Is the man Jesus Christ also the LORD?

by hooberus 93 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  LittleToe

  Herk:
  Sorry, friend, but you appear to have a siege mentality. I only asked your opinion, and you feel the need to evade and attack.

  I feel no need nor desire to rebutt your points. You are welcome to them. Besides, Ellderwho appears to be addressing your more obvious errors... biblically...

  I never realised before that Unitarians believed that angels could take the name YHWH...
  ...interesting...

  Nark:I'd be interested in your further comment, on these deliberations, if you're still reading.
  You have a viewpoint that I find refreshing and well researched, beyond a simple biblical theology..
• 

  Narkissos

  LT: Perhaps you read my last post on this thread (p. 2) before I edited it this (European) morning. In the last edition there was a response (fwiw) to your question about the "angel of the Lord".

  Nothing to add on the later developments: trying to prove anything "just from the Bible" is just meaningless to me, unless the history of ideas and literature between the OT and the NT comes into the picture...
• 

  herk

  Kenneson,
  

  So the oneness that he speaks of in John 17 is not one that raises us to equality with Jesus and the Father, is it?

  Would you mind explaining how you translate "oneness" into "equality"? It seems to me you are complicating something that is very simple. Jesus said he and his Father are one. He prayed that his followers might be made one with him and his Father. This has nothing to do with equality, but it has to do with unity and likemindedness.
  

  It is the New World Translation in John 1:18 that makes Jesus the only begotten god and ergo posits the two Gods concept.

  • Amplified Bible - the only begotten God
  • Hendriksen - The only begotten God
  • NASB - the only begotten God

  It baffles me that you see "god" but not "God" as establishing "the two Gods concept."
  

  Thus we don't have two Gods, but two persons who are God.

  I suppose that only a trinitarian has this unique and fascinating ability to see two persons as not really two but merely one. Only a trinitarian can comprehend three individuals with separate minds, wills, souls, spirits and hearts as three persons but not as three separate entities. Quite a miraculous achievement, I must say!

  On Rev. 21:22 Trinitarians make a distinction between the two persons here. The point is that both the Father and the Lamb constitute the one temple.

  More than one individual can constitute a temple. This is shown at 1 Corinthians 3:16: "Do you [plural in Greek] not know that you [plural] are a temple of God ...?" Also, Ephesians 2:19-22: "You are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God's household, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the corner stone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit."

  Yes, there is unity between Jesus and his followers, but it is not the same oneness that he and the Father possess.

  And yet, the words of Jesus are "that they may be one even as We are" and "that they may be one, just as We are one." (John 17:11, 22)

  herk
• 

  LittleToe

  Nark:

  ...trying to prove anything "just from the Bible" is just meaningless to me...

  Understood. It was your extra-biblical knowledge I was counting on, though.
  I reread your comments, and found them fascinating.
• 

  herk

  elderwho,
  

  You present what Paul states and leave out key verses such as verse 6 and 7 which explictly states; did not regard equality with God something to be grasped" Nas/ Niv I cannot explain the Triune nature of Jesus, but Paul tells me I will not be able to "grasp" this idea.

  If you will re-read my post, you will notice that I did comment on 6 and 7 in connection with Adam. And if a person is really using his mind when reading Philippians, he won't come to the conclusion that Jesus is God because he "did not regard equality with God something to be grasped." If he already was God, what would be the point of mentioning that he did not grasp for equality with God??? Persons grasp for something they do not possess, not something they already have.

  Where, pray tell, does Paul tell you that you will not be able to "grasp" the idea of the Trinity? Please give chapter and verse.
  

  v7 "but made himself nothing" Niv "but emptied himself" Nas. The text does not say Yahweh did this to him (Jesus) that Jesus did this "himself."

  So, what is your point?
  

  Because Paul wrote this letter from prison, the main highlight is the fact that Paul still finds joy. Joy in who? Christ, not Yahweh.

  I get the impression that you have not yet actually read the epistle when you say that the most important lesson of Philippians is "that Paul still finds joy."

  The Jw has a hard time with this as well, in the NWT the end of v24 asks the retorical question "who was with me"

  You seem to be the one having a hard time. If you would consider context and the testimony of other passages, you would not conclude that God was all alone at the time of creation. When he asked "Who was with me?," he was addressing the people of Israel and pointing out to them that no other God was present at the time of creation. You might fail to see this if you don't read a good portion of Isaiah and you merely zero in on 44:24 and some surrounding verses.

  herk
• 

  LittleToe

  Just to point out something that I've repeatedly noticed that you are reasaonably good at, Herk, and that is evading the difficult questions thrown at you.
  You aren't at all bad at using "bait and switch".
  LOL

  For that reason, I've taken an inordinate amount of pleasure in looking out for the points that you don't address.
  It's very informative

  Keep up the fine fight...
  
• 

  Kenneson

  Herk,

  The oneness in John 17 is indeed unity and likemindedness based on mutual love (vs. 24) and is not refering to the oneness that extends beyond that which only he and his father possess. None of us can claim that we are the natural Son of God (John 1:14, John 3:16) and in the bosom position of the Father (John 1:18). That unique oneness belongs only to Jesus and the Father. Our sonship is by adoption (Gal.4:5; Eph. 1:4-5)

  You say Trinitarians have 3 Gods, but yet you say that the Father is God and Jesus is the only begotten god. So do you have 1 God and 1 god? Isn't that 2, a big God and a little god?
• 

  herk

  Kenneson,

  The oneness in John 17 is indeed unity and likemindedness based on mutual love (vs. 24) and is not refering to the oneness that extends beyond that which only he and his father possess.

  How do you come up with this kind of thinking? I'm starting to think you and I live on different planets. Where I come from, when a person says others are 'just like us,' he means 'just like us.' If Jesus said that he wanted oneness for his disciples such as the oneness he had with his Father, I believe his every word. I don't believe he meant one kind of oneness in one breath and another kind of oneness in another breath. And I have no idea why you seem to be having such a problem with what he said.

  So do you have 1 God and 1 god?

  Apparently you haven't been reading my posts. Angels, Moses, the judges and kings of Israel, as well as Jesus, are all called "God" due to being the agents of the Almighty. According to your reasoning, the Bible and I teach that there are many Gods. What you fail to see is that the Bible calls others "God" and "the Lord" because they speak and act in behalf of the only One in all existence who truly is the God and Father of us all. Even Jesus spoke of him as "my God."

  • Matthew 27:46 - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
  • Mark 15:34 - "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"
  • John 20:17 - "I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God."
  • Revelation 3:2 - "I have not found your deeds completed in the sight of my God."
  • Revelation 3:12 - "I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will not go out from it anymore; and I will write on him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from my God."

  herk
• 

  Kenneson

  Herk,

  If we are just like the Father and the Son, how are they unique? And if they are unique, than how are we just like them (unless we also are Gods)?

  I have read your posts and in them I see henotheism, whereas in the Bible I see monotheism.
• 

  ellderwho

  Herk,

  If he already was God, what would be the point of mentioning that he did not grasp for equality with God???

  Are you serious? You argue like a Jw. This ridiculous play on words.

  Ph. 1:6 "who, although he existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. NAS

  "who being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped" NIV

  5For, let this mind be in you that is also in Christ Jesus, 6who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, Youngs Lit Translation

  6 In God?s own form existed he,And shared with God equality,Deemed nothing needed grasping. International Standard Ver.

  From the few texts above we can see the meaning that is obivious. From one claiming to be a adherant to textual perfection why is this one word "grasped" so hard to fit into your understanding? Because you have a predetermined agenda that Jesus cannot be God and man.

  Side note: " thought it not robbery to be equal with God" (closer to Greek linguistics)

  On the other subject you have evaded, is the creator issue, and claim I use one or few verses in Isaiah to expond the fact that Yahweh states he was alone. But fail to see I was highlighting the fact he said" I did it myself"

  If you would consider context and the testimony of other passages, you would not conclude that God was all alone at the time of creation

  Yeah, your right lets consider the following;

  Gen 1:1, 2:7 Ps 33:6 104:30,

  Isa. 40:28 the creator of the ends of the earth"

  42:5 This is what God the LORD has says he who created the heavens and stretched them out"

  44:24 I am the LORD, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself"

  45:12,18 " it is I who made the earth" 18 "he who created the heavens he is God"

  It matters not if Yahweh was alone. You have to agree though if Yahweh says "I made it" then we have to conclude that Yahweh did in fact do it. Then tops it off and says I did it myself.

  Lets look at what Jesus does;

  Jo 1:10, 1Cor 8:6, Col 1:16, Heb 1:10 Rev 4:8-11,

  he was addressing the people of Israel and pointing out to them that no other God was present at the time of creation

  Heb 1:10 He(God) also says "In the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands"

  Whose hands pray tell would you say these are?

  You might fail to see this if you don't read a good portion of Isaiah and you merely zero in on 44:24 and some surrounding verses

  Herk, the bible must fit together. Not just your interpretation of Isaiah. Isaiah must fit with John, Colossians,Hebrews etc...

  You wind up having to discard critical verses which identify Jesus as creator. Because you cannot have it this way. You somewhere along the line will have to create Jesus. And somehow insert this into scripture.

  E