Paul's rationale...

NeverKnew

As a non-jw discussing "the only true" Christianity with JWs, I brought up Romans 14 for obvious reasons. After reviewing the chapter as a whole and asking appropriate questions, I went back up to verse 11 and sincerely asked,

"By the way, how are comparative verses like Romans 14:11, Isaiah 45:23 and Phillippians 2:9-11 interpreted in your faith with the same language being attributed to the Father in the OT and Jesus in the NT? Wouldn't that have been heretical? and Paul did this repeatedly so, according to that which you've always known, what was Paul's reasoning?"

So, they're going to get back to me. It's only been two weeks and I've talked to one of them every day. I'm sure they're working on a VERY THOROUGHLY researched explanation.... maybe there's a peer review that has to happen first.

Can anyone prep me with a simplified WTS explanation for Paul assigning descriptors to Jesus that were said to belong only to God?

Londo111

There is something in the Reasoning Book where they try to refute this. This will likely be where they would go first.

Under the section, the Trinity, it has this blurb:

Application to Jesus Christ by inspired Bible writers of passages from the Hebrew Scriptures that clearly apply to Jehovah

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father’s name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.—John 5:43; 8:29.

Why does Hebrews 1:10-12 quote Psalm 102:25-27 and apply it to the Son, when the psalm says that it is addressed to God? Because the Son is the one through whom God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. (See Colossians 1:15, 16; Proverbs 8:22, 27-30.) It should be observed in Hebrews 1:5b that a quotation is made from 2 Samuel 7:14 and applied to the Son of God. Although that text had its first application to Solomon, the later application of it to Jesus Christ does not mean that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon.—Luke 11:31.

sarahsmile

NWT

Phil 2:5-

5 Keep this mental attitude in ? YOU ? that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, (as an angel Michael)gave no consideration to a seizure,namely, that he should be equal to God(Jesus would never ever consider being equal or God) 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake. 9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.

yI might be able to do this scripture because it is there proof that JOHN 1:1 means that Jesus was in the form of God like all the angels are in the form of God,spiritual form and not man form.

WTBTS changed 6 which is unique and does not make any sense.

King James

this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, (opposite of the NWT yes jesus is equal and thought it okay was not taken anything from God) 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9 Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10 that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Seizure can anyone figure that out! Compare to did not consider it robbery.

should be equal to God versus to be equal with God.

They are going to come and say that there is still two: Jesus to the glory God the Father.

They will probably say that it is Jesus who is liken to the Father but never equal in his angelic form. Equal in that they both have the same goals but different forms.

You can say if it is different forms than why mention it.

Not too sure about Isaiah 45 maybe it is future prophecy of Jesus coming from the LORD. But Trinity people will say it proves Jesus is Jehovah. Jehovahs Witnesses teach it is prophecy about Jesus.

Like Psalms 110 The Lord [God] said to my master [King David] “Sit thou at my right hand...” (Psalm 110:1) Which is true. Yet later it is actually about Jesus Matthew 22:44.

Ok other people will do better. Think like a JW LOL.I am laughing! It will be interesting to see what others will say. Blondie she will know.

sarahsmile

Okay Londo 111 did it!

InChristAlone

If you are looking for a quicker response, perhaps try posting the same question on topix.com under the Jehovah's Witness forum. There are several eager witnesses who seem to congregate there.

Although I am a non-JW as well, I have had this discussion with them before. Here is what I would anticipate hearing, although I welcome correction from former or current JW's.

(NWT) Isaiah 45:23b says, " that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear ". Romans 14:11 says, " for it is written: “‘As I live,’ says Jehovah, ‘to me every knee will bend down, and every tongue will make open acknowledgment to God.’” Phillippians 2:10-11 says, " so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father."

What I would expect to hear is this...the three verses do not conflict with each other or prove that Jehovah is Jesus. In fact, you can merge the three together to say this...(R) "As I live", says Jehovah, (P) that in the name of Jesus ever knee should bend down (R/I) to me, (P) and those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and (ALL) every tongue (I) will swear (R) and make open acknowledgment to God (P) that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of the Father. Therefore the verses work well together and also differentiate the Father from the Son.

It is easier to argue these verses when using other translations that use "Lord" in Romans 14:11 considering that verse 9 calls Jesus "Lord". But you will not go far with them using a translation other than the NWT.

There are many other Jehovah/Jesus correlations that will get you further than this one. I hope that helps.

InChristAlone

Hey Londo, remember all the discussion on jwstruggle about this very thing?

designs

Always remember the god of the bible has a magic wand and BLING! you can be whatever.

Newly Enlightened

Jesus told his disciples

MT 28:18 "

And Jesus approached and spoke to them, saying: “All authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth." [This was not a future verb usage, but past tense usage]

Phil 2: 9-11 NWT "

9

So Paul correctly writes those verses acknowledging the authority of Christ.
Doesn't get more simple than that.

NeverKnew

Okay, gotta get practice ...

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father’s name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.— John 5:43; 8:29 .

Doesn't this infer that the inspired writer of Isaiah got the message wrong and that he should have written that a representative of God would come? Or did God change his mind about coming....

Am I bordering on disrespectful?

InChristAlone, it's good to hear I'm not alone. I get pretty frustrated but Londo and others are pretty good at prepping me. I read that the NWT has blurred the similarities in these verses so I've been careful about that landmine. Thanks for the NWT variation!

OMG Sarah! We almost went to blows over that seizure thing! Now, one friend has read and studied the sentence so seriously he's to the point of being INCAPABLE of absorbing the sentence without the WT lense. WHY'D YOU TAKE ME BACK THERE???? NOW I'M TICKED AGAIN... LOL THEN he said that OTHER TRANSLATIONS use the same word? I asked him WHICH ONE IS THAT????

Another research project I guess....

NewlyEnlightened... Good point!

InChristAlone

NeverKnew, I am with you 100%. To me, when it says Jehovah, it means Jehovah, not a representative of Jehovah. There are many instances when the bible says, "the angel of the Lord" or "the glory of the Lord" and later clarifies that to be Jehovah. So, is it Jehovah made visible or a representative? Doctrine will dictate perspective. In my experience, when discussing the Trinity, JW's set out to prove that the Father and the Son are distinct and that the Son is eternally subject to the Father. I quickly concede those points. They tend to be more receptive at that point because those are two of the most important things to them. Where they get hung up is the Trinitarian belief that "Jehovah" could be referring to any of the three or all three at the same time.

Since you are looking at practicing this sort of thing, I would highly recommend topix.com. If you have a specific question to have answered, this is a great location. Allexperts.com under Religion/Spirituality, Jehovah's Witnesses is another good one. For a Christian perspective, ask Derrick Holland. For a balanced JW perspective, ask Brenton Hepburn. Good luck!

Paul's rationale...

Share this