Is Jesus Jehovah?

by lostsheep82 144 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • passwordprotected


    now back to your bible absolute of 'only God can be saviour', this is the same principle as who builds a house? the building firm Owner who employs the builder and can say he built it or the builder himself? Or both, Jesus saved us but could he have saved us if God himself hadn't given up his 'only begotten son' to die for us? which leads me neatly to another bible absolute 'God cannot die' jesus died therefore he cannot be god!

    I didn't say that only God can be saviour. It's very important that you read what the Bible actually says and then base your comments/replies/beliefs on that. Re-read my post, please, and you'll notice I quote from Isaiah 43:11

    11 I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”

    I'm quoting from the NWT which uses YHWH. It's there in black and white that YHWH alone is saviour. Not God. YHWH.

    So here's the thing. Either Bible is contradicting itself, which you as a loyal JW would never accept, or the Bible is saying that YHWH and Jesus are one and the same.

    Some other references for your consideration (and remember, the question is; Is Jesus Jehovah? We've already established from the Hebrew Scriptures that there's no saviour asides from Jehovah);

    Luke 2:1 because there was born to YOU today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord, in David’s city.

    Acts 5:31 God exalted this one as Chief Agent and Savior to his right hand

    Acts 13:23 From the offspring of this [man] according to his promise God has brought to Israel a savior, Jesus,

    2 Tim 1:10 but now it has been made clearly evident through the manifestation of our Savior, Christ Jesus

    1 John 4:14 In addition, we ourselves have beheld and are bearing witness that the Father has sent forth his Son as Savior of the world.

    Who did Luke, Paul and John believe was the Saviour? Was it Jehovah? Or was it Christ Jesus? Notice they don't attribute the title of Saviour to Jehovah but rather to Christ Jesus our Lord and.....Saviour.

    Rather than believe that there's a contradiction between Isaiah and all of these other Greek texts, why not accept and believe that God the Father sent forth YHWH into the world and that YHWH became flesh, being known as Immanuel (God With Us) and Jesus Christ, God's anointed one and Saviour?

    Why not repent in prayer to your Heavenly Father and ask for His forgiveness through Christ's sacrifice, accept the Holy Spirit into your heart and be 'born again'? (John 3:3) After-all a person can't even see the Kingdom of Heaven unless they've been born again.

  • Leolaia

    Here are some more quotes from Justin Martyr on Jesus as the "Lord" of the OT:

    "I consider it most appropriate that I repeat here the Scriptural passage which tells how He who is Angel and God and Lord, and who appeared as a man to Abraham, and who wrestled in human form with Jacob, was seen by the same Jacob as he fled from his brother Esau" (Dialogue 58).

    "He who is termed an Angel and is God was the only One who talked to and was seen by Moses" (Dialogue 60).

    "If, then, we are convinced that God has appeared in so many forms to Abraham, Jacob, and Moses, how can we doubt and refuse to believe that, in conformity with the will of the Universal Father, he could also be born man of a virgin?" (Dialogue 75).

    As I stated above, this is much more explicit and developed than what is found in Paul; yet it builds on the identification of Jesus with the Lord of the OT that is found in Paul and elsewhere in the OT.

  • Chalam

    Good stuff passowrdprotected, keep up those youtube moments!

    OK here's another.

    Is 9: 6 For to us a child is born,
    to us a son is given,
    and the government will be on his shoulders.
    And he will be called
    Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

    Another verse which mentions Jesus directly as Father and Holy Spirit.

    Otherwise, calling Jesus "Father" is blasphemy, see Jesus' warning in Matthew 23:8

    Here's more.

    John 14:16 And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Counselor to be with you forever— 17 the Spirit of truth. The world cannot accept him, because it neither sees him nor knows him. But you know him, for he lives with you and will be in you.

    In short, the Holy Spirit, is the Counselor who lives inside those who are born again, has the same name as Jesus, "Counselor". This is no surprise because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Jesus (Galatians 4:6) & The Father (Romans 8:14).

    Still not sure?

    John 14:26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.

    Or here
    John 15: 26 "When the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father, he will testify about me.

    Now consider this verse.

    Matthew 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

    No surprise it says "name" not "names".

    All the best,


  • slimboyfat

    In his article, 'Kyrios or Tetragram: A New Quest for the Original
    Septuagint' Albert Pietersma [1] relies mainly on internal textual
    evidence in the LXX to argue that kyrios rather than the tetragram
    stood in the original. This article was published in 1984 after a century
    in which a number of MS discoveries had cast serious doubt on the
    widely held assumption that the LXX translators had used kyrios to
    represent the tetragram of the Hebrew original. [2]

    Although the main component of Pietersma's argument is that various
    readings are better explained on the assumption of an original
    kyrios, he also argued that the textual nature of those fragments
    recently discovered containing various forms of the divine name
    indicated that they were not typical LXX texts. Since the fragments
    represented atypical (and in one case a non-LXX) texts, Pietersma
    argued that this corroborated his view that these fragments, though
    early, could not be relied upon to demonstrate the originality of
    the tetragram in the LXX. While Pietersma emphasised the hebraizing
    tendencies of Ra 848 (P. Fouad 266) (Deuteronomy fragments) and
    8HevXIIgr (the Minor Prophets scroll) however, he also acknowledged
    concerning Ra 802 (pap4QLXXLev-b) (Leviticus fragment):

    "Certainly, to the extent that its fragmentary condition enables us
    to determine, the genuinely Septuagintal credentials of 4QLXXLevb
    are well-nigh impeccable." [3]

    In 1983 a further fragment containing the tetragram in the Greek OT,
    this time of the book of Job, became available for consideration
    when it was published in the 50th volume of 'The Oxyrhynchus
    Papyri'. This new witness to the tetragram in the Jewish LXX, dated
    early 1st century AD, was apparently not available for consultation
    when Pietersma was preparing his study for William Wever's
    Festschrift. Therefore, it is interesting to note what judgment was
    made concerning the textual nature of the Job fragment when it was

    "The text generally conforms to that of the LXX; even its one unique
    variant (i 1-2) stands closer to the LXX than to the more literally
    accurate version of Symmachus. So far as it goes, that is, 3522
    looks like a version of the LXX; not an independent targum, and not
    a systematic revision of the sort Aquila and the rest would produce
    in the next century." [4]

    This new fragment, therefore, detracts somewhat from Pietersma's
    observation that the tetragram has only been found in fragments from
    atypical, recensional or non-LXX texts. This fragment, together with
    4QLXXLevb, demonstrates that the tetragram was present in first
    century copies of the LXX of the type that Christians would later
    inherit and adopt as their own. Although we have clearly
    acknowledged that the textual character of the tetragram fragments
    was not the major component of the case Pietersma made for kyrios as
    original, it can now be noted that the corroborative evidence he
    enlisted from the textual nature of the fragments available at the
    time has been undermined by the discovery of the Job LXX fragment.

    1. Pietersma, Albert, 'Kyrios or Tetragram: A New Quest for the
    Original Septuagint', De Septuaginta: Studies in Honour of John
    William Wevers on his sixty-fifth birthday (ed. A. Pietersma and C.
    Cox; Mississauga, 1984) pp. 85-101

    2. Kahle, Paul, The Cairo Genizah (1959), "We now know that the
    Greek Bible text [the LXX] as far as it was written by Jews for Jews
    did not translate the Divine Name by Kurios, but the Tetragrammaton
    written with Hebrew or Greek letters was retained in such MSS. It
    was the Christians who replaced the Tetragrammaton by Kurios, when
    the Divine Name written in Hebrew letters was not understood
    anymore." p. 222

    3. Pietersma, p. 91

    4. A. K. Bowman et al., The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Volume L, 1983, page 1,
    (No. 3522).

  • possible-san

    I read each opinion and view of many persons, and I feel that a fundamentalism view is really harmful.

    It is clear that Jehovah's Witnesses do not understand the Trinity doctrine correctly.
    But even so, I think it wrong that people in the 21st century have the outdated faith (Trinity).

    I feel that the view "YHWH is Jesus" (the God of the Old Testament is Jesus) is especially harmful more than the doctrine of Jehovah's Witnesses.
    When people say such in the view of fundamentalism ...


Share this