by UnDisfellowshipped 457 Replies latest watchtower bible
Playing dumb to drawn attention away from the fact that the Holy Ghost doesn't have a name? Jesus was a Jew.......you known the name of his Father and God.
I see. You don't have a verse that gives "the name of the Father as Jehovah", and you're trying to draw attention away from that fact. Tricksy...
eggnog:
Your argument is simply a rehashing of JW-Furuli's, which has been refuted on the Internet numerous times.
Shall I now quote scholarly sources that refute Furuli?
Robertson's Word Pictures:
My Lord and my God (Ho kurio mou kai o qeo mou). Not exclamation, but address, the vocative case though the form of the nominative, a very common thing in the Koin. Thomas was wholly convinced and did not hesitate to address the Risen Christ as Lord and God. And Jesus accepts the words and praises Thomas for so doing
Shall I go on?
What next? You'll quote JW-Stafford? Then I'll include sources that refute him?
John 20:28 says: "Answered Thomas and said to him [Jesus]: The Lord of me and the God of me."
My take home point: Once again, you are unwilling to accept the verse as it is written; once again, you insist the verse means something other than what it plainly says.
Those words of debator are ringing in my ear again: "...deny the obvious and bible written [sic]... resorting to saying the scripture is not saying saying [sic] what it obviously is"
@Podobear:
I apologize for the "condition" of the previous post, but I don't really know the right way to include Greek characters in a post. I attempted to respond, but your message wasn't the typical question to which I normally respond because responding to posts on this subject tends to be a bit off-putting for those that do not know Greek and lose interest in exchanging messages with an apparent know-it-all (which I am not!).
@chalam:
Jehovah, Jesus..........could someone please tell me the "name" of the Holy Ghost?
In your post you quote Matthew 28:19, in which verse you read the word "name," but clearly didn't understand that the word, as used in this verse, is a synonym for the word "authority," that is to say, "according to the authority with which I have been vested by something or someone."
For example, at John 5:43, 44, Jesus stated:
"I have come in the name of my Father, but you do not receive me; if someone else arrived in his own name, you would receive that one. How can YOU believe, when YOU are accepting glory from one another and YOU are not seeking the glory that is from the only God?"
He was no self-made Messiah ambitious for glory and power.
Maybe you will recall how at Exodus 3:13-15, Moses upon his being sent to speak to the sons of Israel, he had asked Jehovah as to what name, in whose authority, he could tell them that he had come:
Nevertheless, Moses said to the [true] God: "Suppose I am now come to the sons of Israel and I do say to them, ‘The God of YOUR forefathers has sent me to YOU,’ and they do say to me, ‘What is his name?’ What shall I say to them?" At this God said to Moses: "I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE." And he added: "This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘I SHALL PROVE TO BE has sent me to YOU.’" Then God said once more to Moses:
"This is what you are to say to the sons of Israel, ‘Jehovah the God of YOUR forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, has sent me to YOU.’ This is my name to time indefinite, and this is the memorial of me to generation after generation.
Notice how at Exodus 5:22, 23, Moses points out that when he entered the court of the Pharaoh of Egypt to speak to him, that he was speaking, not on his own initiative or authority, but by Jehovah's authority, for Moses spoke in Jehovah's name:
Then Moses turned to Jehovah and said: "Jehovah, why have you caused evil to this people? Why is it that you have sent me? For from the time that I went in before Phar´aoh to speak in your name, he has done evil to this people, and you have by no means delivered your people."
Likewise, Jesus came in the name of Jehovah, his heavenly Father, which meant that he had come, not on his own initiative, but as one authorized to do so by Jehovah, as one sent in the name of Jehovah, as the one sent to speak on Jehovah's behalf as His representative. Whenever we seek glory for ourselves, we are seeking glory for from the world, but anyone that seeks glory from the only true God, that person is someone that seeks spirituality.
But I've another example that could be helpful here.
When a police officer in chase of a suspect that is fleeing the scene of a burglary then taking place at someone's home beings to close the distance and yells the words, "Stop in the name of the law!" what's the reasoning here? Why should the suspect stop running away, so as to bring the pursuit to a conclusion? Is it because the officer has so requested him of the officer's own initiative? Or, rather, is it according to the authority given to the officer by the operation of law that the suspect should stop running away? Of course, the law is not a person, but it is by means of the spirit of that law promulgated by government officials that empower the officer to carry out his or her duties in law enforcement that the officer utters commands to the citizens that this officer he has sworn an oath to serve..
Jesus has commanded that his followers make disciples in the name of the Father, Jehovah being the Sovereign over everyone and everything, in the name of the Son, Jesus, as king, ransomer and high priest, and in the name of the holy spirit, which is the active force of God that motivates God's theocratic organization to preach the heavenly kingdom of God and the coming end of this system of things. When Christians are obedient to what things the holy spirit says in the Bible, they are being guided by holy spirit, not resisting the spirit to do their own thing as if they aren't God's property (which they are!), and holy spirit is the very same force that activates our minds so that we are able to lead others to Christ in the way that the spirit operates.
I am reminded of something that the apostle John wrote at 1 John 1:5-7:
And this is the message which we have heard from him and are announcing to you, that God is light and there is no darkness at all in union with him. If we make the statement: "We are having a sharing with him," and yet we go on walking in the darkness, we are lying and are not practicing the truth. However, if we are walking in the light as he himself is in the light, we do have a sharing with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.
If you are not walking in the light, then you are in darkness mentally and cannot be practicing or walking in the truth and if you are not putting faith in Jesus' blood -- the release by ransom that cleanses us from all sin -- then you are dead in your sins. All of the things you've learned from your reading of the Bible over the years would be of no effect to you.
@djeggnog
Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary As the name of Jehovah ("Holiness to the Lord") was on the golden plate on the high priest's forehead (Ex 28:36-38); so the saints in their heavenly royal priesthood shall bear His name openly, as consecrated to Him.
I would have to also guess Jesus is refering to the name of his God here as Jehovah. Interesting that no mention is made of the Holy Ghost being important enough to be included or have a name.
Think About It
@Think About It. Thank you. I err on the side of consistency in the Scriptures too. I agree that the name of Jesus Father and God is Jehovah.
@djegnogg: Thank you too. John 20:28 was always the most difficult text for me to explain until I entered into a protracted discussion on the Green, I had believed for years that the expression was made in the Vocative. I apologised for my misunderstanding, and all became clear to me. That was the last brick in the Trinitarian wall demolished for me. I could then see fully how absurd the doctrine is. I was finally free of its grip. Thanks again.
@peacedog: I read your post at an even pace thank you. I take it that simple questions trouble you, so that sarcasm and mockery are your only protection? You have a serious mental aberration if this is the case... my sympathies. Please refrain from being condescending when folks want information to reason on. Would you like me to comment on your post to me? I will reply with frankness and honesty and without derisory comment.
Podo
| Post 1431 of 1434 Since 1/20/2010 | Rev 3:12 Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name. Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary As the name of Jehovah ("Holiness to the Lord") was on the golden plate on the high priest's forehead (Ex 28:36-38); so the saints in their heavenly royal priesthood shall bear His name openly, as consecrated to Him. I would have to also guess Jesus is refering to the name of his God here as Jehovah. Interesting that no mention is made of the Holy Ghost being important enough to be included or have a name. |
My reply: Jesus god is the Father. That simply shows submission to the decision-maker by the agent who carries out those decisions. That does not disprove the Father and Son sharing the same nature. The Father, not the Holy Spirit, is Son's god. The Holy Spirit is the helper. This explains how Jesus can be God, yet have a God.
Think About It:
I see nothing in Rev 3:12 that says "Jehovah" is the name of the Father. Thanks for the effort though.
Podo:
I will reply with frankness and honesty and without derisory comment.
Says podo in a post where he speaks with derision...
If there is nothing else, podo, perhaps you could refrain from making comments to me. All the best to you.
eggnog:
Still waiting:
5For example, to which one of the angels did he ever say: "You are my son; I, today, I have become your father"? And again: "I myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son"?
13But with reference to which one of the angels has he ever said: "Sit at my right hand, until I place your enemies as a stool for your feet"?
Please explain how the word "ever" fits with (and supports) your interpretation of these verses. Perhaps you might even explain why the bible writer chose to include the word, when you yourself have omitted it when "explaining" the meaning of these verses. Thank you kindly.
Perhaps another jw "apologist" would like to make the attempt in your stead...
@issacaustin:
[Jesus'] god is the Father. That simply shows submission to the decision-maker by the agent who carries out those decisions. That does not disprove the Father and Son sharing the same nature.
You are correct on all three fronts in what you say here. I believe the Bible teaches that Jehovah is the true God. (Jeremiah 10:10) After Ahab and many of the sons of Israel, including some 450 of which had become prophets of Baal, died because that didn't want to walk in accord with Jehovah's standards, preferring instead to walk in accord with the standards of an imaginary god, it was clear made, at least historically, that Jehovah is the true God. (1 Kings 18:21-40)
While it is true that all of the angels of God -- and that would include Jesus and Satan -- are spirit beings, gods that are all sharers of the same divine nature as Jehovah, after Jesus' resurrection, only he came to share bodily that divine quality of which only Jehovah had been in possession, immortality. (Colossians 1:19; 2:9) So it is only with respect to immortality have both the Father and the Son become sharers of this divine quality. Those of the first resurrection will all of them be given immortality, too.
The Father, not the Holy Spirit, is Son's god. The Holy Spirit is the helper. This explains how Jesus can be God, yet have a God.
No, it doesn't . The fact that the holy spirit is the active force of God that can bring back to one's mind what things Jesus taught to those that have actually learned these things (John 14:26) (while the holy spirit helps one remember the things learned, it doesn't plant memories into the mind that never existed there!) doesn't explain how Jesus can be God at all. That after his resurrection, Jesus was given immortality by God explains how Jesus is now a God. That Jesus is now immortal is proof that Jesus doesn't have to be the true God to be a God himself, and the fact that God that raised Jesus from the dead gave him immortality is proof that Jesus has a God, someone greater than he.
As to the word "name" to which @Think About It refers in her post, this word doesn't refer to a personal name like "Jehovah," like "Jesus," or a title, like "God," like "Christ," like "@Think About It," but to the authority that someone or something has, like when a father sends his child to his brother's home with a check on a Tuesday, and the child tells his uncle that he should not cash the check until the following day, this child was speaking to his uncle in his father's name as his father's representative, being authorized by his father to tell his uncle when he could cash the check.
As recently as yesterday, I call myself explaining to@chalam (I don't know yet how well I did though!) how the word "name" is a synonym for the word "authority," that is to say, a word that refers 'to the authority with which someone has been vested by something or someone,' in this case, this teenager that had spoken to his uncle in his father's name, being authorized by his father to speak on his behalf, as his representative, who had entrusted his words to his son to carry his message (and the check) to his brother without embellishing them so as to alter his words in any way.
@peacedog:
Please explain how the word "ever" fits with (and supports) your interpretation of these verses.
No, and I believe we're done. I do know the difference between someone that is listening and someone that isn't listening, and you're not listening to me. I don't expect you to agree with what I have said here, because you are just as entitled as I am to believe whatever it is you choose to believe, and I cannot see how I could ever get in the way of anyone's exercise of their freedom to make their own decisions. It's clear that you want to quibble over words, but I do not wish to do quibble or argue with you; we're all just exchanging points of view here on this forum. I'm not more "right" than you are, except in my own eyes, and the even playing field is what makes the Bible-related discussions had here on this forum so great.
But IMO it is a show of contempt on your part to pretend as if you did not understand what I said to you about this question that you keep whining about how I have yet to answer it, when I believe I have responded to it. What I told you with respect to what Hebrews 1:5 and Hebrews 1:13 say was that "whereas your focus was on the word 'ever,' my focus was on the words 'to which.'" I also told you that I would "not allow you to change your argument. We were discussing the inclusion of the word 'one' in rendering Hebrews 1:5 and Hebrews 1:13 as 'which one,' and we were never discussing the word 'ever.'"
You and I are not going to be discussing apparent red herrings because I find that your pursuit of "truth in semantics" to be contemptuous, and I really don't deserve your contempt. At no time during this discussion can you accuse me of being disrespectful to you despite our differences of opinions in several areas. Earlier in this thread you declared a "case closed" status on matters as they relate to the Trinity, which informed me as to your mindset, that you really had no real interest in exchanging disparate viewpoints any longer, but that you're not such a stalwart in that regard or so it would appear.
So, @peacedog, if you truly believe that faith in the Trinity will save you, and you do not believe our exercising belief in the ransom provided by Jehovah through Jesus Christ for the release this provision provides from condemnation of sin and death that has ravaged mankind from Adam until now is going to save anyone, then my attitude is that maybe tomorrow you will come around, but today I accept that you and I have different opinions as to mankind's salvation and although I cannot agree with it, I do respect your right to make this choice.
@djeggnog
@issacaustin:
[Jesus'] god is the Father. That simply shows submission to the decision-maker by the agent who carries out those decisions. That does not disprove the Father and Son sharing the same nature.
You are correct on all three fronts in what you say here. I believe the Bible teaches that Jehovah is the true God. (Jeremiah 10:10) After Ahab and many of the sons of Israel, including some 450 of which had become prophets of Baal, died because that didn't want to walk in accord with Jehovah's standards, preferring instead to walk in accord with the standards of an imaginary god, it was clear made, at least historically, that Jehovah is the true God. (1 Kings 18:21-40)
While it is true that all of the angels of God -- and that would include Jesus and Satan -- are spirit beings, gods that are all sharers of the same divine nature as Jehovah, after Jesus' resurrection, only he came to share bodily that divine quality of which only Jehovah had been in possession, immortality. (Colossians 1:19; 2:9) So it is only with respect to immortality have both the Father and the Son become sharers of this divine quality. Those of the first resurrection will all of them be given immortality, too.
My reply: They share omipotence, omniscience and omnipresence. Sorry i don't really have time to do a very long answer now.
No, it doesn't . The fact that the holy spirit is the active force of God that can bring back to one's mind what things Jesus taught to those that have actually learned these things (John 14:26) (while the holy spirit helps one remember the things learned, it doesn't plant memories into the mind that never existed there!) doesn't explain how Jesus can be God at all. That after his resurrection, Jesus was given immortality by God explains how Jesus is now a God. That Jesus is now immortal is proof that Jesus doesn't have to be the true God to be a God himself, and the fact that God that raised Jesus from the dead gave him immortality is proof that Jesus has a God, someone greater than he.
My reply: Let me say this again if I said it confusingly. I don't think i worded it well. Jesus has a god- the Father, to whom the Son is eternally submissive. Jesus also is God, by nature. In a similar sense we can say Adam and Eve were Cain's head in the Garden. Yet Eve also had a head- Adam...to whom she was to be submissive, one flesh.
DJEggNogg:
The Father, not the Holy Spirit, is Son's god. The Holy Spirit is the helper. This explains how Jesus can be God, yet have a God.
c'mon djeggnog in your heart you know Jesus isn't an angel.
