Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah?
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
If they are the same person…
How can Jesus die? Jesus is God and the Bible says God is there from the beginning to the end.
[/quote]
His death was only body death, spirit lives…We can’t kill it.
He was fully human.
Prayer is tapping into spirituality which is what he was doing as a human.
Why can’t God do what he wants to?
Because of his humility.
It never descended to human state so it did not have to be restored.
Yeah, that would have gone over well. It’d look like he was chasing his own human glory. He didn’t reveal who he was at that time.
The idea of the trinity is so foreign to the way the Bible is written. I shared an article that talked about the trinity and it mentioned the idea of the trinity didn’t get established until the 4 century C.E. Scripture is being used to try and prove something that didn’t come about until later, all the while in the arguments, Jesus is referred to as the Son and Jehovah as the Father.
I know this concept is wanted to be there by so many people, but it just isn’t.
[/quote]
It is. The spliting of the Trinity by the Jehovah’s Witnesses didn’t occur until the 19th Century. The counsel if Nicea did not come together to to pull things out of their asses. It was to unify the dogma of the churches so they all teach the same things. There was a problem in the early church were people were doing their own things. Some were harming the body for the sake of the spirit and using their own scripture. The Bible as we know it was not assembled in the late 3 rd century. Protestantism removed 7 books from the Bible in the 16th century. The bible you hold today is that one. The church and the new testament scriptures grew together, they are not separate and they require each other
There are tons of scriptural references to 3 manifestations in one God. BlackSheep did an excellent job showing this.
It’s not that strange, Hindu’s do very much the same thing. They understand many manifestations of the one God. There’s nearly a billion of them.
Jn 14:9
Jesus said to him, "Have I been with you for so long a time and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah? [/quote]
Don’t twist it. Jesus give credit to his father, Jehovah, for everything. To be saved there, needed to be a ransom. Jesus was that Ransom.
Jehovah is God, Father
Jesus is his son
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah? [/quote]
Don’t twist it. Jesus give credit to his father, Jehovah, for everything. To be saved there, needed to be a ransom. Jesus was that Ransom.
Jehovah is God, Father
Jesus is his son[/quote]
You telling me, “Don’t twist it?” That sure is calling the Kettle Black.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall have eternal life.
That sounds like Jesus is where salvation is found. To beleive in God does not save us and you are willing to admit to that. You have to beleive in the sacrifice that Jesus made for us. Jesus is where salvation lies. That is why Jesus is Jehovah.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah? [/quote]
Don’t twist it. Jesus give credit to his father, Jehovah, for everything. To be saved there, needed to be a ransom. Jesus was that Ransom.
Jehovah is God, Father
Jesus is his son[/quote]
You telling me, “Don’t twist it?” That sure is calling the Kettle Black.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall have eternal life.
That sounds like Jesus is where salvation is found. To beleive in God does not save us and you are willing to admit to that. You have to beleive in the sacrifice that Jesus made for us. Jesus is where salvation lies. That is why Jesus is Jehovah.
[/quote]
Look up that word begotten.
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah? [/quote]
Don’t twist it. Jesus give credit to his father, Jehovah, for everything. To be saved there, needed to be a ransom. Jesus was that Ransom.
Jehovah is God, Father
Jesus is his son[/quote]
You telling me, “Don’t twist it?” That sure is calling the Kettle Black.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall have eternal life.
That sounds like Jesus is where salvation is found. To beleive in God does not save us and you are willing to admit to that. You have to beleive in the sacrifice that Jesus made for us. Jesus is where salvation lies. That is why Jesus is Jehovah.
[/quote]
Look up that word begotten.[/quote]
Why dont you answer the questions?
You always ask questions instead of answering them.
Jesus was born of a virgin ok so when you look at it Jesus is God’s Son. That does not mean he is not God. Since God does not have DNA, would you assume that Jesus only has half of the chromosomes? I think you would have to be God to still be alive with only half of human chromosomes.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Hey this is an interesting read:
"The Jehovah Witness Movement was begun by Charles Taze Russell.[/quote]
The Jehovah’s Witnesses organization was actually begun by Joseph Rutherford after the death of Charles Taze Russell. Russell was a non-sectarian who did not believe in such an authoritarian organization as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, nor did he believe in its condemnatory policies towards those who disagree with its leadership. The true founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses was Joseph Rutherford, who, after Russell died, began immediately to use the Watch Tower as a basis to form his ‘new organization,’ as it was referred to in the Watch Tower in December 1916, right after Russell died. By 1930, the majority of the earlier Bible Students had rejected Rutherford’s new organization, and the Bible Students movement continued it affairs apart from the Watch Tower. This led Rutherford to designate his organization ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’ in 1931, in order to distinguish his new organization from the general Bible Students movement.
There were many Bible Students all around the world who spoke out against Rutherford’s new ‘organization.’ One well-known Bible Student who spoke out against the Rutherford’s new ‘organization’ policies was Morton Edgar, who, around 1929, wrote:
[quote]The word ‘organisation’ does not occur in the Bible, and its use is apt to mislead. The Scriptural word is ‘kingdom’; and our Lord distinctly said that 'the kingdom of God cometh not with observation’â??with outward showâ??Luke 17:20. Therefore there is no ‘visible organisation of God on earth,’ as is claimed by some to their undoing.
How often Brother Russell warned us against this very thing, and how foolish we shall be if we do not heed his warning. We shall indeed be foolish if we claim that ‘only through our system or organisation will the heavenly Father accept praise and service’; for this would make it appear necessary for every spirit-begotten child of God to ‘bow the knee’ to the few who have constituted themselves heads of the organisation. The apostle shows that it is only the carnal, fleshly mind that is deceived by such unscriptural claimsâ??1 Cor. 3:1-6, 18-23…
I for one entirely repudiate this talk of ‘God’s visible organization on earth’ during this Gospel Age. It is dangerous talk, and gives rise to all kinds of persecutions and ungodly claims, as anyone who has consecrated reasoning powers can see… If there was one thing that our dear Brother Russell warned us against, more strongly than any other, it was this very thing. Brother Russell never made any such claim for the ‘Society’ when he was here in the flesh and amongst us, for he knew better. But Judge Rutherford, apparently, does not know enough to keep himself clear of it. In the very first chapter of the first volume of ‘Studies,’ Brother Russell speaks of this ‘false idea that the nominal church, in its present condition, is the sole agency’ for the recovery of the world from sin.[/quote]
Published in ‘Gleanings From Glasgow’
Russell was a non-sectarian, who believed that true Christians could be found in all Christian denominations. Russell’s core teaching was the ransom for all, that is, that all who are dying in Adam will be blessed. (Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21,22; 1 Timothy 2:5,6) Rutherford rejected and misrepresented that teaching, and replaced it with doctrines that basically in effect said: ‘Join with me, or else be eternally destroyed.’ Russell never taught such a teaching.
Russell never rejected the true Christian doctrine of hell; he did reject the false doctrines that many Christians adopted and adapted from Grecian mythology concerning what the Christian hell is. No where in the Bible is the Bible hell presented as a place of eternal torment.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
Lets use Honest’s logic.
I just looked up the Hebrew Root for Jesus. It is Jeshewa or Joshua which means “Jehovah is Salvation.” We all don’t dissagree that Jesus’ sacrifice is what brings us salvation do we? By Jesus bringing us salvation wouldn’t that mean that Jesus is Jehovah? [/quote]
Don’t twist it. Jesus give credit to his father, Jehovah, for everything. To be saved there, needed to be a ransom. Jesus was that Ransom.
Jehovah is God, Father
Jesus is his son[/quote]
You telling me, “Don’t twist it?” That sure is calling the Kettle Black.
For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that who so ever believes in him shall have eternal life.
That sounds like Jesus is where salvation is found. To beleive in God does not save us and you are willing to admit to that. You have to beleive in the sacrifice that Jesus made for us. Jesus is where salvation lies. That is why Jesus is Jehovah.
[/quote]
Look up that word begotten.[/quote]
Why dont you answer the questions?
You always ask questions instead of answering them.
Jesus was born of a virgin ok so when you look at it Jesus is God’s Son. That does not mean he is not God. Since God does not have DNA, would you assume that Jesus only has half of the chromosomes? I think you would have to be God to still be alive with only half of human chromosomes. [/quote]
The reason i ask questions is because you are making claims that aren’t true and then using those claims in your argument to make a point.
The fact that Jesus was BEGOTTEN means he was created, thus the reason I had you look that up.
And Mary didn’t give chromosomes to Jesus. He was shielded off in the womb. If she had, Jesus wouldn’t have been perfect. (imperfect genes + perfect genes = imperfect genes)
You are saying that Jesus is Jehovah’s Son, but is also Jehovah. That is your argument, based on a scripture that says that Jesus was created. That doesn’t make any sense. It is a contradictory thought.
Every man is a liar to some extent; a Christian does not judge fellow Christians by the flesh, but by the spirit.
Russell had indeed been ordained, I believe, both by God and man, as a shepherd of the sheep. He was first ordained by man in Allegheny, but the it became apparent that this was not being recognized. By the definitions that the defense attorney was giving to ordination, however, ordination would evidently only be recognized by if given by a trinitarian recognized organization.
Russell never made any such claim.
http://rlctr.blogspot.com/2008/09/russells-perjury.html
Stated,
“Look up that word begotten…Jesus had a beginning, was created… Because Jesus was created, and the fact that he admitted to the fact that he wasn’t equal to his Father, they are not the same person…”
“Begotten” (Gk. monogenes-“only,” “unique,” “only-begotten”). This adjective is a compound of mono-(“only”) and genes (“race,” from ginomai, “to be born”); thus, monogenes means “only-begotten,” the “only one of its kind.” It is known from around the Seventh Century B.C. The mono-prefix stresses the “only” aspect, i.e., it means “without brothers and sisters” (Buchsel, “monogenes,” Kittel, 4:738).
In the Fourth Centry, a heresy known as Arianism mistakenly saw monogenes as a derivation related to the word gennao which means “to beget, to generate, or to give birth.” This inappropriate connection was used to support the false doctrine that jesus was created by God and was not eternal with Him. However, the context of John’s Gospel makes it clear that monogenes is emphasizing the unique relationship between God the Son and God the Father, and not the physical birth of Jesus. Nowhere does the Bible teach that Jesus is a created being. On the contrary, the scriptures reveal Jesus Christ to be the Second Person of the Trinity, coeternal with the Father and with the Holy Spirit. “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Col. 2:9). Jesus was with God in eternity past.
In addition, as the “only-begotten” of the Father, Jesus is not simply unique, He is the one who was with God from the beginning, the pre-existent, eternal Son (John 1:2; 8:58; 17:5,24). He did not become the “Son” of God at the incarnation; He is the Son from eternity and remains so forever. This truth is a divine mystery which John did not attempt to fully explain. In one creed of the Church (the Nicene Creed) this mystery is stated as follows: Christ is “eternally begotten of the Father.”
As a side note, in “A Textual Commentary of the Greek New Testament,” Bruce Metzger explains why some modern Greek texts, such as Nestle-Aland 26th, read “only-begotten God” at John 1:18. In addition to stating significant internal support, he says: “With the acquisition of p66 and p75 (two of the oldest papyri), both of which read theos (God), the external support of this reading had been notably strengthened” (p.198).
[quote]blacksheep wrote:
Stated,
“Look up that word begotten…Jesus had a beginning, was created… Because Jesus was created, and the fact that he admitted to the fact that he wasn’t equal to his Father, they are not the same person…”
“Begotten” (Gk. monogenes-“only,” “unique,” “only-begotten”). This adjective is a compound of mono-(“only”) and genes (“race,” from ginomai, “to be born”); thus, monogenes means “only-begotten,” the “only one of its kind.” It is known from around the Seventh Century B.C. The mono-prefix stresses the “only” aspect, i.e., it means “without brothers and sisters” (Buchsel, “monogenes,” Kittel, 4:738).
In the Fourth Centry, a heresy known as Arianism mistakenly saw monogenes as a derivation related to the word gennao which means “to beget, to generate, or to give birth.” This inappropriate connection was used to support the false doctrine that jesus was created by God and was not eternal with Him. However, the context of John’s Gospel makes it clear that monogenes is emphasizing the unique relationship between God the Son and God the Father, and not the physical birth of Jesus. Nowhere does the Bible teach that Jesus is a created being. On the contrary, the scriptures reveal Jesus Christ to be the Second Person of the Trinity, coeternal with the Father and with the Holy Spirit. “For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily” (Col. 2:9). Jesus was with God in eternity past.
In addition, as the “only-begotten” of the Father, Jesus is not simply unique, He is the one who was with God from the beginning, the pre-existent, eternal Son (John 1:2; 8:58; 17:5,24). He did not become the “Son” of God at the incarnation; He is the Son from eternity and remains so forever. This truth is a divine mystery which John did not attempt to fully explain. In one creed of the Church (the Nicene Creed) this mystery is stated as follows: Christ is “eternally begotten of the Father.”
As a side note, in “A Textual Commentary of the Greek New Testament,” Bruce Metzger explains why some modern Greek texts, such as Nestle-Aland 26th, read “only-begotten God” at John 1:18. In addition to stating significant internal support, he says: “With the acquisition of p66 and p75 (two of the oldest papyri), both of which read theos (God), the external support of this reading had been notably strengthened” (p.198).[/quote]
The line of reasoning that you used to reach the conclusion that Jesus is not created is not evident here. Begotten means produced by. It does NOT have to indicate being born, just produced.
John does not emphasize that Jesus is part of a trinity. John clearly speaks of himself as a only-begotten son from a father.
“eternally begotten by the father”? What is that suppose to mean?
Jehovah did not leave us in the dark on this MOST important fact. To worship Jehovah in spirit and truth we have to know the truth. This is not a mystery.
Stated,
“The line of reasoning that you used to reach the conclusion that Jesus is not created is not evident here. Begotten means produced by. It does NOT have to indicate being born, just produced…we have to know the truth…”
Your sources:
(1) The free Dictionary
(2) Word Net Search 3.0
Versus the following sources:
(1) The Word of God (Manuscripts, Papyri, Majuscules, Minuscules, Lectionaries, Church Fathers, Early Versions, Major Greek Texts, Byzantine Text, Egyptian Text, and Printed Greek text)
(2) Westcott-Hort (Greek Scholars)
(3) Bruce Metzger (Textual Commentary of the Greek N.T.)
(4) Nestle-Aland (Greek N.T.)
(5) Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich (Greek-English Lexicon of the N.T.)
(6) Kittel-Friedrich (Theological Dictionary of the N.T.)
(7) Brown (New International Dictionary of N.T. Theology)
(8) Liddel-Scott (Greek-English Lexicon)
(9) Thayer (Greek-English Lexicon)
“The truth” is available. You just have to search for it with an open mind and heart.
“Begotten” (Gk. monogenes-“only,” “unique,” “only-begotten”). This adjective is a compound of mono-(“only”) and genes (“race,” from ginomai, “to be born”); thus, monogenes means “only-begotten,” the “only one of its kind.”
You said it right there. The truth.
Colossians 1:15
“He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.”
Firstborn (Prototokos). From Protos, meaning first in time or place; and Tikto, meaning to bring forth, bear, produce.
John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”
Only-begotten (monogenes). From monos, meaning alone, and Ginomai, meaning to become, i.e. to come into existence, begin to be, receive being.
Jesus was brought forth, produced, brought into existence.
[quote]blacksheep wrote:
Stated,
“The line of reasoning that you used to reach the conclusion that Jesus is not created is not evident here. Begotten means produced by. It does NOT have to indicate being born, just produced…we have to know the truth…”
Your sources:
(1) The free Dictionary
(2) Word Net Search 3.0
Versus the following sources:
(1) The Word of God (Manuscripts, Papyri, Majuscules, Minuscules, Lectionaries, Church Fathers, Early Versions, Major Greek Texts, Byzantine Text, Egyptian Text, and Printed Greek text)
(2) Westcott-Hort (Greek Scholars)
(3) Bruce Metzger (Textual Commentary of the Greek N.T.)
(4) Nestle-Aland (Greek N.T.)
(5) Bauer-Arndt-Gingrich (Greek-English Lexicon of the N.T.)
(6) Kittel-Friedrich (Theological Dictionary of the N.T.)
(7) Brown (New International Dictionary of N.T. Theology)
(8) Liddel-Scott (Greek-English Lexicon)
(9) Thayer (Greek-English Lexicon)
“The truth” is available. You just have to search for it with an open mind and heart.[/quote]
I think I am going to go with Blacksheeps sources.
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
Jesus was brought forth, produced, brought into existence.
[/quote]
You really think you’re having better luck here rather than the traditional route of going door to door and hoping for someone who is depressed and confused?
Hey, it’s up to you.
Sorry Dmax honest lifter makes much more sense, he uses the Bible as his primary source much more effectively than zeb
[quote]BULLD0G700 wrote:
Sorry Dmax honest lifter makes much more sense, he uses the Bible as his primary source much more effectively than zeb[/quote]
Dude did you not even read the post? My agreement was with Blacksheep’s sources. You probably dont even read the Bible so you would have no clue whether Honest, Blacksheep, Zeb, or myself is even saying anything based on the Bible.
By the way why do you need 2 usernames?