- Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to the men mentioned, in the Acts passage, in the phrase, "not lied to men"?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to those who "gave [Jesus] meat" in the Matthew passage?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to "the least of these [Christ's] brethren" in the Matthew passage?
- Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to Christ in the Matthew passage?
Go ahead, Professor, please flesh out for us, as clearly and concisely as you can, the analogy you suppose inheres between the two Scripture passages. We sit humbly and patiently at your feet, waiting to be made wise by your wisdom.
Ok it's quite simple...Ananias was speaking to Peter and the other apostles. Therefore when he said.. you have not lied to men he was referring to himself and the other apostles...So if you want to believe that Peter meant that Ananias was actually speaking with the holy Spirit and God you would have to conclude that He Peter was the holy Spirit / God. But since we know that is not the case then we have to conclude that the holy Spirit/God must be in Peter and the other apostles as dictated by the scripture. In any case as a believer if you lie it is God you are lying to. That is the reason I brought up the particular passage that says if you did it unto them you did it unto me... It's the same principle. Whatever a believer does to another believer it is done as unto Jesus. And whatever the unbeliever does to a believer it is done as unto Jesus. The father has committed all things to Jesus..
Yep and to us there is but one God The father... not one God The Trinity..1 Cor 8Since, by "God", you mean God the Father, here is what you have just told us:
Well done, Professor! A+ for you!
5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
That is your conclusion ... Jesus called his Father God... and there is only one God... Jesus told Peter that his father in heaven revealed to Peter that he Jesus was God's son... Did Jesus make a mistake.. because Jesus and the Thomas are not saying the same thing...
You missed it. Try again.
Thomas said to Jesus, "the Lord of me and the God of me."
You say "Jesus is not God."
Who's right, you or Thomas?
Why are you guys still discussing things that the scripture does not say??? Even if Thomas called Jesus God you can't use that to confirm something that the scripture does not say...
Lord of me would be Jesus... and God of me would be the father... remember that God made Jesus Lord and Christ... Unless you are saying that Jesus is the father... are you saying that Jesus is the father???
Are you calling Thomas a liar?
If not, then you should accept that Jesus is God based on the fact that Thomas is recorded as calling Jesus God, and that after which, Jesus DID NOT REBUKE HIM, as ANY righteous creature would do when called God.
We're discussing what is in scripture. You seem to reject what Scripture says in favor of your own extrabiblical belief that Jesus is not God.
Again:
Thomas said to Jesus, "the Lord of me and the God of me."
You say, "Jesus is not God."
Who's right, you or Thomas?
Thomas was speaking to Jesus, not muttering under his breath.
Are you asserting that ONLY the Father is God?
Because that's not what scripture says, and I thought you weren't interested in things the Bible does not say...
Lon
Well-known member
Yeah, it does. Fact. ANYBODY with a 6th grade reading level understands 'with' and 'was' God. It is as plain as that. No equivocation needed. Verbatim.
:nono:
:nono:
Means 'exactly what it says.'
:nono: Doesn't matter. The verse in question ALREADY says 'with.' Do YOU understand that? It is word for word.
The next phrase says 'and was.' You are done. We are done. I am done. It is this simple. Help me out. Say you understand this. Thanks.