God is Jesus

by evangelist 178 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    Is that it ernest? Hope not, I was looking forward to an opine on the "typo".
    just over 2 years now & no one will defend this line of preaching.
    if this is ignored, does that mean it doesn't exist?
    I might try that with my laundry.

  • evangelist
    evangelist

    The truth of the matter is that even if you don't accept the last part of the book of Mark, it doesn't prove anything.

    Personally, I just add this to the list of excuses that people use to try to discredit the very clear teachings of the Bible. People just can't deal with the truth sometimes, so they are left with 3 basic choices:

    Pervert the clear meaning of that verse - For example, by looking for the conditions of salvation in the part that speaks about condemnation, while igoring the part of the verse that deals with salvation.

    Try to discredit the verse's legitemacy - This can never be fully proven. There's evidence on both sides. The text doesn't appear in some of the manuscripts while it does in others.

    Ignore the verse - Sometimes it's easy to pretend like a verse doesn't exist.

    To be honest, it's quite pathetic that Mark 16:16 is debated so much like it is. There's no rocket science about that verse. Anybody can see that there are two requirements listed before salvation. The Bible doesn't try to hide them, it says they are belief and baptism. People can either accept what it says, or not accept what it says. Simple.

    Let me ask you a question, and you can just answer this to yourself. If you are interested in computers, and you have two books in front of you, one that's about computers and one that is about pottery, which book are you going to read to learn more about computers? Easy question.

    Now, if you are interested in salvation, and a verse deals with two things: salvation and condemnation, which part are you going to look at for your answer?

    Something tells me that you would choose the book on computers for the purpose of learning more about computers. Sadly, however, something else tells me that you will continue to read the part of the verse that deals with condemnation when you are looking for the answer to salvatioin.

    Funny how that works. Basic human reasoning, for the most part, works just fine when we are dealing with worldly things. But for some people, reasoning goes on a vacation when dealing with the clear word of God. Pride is a terrible thing.

    peace

  • Earnest
    Earnest

    Will Power,

    You asked:

    would you expect unknown and anonymous people to change their own interpretation then reprinting to justify their current way of thinking by adding [other] words that change the meaning not clarify because of the study of languages.
    I appreciate that English may not be your first language but your question is so disjointed it is meaningless. If you are trying to say that the NW translation is interpretation then say so without having to make a question out of it. If you are suggesting that the underlying text on which the NWT is based is faulty then you will have to give examples if you want me to respond.
    textual criticism should be kept to WT rags and kept out of a book that they trick people into thinking it is bible.
    You evidently don’t understand what textual criticism is. It is the science of determining what an original document contained based on the available copies and other factors. It is an integral part of Bible translation.
    these [22 versions of the NT in Hebrew] are 12th century translations! into hebrew from the greek which never contained the tetragrammaton.
    Of course these are Hebrew translations. That’s the point. That these various Bible scholars who translated the NT into Hebrew in 22 different translations believed it legitimate in some instances to substitute kyrios (the Greek word for ‘Lord’) with the tetragrammaton. You may think they were wrong in doing so. But you are clearly wrong to say “you will not find any [bible] scholars to back you up on this one”.
    There is an excellent research document on the insertion of the word jehovah…It is titled The Tetragrammaton in the Christian Greek Scriptures…you need to read it and decide for yourself.
    If you are referring to the book The Tetragrammaton and the Christian Greek Scriptures by Lynn Lundquist I am pleased to say I already have a well-thumbed copy. I also have a copy of the book The Role of Theology and Bias in Bible Translation by Rolf Furuli, with a chapter on the tetragrammaton and the New Testament. I have benefited from information in both publications as well as my own research on the subject.
    the verse "For the Lord* Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first." 1Thes4:16… reference to the footnote. You'll find thatJehovah is this Lord who descends with the call of the archangel...What is your opinion on this?
    My opinion is that you clearly don’t understand the relevance of the Hebrew translations cited. Just like all other translations (possibly with the exception of the LXX) the Hebrew translations of the NT were not inspired and should not be treated as such. However, there are specific instances where the translators believe they were justified in substituting kyrios (the Greek word for ‘Lord’) with the tetragrammaton. It does not mean that every instance that they did so you had to agree with their judgement simply because you agreed with their judgement in some instances. Clearly, in this instance the translators of the NWT did not agree with the judgement of the four Hebrew versions which had the tetragrammaton and considering the context I am inclined to agree with them. Why anyone should show hostility because you asked about this is beyond me, but perhaps they also didn’t understand the relevance of the Hebrew translations and reacted out of ignorance.
    ernest, serious question:
    There they said:
    could you please tell me who they are and what qualifications would allow for [translation]?
    No, I do not know who the translators of the NWT are or their qualifications. I do know who Raymond Franz claims was on the Translation Committee and have no reason to doubt him. But it is quite clear to me that the Committee called on others who had the necessary skills to assist in translation. I would add to this to say that neither do I know who translated other versions of the Bible in English but find that with a bit of effort it is not difficult to determine the value of a translation. I do find the footnotes and appendixes in the NWT a great help in this.

    evangelist,

    You say:

    To be honest, it's quite pathetic that Mark 16:16 is debated so much like it is. There's no rocket science about that verse. Anybody can see that there are two requirements listed before salvation. The Bible doesn't try to hide them, it says they are belief and baptism. People can either accept what it says, or not accept what it says. Simple.
    I have no quarrel with what you say here but I should remind you that it was your reference to Mark 16:18 that prompted me to reflect on the dubious support for that passage. You had posted to funkyderek:
    M'r:16:18: They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.
    This is a statement made not by Wiggleworth, but it is from Jesus Christ HIMSELF saying this will happen and shall happen, people will recover, by laying on of hands.
    My entire argument is that God does not expect us to perform “powerful works” in order to prove the truth and the use of this verse to suggest he does lacks authenticity. If the truth of who God is cannot be determined by his Word then no amount of miracles is going to do so.

    Earnest

  • Will Power
    Will Power
    It does not mean that every instance that they did so you had to agree with their judgement simply because you agreed with their judgement in some instances. Clearly, in this instance the translators of the NWT did not agree with the judgement of the four Hebrew versions which had the tetragrammaton and considering the context I am inclined to agree with them.

    My question about 1thes4:16 has nothing to do with a translation. Side bar: if you do not agree with them here it is obvious there is a theology clash, which is my point about the insertions in the first place.
    Regarding the footnote at 1 thes 4:16. I am not sure you understand the question or I do not understand your answer.
    Are you saying that the hebrew translations you like for other insertions is wrong in this particular instance but it is still cited in the footnote?
    I see deception and or sloppiness or both.
    Saying that the Lord in 1 thes 4:16 is Jesus as an angel at the same time as this same Lord is Jehovah is the kind of truth that makes watchtower literature famous for printing truth[tm]. Who is the apostate? the one who agrees or the one who disagrees? or is it the one who asks for an adult explanation.

    Same with Rev. 22:12 - they can not get their Jesus & Jehovahs straight.

    . I have benefited from information in both publications as well as my own research on the subject.
    Actually, the book I was referring to has no author named which I am sure you would agree, is much more reliable. As well, all general scriptures were from the NWT or the Kingdom Interlinear Translation as well as the Hebrew version - J18, Greek Scriptures in Hebrew.
    No where else do you see how a corporate identity can shape the way one thinks, acts, & believes, than in a theocratically printed bible.
    Having everything in chart form is an easy way to check. Out of the 237 Jehovah words in the NWT of the NT only 112 have Hebrew Scripture quotations. (ex: 42=J20s)
    125 have NO OT tetragrammaton, only reference and 61 have NO quotation or reference.

    So to the original question of this thread.
    Making changes 61 times, to the word of God, the inspired book that has been safeguarded by God for all these centuries, to please a man made religion is an atrocity. Similarily crying conspiracy in the 1st century again insults the God that supposedly has protected his inspired word! If no confidence in the bible after the 1st century, why worship it now?
    The 61 citations had they been left alone surely conflict with WT doctrine of today. Not original doctrine tho because Russell taught the deity of Christ and that He should be worshipped.
    Again has there been some apostacy? Henschel or Russell. One or the other turned away there is no way around it.

    If the truth of who God is cannot be determined by his Word then no amount of miracles is going to do so.
    Exactly, that is why the Word should not be tampered with since the Word is "a" god.
    I wonder what witnesses would think if they were to read just the Holy Bible while they prayed? hmmmmm.
  • Will Power
    Will Power

    p.s. Do you have an opinion on the presentation of 1 thes 4:16?

    thanks

  • evangelist
    evangelist

    Quote by Earnest

    My entire argument is that God does not expect us to perform “powerful works” in order to prove the truth and the use of this verse to suggest he does lacks authenticity. If the truth of who God is cannot be determined by his Word then no amount of miracles is going to do so.

    Quote by c.moore
    I can`t really agree with you about this because the bible says something different about this.
    let check out what the bible says about miracles, and performance in powerful works.

    Ac:1:8: But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

    Why do you think the bible says we recieve power???
    I think God know that if he has given us power we will use it for his glory.

    M't:10:7: And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
    M't:10:8: Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

    M't:28:18: And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
    M't:28:19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
    M't:28:20: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

    Lu:10:1: After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before his face into every city and place, whither he himself would come.
    Lu:10:2: Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth labourers into his harvest.
    Lu:10:3: Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among wolves.

    Lu:10:17: And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name.
    Lu:10:18: And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.
    Lu:10:19: Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy: and nothing shall by any means hurt you.
    Lu:10:20: Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are subject unto you; but rather rejoice, because your names are written in heaven.
    Lu:10:21: In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight.

    Joh:14:12: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.

    Look Jesus said; those that believe like us will do works like Jesus raising the dead , heal the sick, help other to be set free from demons, and the greatest miricle is to see somebody get saved and born again.

    Even Moses used God powers to show Pharaoh ,and convince that Moses had the true Go, I AM jehovah God, through signs and wounders

    Ex:4:1: And Moses answered and said, But, behold, they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice: for they will say, The LORD hath not appeared unto thee.
    Ex:4:2: And the LORD said unto him, What is that in thine hand? And he said, A rod.
    Ex:4:3: And he said, Cast it on the ground. And he cast it on the ground, and it became a serpent; and Moses fled from before it.
    Ex:4:4: And the LORD said unto Moses, Put forth thine hand, and take it by the tail. And he put forth his hand, and caught it, and it became a rod in his hand:
    Ex:4:5: That they may believe that the LORD God of their fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath appeared unto thee.
    Ex:4:6: And the LORD said furthermore unto him, Put now thine hand into thy bosom. And he put his hand into his bosom: and when he took it out, behold, his hand was leprous as snow.
    Ex:4:7: And he said, Put thine hand into thy bosom again. And he put his hand into his bosom again; and plucked it out of his bosom, and, behold, it was turned again as his other flesh.
    Ex:4:8: And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe thee, neither hearken to the voice of the first sign, that they will believe the voice of the latter sign.
    Ex:4:9: And it shall come to pass, if they will not believe also these two signs, neither hearken unto thy voice, that thou shalt take of the water of the river, and pour it upon the dry land: and the water which thou takest out of the river shall become blood upon the dry land.
    Ex:4:10: And Moses said unto the LORD, O my Lord, I am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but I am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue.
    Ex:4:11: And the LORD said unto him, Who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?
    Ex:4:12: Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say.
    Ex:4:13: And he said, O my Lord, send, I pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send.
    Ex:4:14: And the anger of the LORD was kindled against Moses, and he said, Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well. And also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart.
    Ex:4:15: And thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do.
    Ex:4:16: And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people: and he shall be, even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God.
    Ex:4:17: And thou shalt take this rod in thine hand, wherewith thou shalt do signs.

    samson had powers to show that God anointing was on him.J'g:14:5: Then went Samson down, and his father and his mother, to Timnath, and came to the vineyards of Timnath: and, behold, a young lion roared against him.
    J'g:14:6: And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him, and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

    Lu:4:18: The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,

    M'r:16:17: And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
    M'r:16:18: They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.

    many people followed Jesus because of his powers, and wounders, and Jesus said we can do the same and greater works, so we will have others wanting what we have , and see the powers that God has given us, that why we are light for this world.

    God bless you

  • evangelist
    evangelist

    A JHW said he would believe that God is Jesus or Jesus is God if there was more bible verses directly saying God is Jesus, more than Jesus is the Son only.

    The bible says:Joh:14:6: Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

    So If JHW are looking for the truth, why don`t they go to Jesus, and follow Jesus way?????

    This is a big Question special if Jesus said this.

    God bless

  • Earnest
    Earnest

    evangelist,

    That is a convincing array of scriptures to show that God has used miracles to demonstrate his support for individuals (Moses) and communities (Christian congregation). But if you are to maintain that the performance of powerful works is in itself proof of God's approval then you have to explain why Jesus said:

    "Many will say to me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not...perform many powerful works in your name?' And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU!"
    He clearly showed that those doing powerful works could still have "worthless fruit" and we know this is true in our day.

    Will Power,

    You said:

    My question about 1thes4:16 has nothing to do with a translation.
    Your question on this verse was "How do you accept a passage describing the Lord* Jesus as an angel with a footnote calling this Lord* Jehovah?" and it has everything to do with translation.

    The NWT translates this as "the Lord will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel's voice and with God's trumpet" and is a very literal translation of the underlying text.

    The footnote to this verse reads: "The Lord," [Hebrew aleph]ABVg; J7, J8, J13, J14, "Jehovah." What this means is that the codex Sinaiticus (Greek, fourth century), codex Alexandrinus (Greek, fifth century), codex Vaticanus 1209 (Greek, fourth century) and the Vulgate translation by Jerome (Latin, about 400 A.D.) all have the Greek/Latin equivalent of "The Lord" in this verse. It also means that four Hebrew translations (dated 1599,1661,1838 and 1846) substitute "The Lord" with the tetragrammaton in this verse.

    What role does translation play? The verse does not explicitly say whether it is referring to the Lord Jesus or to the Lord God. Evidently, the translators of these four Hebrew versions understood it was referring to God and so substituted kyrios (the Greek word for ‘Lord’) with the tetragrammaton. Now what is particularly interesting is how the Hebrew versions translate kyrios in the next verse (v.17). There it says: “Afterward we the living who are surviving will…meet the Lord in the air; and thus we shall always be with [the] Lord.” The first instance of ‘Lord’ in this verse is only substituted with the tetragrammaton by two of these Hebrew translations (those of 1599 and 1661). The second instance of ‘Lord’ is substituted with the tetragrammaton by all four Hebrew translations as well as J24 (A Literal Translation of the New Testament,1863, by Herman Heinfetter). This is interesting because it demonstrates that the Hebrew translations do not always concur on the substitution of the tetragrammaton. Clearly, in the first instance of ‘Lord’ in verse 17 the Hebrew translations of 1838 and 1846 did not use the tetragrammaton.

    Now your argument appears to be that the NWT is inconsistent because it does not substitutes kyrios (the Greek word for ‘Lord’) with ‘Jehovah’ in all instances where the Hebrew translations have the tetragrammaton. This argument is fallacious for two reasons. Firstly, because the Hebrew translations do not all agree on where the tetragrammaton should be used and so your argument amounts to only agreeing with those translations that use the tetragrammaton regardless of the context or textual support. Secondly, and more important, is the fact that the NWT specifically expresses the translation principles for substituting kyrios with ‘Jehovah’. It says:

    To know where the divine name was replaced by the Greek words kyrios and theos, we have determined where the inspired Christian writers have quoted verses, passages and expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures and then we have referred back to the Hebrew text to ascertain whether the divine name appears there. In this way we determined the identity to give kyrios and theos and the personality with which to clothe them…We have looked for agreement from the Hebrew versions to confirm our rendering.
    So, the principle for using ‘Jehovah’ in the NT was not because some Hebrew translations did so, but because the NW translators concluded that the Christian writers were using verses, passages and/or expressions from the Hebrew Scriptures which contained the divine name. Only when they had concluded that there was scriptural support for the divine name did they look for agreement from the Hebrew versions. It is quite absurd to suggest that because you concur in some instances with a translation that you must concur in all instances.
    Are you saying that the hebrew translations you like for other insertions is wrong in this particular instance but it is still cited in the footnote? I see deception and or sloppiness or both.
    I am saying that I don’t think Paul was using a passage or expression from the Hebrew Scriptures in this verse or that the context suggests that ‘Lord’ refers to God rather than Jesus. Hence, the principles laid down for using ‘Jehovah’ in the NT are not applicable in this verse. Nevertheless, the Hebrew translations that do use the tetragrammaton in this verse are still cited for consistency. Similarly, in verse 9 the Hebrew translation by Franz Delitzsch (J17) is cited in the footnote although the translators did not believe there was justification for substituting ‘God’ with ‘Jehovah’ in the text. I am sure that if the NWT only cited the Hebrew translations when they supported the NWT you would be saying how inconsistent it is not to show all instances that they use the tetragrammaton. Rather than deception or sloppiness I see a real effort made to be consistent and allow the reader to exercise their judgement on the accuracy of translation.
    Making changes 61 times, to the word of God…is an atrocity. The 61 citations had they been left alone surely conflict with WT doctrine of today.
    Once again your allegations are quite meaningless because you do not tell us where these 61 changes are, you do not demonstrate that they are contrary to the principle of quoting a verse, passage or expression from the Hebrew Scriptures containing God’s name, and you do not show how these verses would conflict with WT doctrine if God’s name had not been used. Now that is sloppiness.

    Earnest

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    evangelist,

    : I am looking for more scriptures that can prove to a Jehovah witness that God is jesus, and Jesus is God.

    I suggest fortune cookies. Yes, fortune cookies. If they are wrong, at least they taste pretty good.

    Now, if you are looking for more scriptures that can prove that Jehovah is the cosmic asshole, just ask. I've got lotsa them. Lotsa, lotsa them.

    Farkel

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    Thanks for the reply E. but I think there is still a misunderstanding. I guess translation in regards to 1 Thess 4:16 is not the right word. It would be interpretation. Now if I understand your bit, the NWT who has chosen to substitute Lord for Jehovah when it is supported by later 1599 Hebrew translations instead of using the ones from 300-400 manuscripts which clearly use Lord. But keep Lord in the sentence in certain circumstances, yet make a footnote showing good faith & fairness with translators. How noble.

    My point is if they had followed their reliable newer Hebrew translations that rightfully replaced the Greek for Lord with the word jehovah, the word jehovah would & should have been placed at 1 Thess 4:16. They couldn't tho because the WT interpretation
    contradicted the learned Hebrews. That was a verse that they use to prove that the Lord = Jesus = Angel.
    That is what I call bad translation. Pick & Choose & Change to suit.
    Big whoop, they say that this Lord means both Jehovah & Jesus, you choose for yourself, but if you don't choose our way you will need "adjustment".
    that always sounds to me like what the mob guys say just before someone gets their legs broke.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit