It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Debunking false claims about Jehovah's Witnesses. 1-14

page: 10
4
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 



Perhaps you didn't understand my post. The point is that the Pharisee's clearly understood that Jesus was claiming to be God. Because obviously He was claiming to be God. And when they confronted him He never denied it.

Gee maybe because ...He is God.


I guess you don't understand Jesus' response to them. To put it in other words, Jesus was saying something like:

"you guys are having a fit because I call myself THE SON OF GOD, and yet God himself had no problem calling you (the judges) "gods"????.

Get it?

He corrected them... he did NOT agree with them!




posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
so.. you are arguing a point about greek, and your rebuttal is to quote general opinions?

miriam0566
I am quoting from one of the two greatest 20th century Greek scholars.
His opinion is not general.
Please read this:
"Julius Mantey clearly means that the “Word was deity” in accord with the overwhelming testimony of Scripture, but the writers of the NWT have dragged in the interpretation “a god” to suit their own purpose, which purpose is the denial of Christ’s deity, and as a result a denial of the Word of God. The late Dr. Mantey publicly stated that he was quoted out of context, and he personally wrote the Watchtower, declaring, “There is no statement in our grammar that was ever meant to imply that ‘a god’ was a permissible translation in John 1:1” and “It is neither scholarly nor reasonable to translate John 1:1 ‘The Word was a god.’"


Originally posted by miriam0566
www.prudentialpublishing.info...


The first problem with that is this:
"(This, too, is not a saying of the historical Jesus. John put it in Jesus’ mouth because he believed that Jesus pre-existed.)"
By saying that, they believe that John made stuff up about Jesus. That's not true. Where is the evidence?
Plus, they have no evidence for their statement here:
"Most Christian translators render it “and the Word was God” because they believe that Jesus is equal to God."
Where's the evidence for that?


Originally posted by miriam0566
even mantey knows this!


Prove it. I want you to produce evidence where he said it or wrote it.


Originally posted by miriam0566
if im in the room, do you need a sign to show you? or do you just look at me?
if jesus' presence is literal and physical, why would his disciples need a sign?


No. They wouldn't need a sign. But I think your trying to make a argument for the jw's seeing Jesus invisibly. The Bible states that every eye shall see Him and He comes with clouds. Rev 1:7

I guess I need to get to know you if you don't mind. Were you brought up in a church? If so, which one? If not, where did you get your beliefs at?

Thanks,
TT



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by holywar
 


First of all they weren't judges they were angels (little "g" gods) of the divine council. God divided the nations among 70 angels after the tower of babel incident.

Second he was not "correcting them" he was using his skill and knowledge of the scriptures to avoid being stoned because his time had not yet come.

He very clearly and explicitly made the claim to deity and the early church all understood it.



"See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily," (Col 2:8-9)


[edit on 6/20/2009 by Bigwhammy]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 



First of all they weren't judges they were angels


well, Jesus was quoting from the 82nd Psalm which was a melody of Asaph. If you read this Psalm, you'll see Asaph was referring to the judges of Israel.

Psalm 82:1-8 (New International Version)

Psalm 82
A psalm of Asaph.

1 God presides in the great assembly;
he gives judgment among the "gods":

2 "How long will you [a] defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?
Selah

3 Defend the cause of the weak and fatherless;
maintain the rights of the poor and oppressed.

4 Rescue the weak and needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

5 "They know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 "I said, 'You are "gods";
you are all sons of the Most High.'

7 But you will die like mere men;
you will fall like every other ruler."

8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
adam and eve lost their eternal lives for eating a piece of fruit they were told not to.
how is
gen 9:[3] Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
[4] But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
[5] And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
[6] Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
any less of a commandment from god?
so god's laws are optional when you disagree or dont understand? is that what you are saying? are you saying that god will not resurrect those obedient to his laws?
this is not JW's laws you find ridiculous, its god's


Our salvation is not tied to the law.


Originally posted by miriam0566
jesus disagrees...
[2] The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son,
[3] And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come.
[4] Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
[5] But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:
[6] And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them.

[7] But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
those who were invited were not saved but destroyed. nothing about having an invitation saved them. action was required on their part and it wasnt the action they chose. they all went back to their business.
perhaps you should research more before making those types of statements


You should research more also before making those type of statements.
The above is about how the Jews rejected Jesus.
This is an accurate portrayal of God’s judgment on the Jews, especially the Jewish leaders, who rejected His invitation to accept the Messiah.


Originally posted by miriam0566
do you even read what you write?


I wrote it that means I read it.


Originally posted by miriam0566
everyone who believes in him. what do you think faith is?


Faith is the substance of things hoped for.


Originally posted by miriam0566
does everyone who believes in him include those that dont put faith in jesus?


No. You have to believe in Him to be saved. John 3:16


Originally posted by miriam0566
yes, yes it does. jw's are the only organization actually doing the times jesus told them to do.


What times are those? And who said Jesus told them to do something. Maybe it was the devil.

Thanks,
TT



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by holywar
 


Human judges was a later contrivance that has been corrected with Hebrew scholarship. It says "gods" which is bnai' elohim it means what it says = little g gods = angels.

Consider why would God say they would die "like men" if they were men?

See www.thedivinecouncil.com...

Phd Ancient Language scholar Micheal Heiser is working on a book about it.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 



So, what is your explanation for Jesus bringing up that scripture? How is it relevant to the accusation the Pharisees made about Jesus'.

I understand it clearly... you seem not to.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
lol, jw's never claimed that jesus wasnt resurrected. so if that is the argument, then the videos are even more ridiculous than before


Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to believe in the “resurrection” of Jesus Christ, but their definition of resurrection differs from the historic Christian position that teaches that Jesus raised His human body of “flesh and bones.” Instead, the Watchtower Society claims that Jesus did not raise His physical human body, but rather an invisible spirit—the archangel Michael. They state:
“…in his resurrection he ‘became a life-giving spirit.’ That was why for most of the time he was invisible to his faithful apostles… He needs no human body any longer… The human body of flesh, which Jesus Christ laid down forever as a ransom sacrifice, was disposed of by God’s power.”—“Things in Which it is Impossible for God to Lie,” pp. 332, 354
“So the evidence indicates that the Son of God was known as Michael before he came to earth and is known also by that name since his return to heaven where he resides as the glorified spirit Son of God.”—Reasoning from the Scriptures, 1985, 1989, p. 218

Guess what Jesus said:
Luke 24:39
Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Thanks,
TT



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
wow... so the thief made it to heaven before jesus did, and jesus was STILL call the firstborn of the dead..
amazing


They went together. Jesus said, "you will be with me".

Thanks,
TT



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by holywar
 


I did address it. He was using his knowledge of the scriptures to confuse them so he could get away as his time had not yet come and they were about to stone him. The same thing he did when he asked them about how David.



" But he said to them, “How can they say that the Christ is David’s son? For David himself says in the Book of Psalms, “ ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand," (Lk 20:41-42)


Seriously I am intimately familiar with the Hebrew and context of Psalm 82, please study this link it is truly fascinating when you understand that God had a divine council of Angels:

www.thedivinecouncil.com...

Recall when the Angel Gabriel told Daniel that he was delayed by the prince of the power of Persia? This was an allusion to the council.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

I am amazed that this was so unclear to you that you needed to refer to the scribblings of a brain injured prophetess? One who you already knew had a record of false prophecies.
What false prophecy is that?
Are you talking about the quote about 1843?
That was not a prophecy because it was written after 1844 as she is describing what she thought about why people kept coming up with different dates. She was saying that God did not correct it because they were having false expectations about what the date meant in the first place.

As for your interpretation of Genesis 3:16, later Jewish scholars translated the ancient Hebrew into Greek. Then it was translated into a form of Latin and later transcribed into a revised version of Latin and then German and then English. After that, it would be commented on and those traditions of interpretation handed down and built upon. How can you be sure what it means?
Please give me your own understanding of the Hebrew version of the verse.
Or do you accept all these people, between God telling it to Moses, and your understanding of the verse, to be true prophets?


[edit on 20-6-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

First of all they weren't judges they were angels (little "g" gods) of the divine council. God divided the nations among 70 angels after the tower of babel incident.
Wow. Which SBC prophet came up with that one?
Do you realize that is a cultish interpretation of that verse in the old testament that Jesus was referring to?

Just as a note: I am going next week to my local Southern Baptist Convention affiliated church, so do not think I am mocking your church, just your approach to argument.


[edit on 20-6-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

I am amazed that this was so unclear to you that you needed to refer to the scribblings of a brain injured prophetess? One who you already knew had a record of false prophecies.
What false prophecy is that?
Are you talking about the quote about 1843?
That was not a prophecy because it was written after 1844 as she is describing what she thought about why people kept coming up with different dates. She was saying that God did not correct it because they were having false expectations about what the date meant in the first place.



Let's look at a few of th many false prophecies of Occultist Ellen White.



"I also saw that Old Jerusalem would never be built up."
Early Writings Pg 75.


Hmmm, looks to me like Old Jerusalem has been built up.

Mrs White said she would be alive when Jesus returns...


"Soon our eyes were drawn to the East, for a small black cloud had
appeared, about half as large as a man's hand, which we all knew was the
sign of the Son of Man...we were changed and caught up together with
them to meet the Lord in the air." Early Writings pg 15-16.


Hmmm, the Lord has not returned. Is Mrs White still alive?

Mrs White said in May of 1856 that some of those listening to her will live
to see the return of Jesus...


Some of those that were attending a meeting with her would become food
for worms, and some would live to become subjects of the seven last
plagues, and some others would "remain upon the earth to be translated
at the coming of Jesus."
Testimonies for the Church, vol 1, pg 131-132.


Hmmm, that statement was made over 140 years ago. Has Jesus come yet?

Are any of those at that 1856 meeting still alive?

False Prophet


It goes on and on and on.........



As for your interpretation of Genesis 3:16, later Jewish scholars translated the ancient Hebrew into Greek. Then it was translated into a form of Latin and later transcribed into a revised version of Latin and then German and then English. After that, it would be commented on and those traditions of interpretation handed down and built upon. How can you be sure what it means?


Dude we have the old manuscripts in Hebrew from the Dead Sea scrolls find dated at ~100BC compared to the 1000 AD text (1100 years of copying) there are no revisions - you sound like an atheist skeptic



Please give me your own understanding of the Hebrew version of the verse.
Or do you accept all these people, between God telling it to Moses, and your understanding of the verse, to be true prophets?


This is nonsensical. They were scribes not prophets that copied the text and it is demonstrated to be precise. I don't know how much clearer God "greatly increasing your pain" could be as evidence that God cursed her.




[edit on 6/20/2009 by Bigwhammy]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jmdewey60

Wow. Which SBC prophet came up with that one?
Do you realize that is a cultish interpretation of that verse in the old testament that Jesus was referring to?



No it's called Ancient language scholarship by a phd Hebrew expert.

Mikes Resume'

A vast departure from a brain damaged mad woman like Ellen White.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

Hmmm, looks to me like Old Jerusalem has been built up.
Prove it. Seriously, dude, if I can call you that. It looks just like it has since after the Crusades.
Besides, you need to read the whole page and tell me if she is wrong.

Then I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes. Such a view is calculated to take the mind and interest from the present work of the Lord, under the message of the third angel; for those who think that they are yet to go to Jerusalem will have their minds there, and their means will be withheld from the cause of present truth to get themselves and others there. I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent. I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing and that souls all around them in this land could be helped by them and led to keep the commandments of God, but they were leaving them to perish. I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up; and that Satan was doing his utmost to lead the minds of the children of the Lord into these things now, in the gathering time, to keep them from throwing their whole interest into the present work of the Lord, and to cause them to neglect the necessary preparation for the day of the Lord.
Do you see all the Jews over in Jerusalem coverted to Christianity and awaiting the return of Jesus? If they have, I have not heard about it.
Don't you get the feeling that it is more deception on the part of the "debunkers"? That's their best shot? Pretty pathetic and the sign of Satan to me.


[edit on 20-6-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 02:35 AM
link   
hosently, im too tired to go through this thread post by post.

you guys have already decided what you want to believe and talking to you is like trying to convince someone that the sun is in the sky of a blazing summer day. you can feel the heat, you can see the light, you can even plainly see the sun sitting in the sky and yet you still deny it.

you want to pick on john 1:1, have fun. no greek person who speaks the language natively will take you side. but it hardly matters, does it? the entire context of the scriptures points to jesus being separate! even scripture NOT in the gospel..

duet 18:[17] And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.
[18] I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee(moses), and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.
[19] And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

the jews understood this passage to be the messiah. paul later quoted this passage...

acts 3:[22] For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you.
[23] And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.
[24] Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days.
[25] Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed.
[26] Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.

its staring you right in the face.

you still refuse to address my list of things that jesus did that prove he was separate.

instead you simply state "its false doctrine". put your money where your mouth is. prove it. show me not only scriptures, but context that shows undeniable that jesus is god.

if this was a pointed debate, you would have been finished by now which is why i cant stand this thread anymore.

how do you debate with someone who denies something even when its right in front of him? there is a point where its really hard not to make comments on the inability to absorb simple concepts that are laid out before you. its incredible.

believe JW are a satanic cult? keep believing it.

if a "satanist" is the only person who knows how to actually read the bible (2nd graders are able to read too) and let the bible speak for itself, then id rather be a "satanist" than a dogmatic, stubborn, hypocrite of a "christian" who doesnt even know what the word "son" means



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 


you have some powerful points.

On another angle, when Jesus said that the "...Father and I are one just as you and I are one" then those who continue to believe that Jesus is God can also be reconcilled in the fact that they must also be God, as stated by Jesus Christ.

Personally I enjoy being a child of God, less responsibilty with world issues, I can just handover to God and sleep tight in the knowledge that God has everything under control... (although to me it may appear chaotic with the murders etc)

so people really are interesting...they either take passages word for word, or interpret passages to suit their arguements or to suit how correct they believe they are. People interestingly enough manage to delete passages that no longer suit their needs or lifestyle, with convenient explanations like, that was in the old days not modern day.... people are people.

I like the more liberal interpretations of the bible.

The other day a preacher at my church dogmatically made it ever so clear that it was Eve who ate the apple therefore leading to the down fall of the humanrace .... ............................................................................................................. it is 2009....... It was also made clear that if men look after their woman then their woman will give them a great night.... Yuk, the sexual overtones were disgusting. I soooo did not expect to hear that...... hadnt been to church for like 4 months, will be another 4 months before I return. The church remains ruled by men, that is not God like in any manner or form.

God bless you all





posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by miriam0566
 

you still refuse to address my list of things that jesus did that prove he was separate.
I guess this is what you mean by that. I am not joining them, but I figure I can make a few little comments and give them a hint on how it is done (meaning, to address something).

[1] These words spake Jesus, and lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, "Father, the hour is come; glorify thy Son, that thy Son also may glorify thee:"
one person, talking to another person, not one "aspect" talking to another "aspect". if jesus was just another side of god, then there would be absolutely no need for god to glorify the son, or vice versa.
The "Me" came into existence as this aspect became something more than an aspect, but became something separate to the extent of being a distinct individual.

[2] "As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him."
if jesus was god, why would he be "given" power?
God is the source of everything to Jesus, just as God is the source of everything to us.

[3] "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent."
"the only true god, AND jesus christ" not the only true god, jesus christ. black and white, 2 separate people. jesus also being "sent". do you ever send yourself?
God is not a people. Jesus is a people, for the purpose of being sent.

[4] "I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do."
how is it that god is "giving" or assigning work for himself, and then patting himself on the back for accomplishing it?
The whatever it was that Jesus was, before he became Jesus, was sent to do things and that was his purpose. In this instance, he had to become a human being.

[5] "And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."
"i had WITH thee" not i had AS thee.
Was not Jesus "with" God while he was on earth as a man? If yes, then in the same sense, he was with God before coming to earth to live. If Jesus was not "with" God, then why do we believe in him?

[6] "I have manifested thy name unto the men which thou gavest me out of the world: thine they were, and thou gavest them me; and they have kept thy word."
"gavest me"?
Jesus is saying, "Now I am their God".

[7] "Now they have known that all things whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee."
jesus' works were FROM god, not god's
Jesus' works were the works of God.

[8] "For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me."
clearly jesus is likening himself to a messenger. if jesus was god, i guess he was delivering his own message? notice that jesus doesnt say it was his message but god's
Jesus "came out" from God.

[9] "I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine."
so these people were god's but they were given to jesus. so they were god's and then god gave them to god?
Jesus seems to have joint custody.

[10] "And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them."
so, god's peoples are god's and god's peoples are god's?
Jesus will be glorified by not loosing those he was given.

[11] "And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are."
many use john 10:30 "I and my Father are one." to try to prove the divinity of christ, yet jesus himself shows that this is not one in a literal sense but rather in unity.
Whether by the name of God or the name of Jesus, they will be kept as their own.

i am not god. i am human, i sin, i die and god can do none of these things. if jesus and god are one literal person, then how am i to be one with them? how am i to be one with other christians? because one means unity not sameness of person.
You are held in the same hand as the others, to be kept safe by God.

[12] "While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled."
so god looked out for god's people?
Jesus presented to them the true God, as His representative.

[13] "And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves."
"come I to thee". have you ever returned to yourself?
Only Jesus can, as a part of god, enter into the very presence of God, and so he does but in the form of a man to represent us before God, just as he represented God to us.

[14] "I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world."
"your word." not MY word, YOUR
Jesus was not under the control of the sinful world system, headed by Satan. Jesus was under submission to God and maintained the ability to keep that status through adversity.

[15] "I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
[16] They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
[17] Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth."
"thy truth" not my truth. jesus is apparently humble and doesnt take much credit. which would be very weird if he was god and deserved the credit in the first place/
Jesus being also God, himself (The Word was the same as God, from our perspective) allowed him to be a perfect vessel to hold all the truth of God within him.

[18] "As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world."
clear comparison. jesus was "sent" just like christians are "sent". so if jesus is god, then christians are jesus?
God sanctifies Jesus and Jesus sanctifies the Apostiles.

[19] "And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth."

Jesus pledges to himself to be obedient to the point of death, in order so save those that he loves.

[20] "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;"

Jesus prays to God. And rightly so because he exists of the Father and can not without the father.

[21] "That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me."
again, referencing john 10:30 we see that there are clear differences between god, jesus, and christians, and yet all three are united or "one"
There is an unseen bond that unites Jesus with God but the connection is unmistakable. We know Jesus is truth because he is connected to God who has to be truth.

[22] "And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:"
"gavest" again this time showing jesus also "giving" it to christians.
Jesus' glory is his ability to transmit truth.

[23] "I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me."
three separate entities, god, jesus and followers. nothing and i mean nothing to elude that they are the same being
God is not an "entity".

[24] "Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world."
"given me" "be with me" "lovedst me"
separate people
God is not a people. God has known what Jesus was before he was jesus and loved him then, and is shown in that God has allowed The Word to continuously remain God's representative since before anyone can reckon. And more than that, really because The Word was actually the representation of God.

[25] "O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me."
jesus keeps emphasizing "sent me"
God practicaly had to seperate The Word from Himself.

[26] "And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them."
"thy name" not my name
Jesus needs not steal God's glory because Jesus is God's glory.


[edit on 22-6-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
From ancient times, people have used allegory to explain away passages they were uncomfortable with or in denial about. They justify doing this because some of the Bible is meant to be taken allegorically, such as Psalm 91:4, “He will cover you with His feathers and under His wings you will find refuge.” This is not meant to imply that God is a bird, but rather to evoke the image of a mother hen gathering her chicks under her wings to protect them. Jesus applied this image to Himself in Matt. 23:37.

So how do we know when the Bible is meant to be taken literally and when it isn’t? The “golden rule” of interpretation goes like this. “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studies in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise. God in revealing His Word neither intends nor permits the reader to be confused. He wants His children to understand.” (Dr. D. A. Waite) If a passage of Scripture describes something that could actually happen just as it’s described, then it’s best to assume that’s what the Lord intends to do.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by dthwraith
So how do we know when the Bible is meant to be taken literally and when it isn’t? The “golden rule” of interpretation goes like this. “When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context, studies in the light of related passages and axiomatic and fundamental truths, indicate clearly otherwise.


exactly. and the context of the gospels (ESPECIALLY john) say jesus is god's son, not god himself, or god THE son, or any variation thereof.

people like to attack JW's because of things like john 1:1. they make the claim that JW's translate it "a god" so as to support their "false" doctrine that jesus is not god. the funny thing is, you dont NEED john 1:1 to support that claim. their are many many scriptures that clearly describe the relationship jesus has to his father as son and as separate.

so its actually the opposite! trinitarians are the ones who need scriptures like john 1:1 so that they can push their doctrine DESPITE context.

scriptures like john 14:28 where it says "for my Father is greater than I" blasts the trinity to pieces. if jesus IS god, then god cannot be greater than him, then that means jesus is lying.

i have quoted this scripture literally dozens of times on this forum. only one trinitarian was brave enough to reply to it, the rest ignored it. he replied basically saying that jesus was god making himself into a limited form, and that jesus could say that truthfully. the are some problems with this, 1- where does the bible say anything about that? and 2- if jesus is god in limited form, then how is jesus co-equal and co-eternal?

if jesus is god, why is he called son (υιος - son, child)?

if jesus is god, why does god command him?

why did jesusGOD have to learn obedience? (heb 5:8)

trinitarians... the bible does not agree with you. let me repeat. the bible doesnt agree with you

scriptures like john 1:1, 10:30, are clear given the context of the rest of the gospels

just because JW's understand this does NOT make them satanic. in fact, after this thread, im firmly convinced its the opposite.

the only way a person can look at these scriptures and deny them with such a degree of passion a majority of people do is if they are blind.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join