One cannot be saved by trusting a false christ. The object of our faith in important/vital (2 Cor. 11:4; Gal. 1:6-10). Mormons are not Christians trusting the biblical Jesus (they say Jesus is the spirit brother of Lucifer, Jehovah, one of many gods, product of a god having sex with Mary, an evolved man into god, etc.). JWs trust Michael the Archangel, a created Jesus. There is no such thing/person. Jesus claimed to be God, equal with God, same nature as the Father (Deity, not mere humanity or angelic). Confessing Him as Lord is to recognize His true person and work. Trusting a Spanish guy named Jesus will not save you. Trusting the Jesus of the cults or religions like Islam will not save you. Generic faith in an imaginary christ is not gospel saving faith in the true Jesus. We must confess Him for who He is, so His identity is not optional (or false, non-existent, worthless counterfeit Christs and religions are just as valid as biblical Christianity despite diametrically opposing views on the essentials).
The trouble with Christianity. TRINITY.
by whereami 209 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
PSacramento
Godrulz, while I certaibly agree that one must have a clearing understanding of who and what Christ was, I do NOT believe that one gets that from the human doctrine of the trinity, as has been shown in this thread and so many more like it.
-
godrulz
Fair enough. Either the trinity is true or false. Embrace it if true (I do) or reject it as false (as many do). So, more basically, who is Jesus Christ? He is either uncreated Creator, Almighty God in the flesh or a created being (Arian heresy). Modalists (Oneness/Jesus only/Sabellianism, modal monarchianism) fully affirms the Deity of Christ, but rejects the trinity as much as JWs do. I can live with modalism (despite it being heretical), but cannot live with Arianism. The biblical, historical, orthodox view is trinitarianism which would naturally flow from an affirmation of the Deity of Christ and personality of the Holy Spirit.
I believe a denial of the Deity of Christ is a denial of the real Jesus in favor of a counterfeit one. Unless we believe that He is I AM (Jehovahistic identity), we will perish in our sins (Jn. 8:28; Jn. 8:58; Jn. 1:1; Jn. 20:28 Thomas got it right and was blessed vs rebuked...same phrase used of YHWH in the LXX Ps.). Michael JW Jesus does not exist and cannot save, a worthless counterfeit robbing the true Jesus of honor, worship, glory (without robbing the co-equal, co-eternal, co-essential Father the same).
Since I am from Canada and selling the trinity among JWs/ex-JWs is a tough sell, can I interest anyone in your warm climates to buy an igloo?
-
frankiespeakin
Godrules,
I think religious dogma(ready made belief systems)organized religion) has a reason for existing but it has more to do with control than it is a formula that grants one God's favor. While using scripture to teach anything we need to take a good look at what is the history and political motivation behind scripture both at the time they were writen and also when they got accepted into the bible cannon by the "Church". If we choose to remain less than well informed then we mis-apply scripture and may find ourselves chasing our tails in circles.
But I guess it all depends on what you got invested in this belief and if you are willing to entertain different idea than what you have already.
-
saltyoldlady
Godrulz - back when you were talking about that passage in John 10:31 thru 36 as supporting your contention Jesus was equal to Jehovah which I gather is your definition of "deity" I read that passage with a very different comprehension of the material than you glean -
Here is my take on it - will quote and intersperse commentary both - Verse 31 reads "Once more the Jews lifted up stones to stone him. Jesus replied to them "I displayed to you many fine works from the Father. For which of those works are you stoning me?" The Jews answered him "We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy, even because you, although being a man, make yourself God." (The Jews were correct in the view that if he claimed himself to be God - the great Almighty Creator - that would indeed qualify for blasphemy, one good reason to me that this is not what Jesus was claming. Now please observe his answer carefully.)
Starting in Verse 34 - Jesus answered them "Is it not written in your Law, I said (the "I" there is referring to Jehovah's dialogue with them) You are gods?" If He called gods those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scriptures cannot be nullified, do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said I am God's Son. (There are two points I glean from this dialogue - one what he actually said was, he was God's Son, not God the Almighty Creator, and two - that men can and were referred to as gods without this idea of equality in stature, rank, deity, or whatever being attributed to them.)
Today while reading 1 Timothy Chapter 3:14 thru 16 I couldn't help but think about you - and reflect I bet you use this passage to support this idea of "deity" that you hold about Christ. Normally Paul is very, very careful to always refer to Jehovah as the Father or God, and Jesus as Lord. But this time he actually calls Jesus God it seems to me. And I believe that would be in the sense that is revealed in Isaiah 9 where we are told Jesus would be called Mighty God (which of course is different than Almighty God).
So to quote 1 Timothy here - starting with verse 14 I am writing you these things, though I am hoping to come to you shortly, but in case I am delayed, that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in God's household, which is the congregation of the living God, a pillar and support of the truth. Indeed the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great. He (meaning the Christ) was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory. (So to me this passage says we give "godly" devotion to Christ - he does indeed get the title God at times - but it is in a very different sense than the Almighty Creator that caused the Word to first come into existence.
For some reason it seems to me you think when the scriptures say Christ was created (which they actually do in two different places - Colossians 1:15 and Rev 3:14) that it "demeans" Christ, and his power and authority. I don't perceive that at all - Jehovah gives him all power and authority for a specific purpose - to reconcile mankind - and He has no fear of Christ usurping it. He knows Christ will hand it back as I Cor 15:28 tells us that Jehovah God may be all things to everyone. And the same thought is expressed in John 16:15 states - All the things the Father has are mine (and vice versa of course) - this portrays to us the love and trust between these two - they are as one in thought and purpose just as we wish to be with the Christ. I don't find it necessary for Christ to be "uncreated Almighty Deity" in order to perform the task at all. Is this the gist of your problem - that you fear if he is not The Deity, he will not succeed in the reconciliation for mankind?
I am trying hard to understand you and be fair with you. Will you also make the same effort yourself with me?
-
godrulz
Isaiah 9:6 Jesus/Messiah=el gibbor (Hebrew), Mighty God. Is. 10:21 YHWH is called Mighty God/el gibbor (also in Jeremiah). Judaism is monotheistic. There is only one true God and many false gods. You put the emphasis on Mighty (adjective) instead of noun (God). Jehovah and Jesus are both called Mighty God because they are both Jehovah in nature (but personally distinct as Father/Son). Is. is also clear that Jehovah knows no other gods, has not created other gods before or after Him, etc. You are proposing polytheism, belief in more than one true God. Whether God is called Mighty, Almighty, powerful, all-powerful, holy, loving, faithful, merciful, etc., He is still God. It is a lame argument to say Jesus is Mighty God, but not Almighty God! He is still GOD and there is only one God. Using your logic, YHWH in Is. 10 and Jer. is not Almighty because He is called Might?! Jesus is God, whether Holy God, Loving God, Powerful God, Mighty God, Almighty God (Mt. 28 says He has all authority, something only God has). Jesus forgave sins, something only God can do (Jews went to stone Him). He received worship. You do not give angels the title Mighty God. YHWH does not command all angels to worship Jesus if Jesus is just an angel (Heb. 1:6 LXX in Deut. a verse about worshipping Jehovah applied to Jesus...).
Jn. 1:1 is sufficient when translated properly (no credible Greek scholar, including anti-trinitarian, secular ones support 'a god'...which is polytheism again and grammatically indefensible). The Alpha/Omega, Beginning/End, First/Last series in Is. and Rev. is also proof of His Deity (angels do not have eternality titles). The WT used to say Jesus is Alpha and Omega. In 1978, an Awake and WT a few months apart had articles that were both correct and supported my contention (Jesus is God). To retain WT views, one would have to say one article was false, but which one (one rightly showed that the speaker in Rev. 22:12-16 is Jesus and the other that Jehovah is Alpha and Omega...so Jesus is called all these equivalent titles that belong to God alone). The Arian proof texts you give are consistent with a triune understanding if you understand that they do not teach inferiority of nature, but positional, functional issues like man/woman equality/headship).
I think shorter posts would be helpful if we are to systematically dialogue.
-
myelaine
dear saltyoldlady...
you said: "Starting in Verse 34 - Jesus answered them "Is it not written in your Law, I said (the "I" there is referring to Jehovah's dialogue with them) You are gods?" If He called gods those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scriptures cannot be nullified, do you say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said I am God's Son. (There are two points I glean from this dialogue - one what he actually said was, he was God's Son, not God the Almighty Creator, and two - that men can and were referred to as gods without this idea of equality in stature, rank, deity, or whatever being attributed to them.)"...
God stands in the congregation of the mighty;
He judges among the gods.
How long will you judge unjustly,
And show partiality to the wicked? Selah
Defend the poor and fatherless;
Do justice to the afflicted and needy.
Deliver the poor and needy;
Free them from the hand of the wicked.
They do not know, nor do they understand;
They walk about in darkness;
All the foundations of the earth are unstable.
I said, “You are gods,
And all of you are children of the Most High.
But you shall die like men,
And fall like one of the princes.”
Arise, O God, judge the earth;
For You shall inherit all nations.one could ascertain that Jesus quoted this scripture because these were infact being unjust in deciding that He Himself should be stoned to death...in psalm 82:1-8 they were called "gods" because they held a position of authority as judges over ones life or death regarding the penalty for sin...in this case stoning for perceived blaspheme against God in calling Himself Son of God.
Jesus said that the leaders sat in the seat of moses(in regard to the law)...they sat in the judgement seat...(aaron sat in the seat of a priest.)...the Son of God rightly sits in the seat of both judge and priest forever.
love michelle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kreSbagj_RM&feature=player_embedded
-
frankiespeakin
Actually I think the real trouble with Christianity is that it became the Roman Empire's State religion under Constantine. From that point on it was mostly down hill as the empire's political considerations would now over shadow the "church fathers" as they play politics with religious dogma.
And one must also keep in mind that Constantine's wanted to unite his kingdom and the choice of state sponsored and enforced religion would determine how well that would be accomplished,,I doubt if anything other than that was behind his decision. The Christians being his choice would indicate that he seen them as the most pliable and useful to his ambitions.
-
godrulz
For all the Catholic criticism, the popes of the WT (Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, GB Ted Jaracz, etc.) have been no better or worse.
-
frankiespeakin
GodRs,
For all the Catholic criticism, the popes of the WT (Russell, Rutherford, Knorr, GB Ted Jaracz, etc.) have been no better or worse.
Exactly they are all no better or worse when it comes to relying on them to reporting and safeguarding the truth. And so then can we conclude that the books the early church father sanctioned to be in the Bible were more of a political consideration than a safeguard to truth consideration?