The Deity of Jesus and the Trinity

[email]

Dear Sir,

As a Theocratic Scholar for forty-five years (Acts9:2), I have found the information on your site most interesting. However concerning the accuracy and context of the material, there is much here to discuss. I would however initially like to offer by way of this email, which shows that the most salient scriptures used to promote this doctrine actually produce the opposite:

On examination, the thesis on the Trinity has more holes than a colander.

John 1:1 according to the original Greek reads "In the beginning was the Word [Logos] and the Word was with [the] God and [a] god was the Word. A large Theta for 'the' God and a small Theta for 'a' god denotes two gods of unequal status.

John 1:2 This one [Logos] was in the beginning with God - not 'as' God.

John 1:14 The Word became 'flesh' [human] not divine.

Jesus himself confirms this when told he is good by his disciples he replied: "Only one is good, God."

John 20:28 After dying as a human Jesus was raised-up from the dead as an immortal spirit creature, a god. Hence Thomas' words "My Lord and My God." Note he did not say 'My Lord Almighty God."

Neither was Jesus a combination of the two natures, human and spirit while on earth, in other words a god-man, divine. The blending of two natures produces neither the one nor the other, but instead an imperfect, hybrid mutation which is obnoxious to the Creator and his divine arrangement. Also, if Jesus as the Trinitarians claim, was God, then as Almighty God is immortal and therefore cannot die in any way shape or form, then Jesus could never have been put to death.

I look forward to your reply on this.

[grand_puba]

I believe these are the articles in reference:

• The Deity of Jesus
• The Triune Nature of the Godhead

[SimplyAStudent]

Thank you for your post to "In Search Of Truth" re: the Trinity. Like you, I, too, try to be a student of the Lord's word and am always seeking for His truth to guide my every footstep. I appreciate your interest in posting an article for other truth seekers to consider.

I read with interest your statements re: the Trinity and must confess they cause me great concern. I do not believe you are representing the truth on this subject. Just as you have asked others to consider what you wrote, I simply ask you to do the same for my thoughts in this response. Please note the web site administrator did not ask me to submit this response...it is from me alone. My words only represent my beliefs and those of no one else

Based on your comments re: John 1:1, I would have to say you are most likely quoting from the New World Translation, the translation exclusively used by those who call themselves Jehovah's Witnesses. In my studies and in discussing the Bible with other men more learned than me, I have never found it to be a very reliable translation, primarily because it denies Jesus Christ His rightful place as the Messiah, the Son of God. There are other discrepancies I could go into as well, but this one will suffice. Your exegesis of Jn. 1:1 is, in your own words, "full of more holes than a colander." It is not correct. Rather, the inspired apostle John does not merely say that the Word possessed certain Divine qualities, but that He was a partaker of the very essence of being Divine. "The Word was God." But if you want to get technical with the koine Greek grammar of the New Testament, notice that the Holy Spirit did not lead John to use the adjective for "divine" (theios) as in Acts 17:29 or 2 Peter 1:3. No, John used the very word for God - a noun (theos). Your reasoning fails to answer this textual evidence that cries out for the Divine nature of Jesus Christ. He was not "a god" as you claim, but rather He is God Himself. He is not the same Divine Person as the Father...but in Him "dwells all the fulness of the godhead bodily" (Col. 2:9).

Even though John fails to use the definite article, that does not mean Jesus was "a god" as you have claimed. Many times in the New Testament definite nouns that regularly precede verbs do not have the definite article, and there is no such implication as you have made with Jn. 1:1. An example of this is 1 Jn. 4:16, where the same apostle says "God is love." It does not mean God is "a love" but that He embodies love, that He is the very essence of love. You are going to have to deal with the truth of these passages that contradict the error you have espoused.

Furthermore, the very wording of v. 14 later on in the same chapter makes your interpretation most unlikely. The same Word in v. 1 "...became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." This one verse powerfully proclaims the Word as the only begotten Son of God. Again, Divine inspiration has thunderously refuted the uninspired opinions of a man.

Additionally, there are other passages you're going to have to wrestle with because of the erroneous claim you have made in denying Jesus His Divine identity. For one, He is said to be eternal (not a created being or "a god") by one of God's own prophets - Micah 5:2. Concerning the prophecy about where the Messiah would be born, Micah states His "...goings forth are from of old, from everlasting." That, my friend, is eternal. We know this prophecy concerns Jesus, for in Matthew 2:6 it is quoted when the chief priests and scribes tell Herod where the Child was to be found. How would you harmonize this prophetical teaching with your position?

Another passage you're going to have trouble with is Jesus' own statements in Jn. 8:24. In this verse, He states "Unless you believe that I am He, you will all likewise die in your sins." In most reliable Biblical translations, the word "He" is italicized, indicating it has been added by the translators to give meaning. Therefore, the passage really states "Unless you believe that I am, you will all likewise die in your sins." That really is the thrust of the text. And, to give further credence to this thrust, compare the actual koine Greek of Jn. 8:24 to the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament written in Alexandria, Egypt around 200 B.C. - Jesus even quoted from the Septuagint) at Exodus 3:14, where God said from the burning bush that His name was "I am" (the passage where we get the name Jehovah or Yahweh). It is exactly the same. A similar passage to Jn. 8:24 is Jn. 8:58. You're going to have do much better than you've done to get around these very strong Biblical statements that attest to Jesus' true identity as the eternal Son of God.

In my Bible, I can find at least 8 different occasions where Jesus was worshiped by man. On each occasion, He accepted or received such worship...He never refused it. If that be the case, how would we harmonize these instances with His own words to Satan in Mt. 4:8-10. If He was not to be worshiped, then He was guilty of hypocrisy and sin by receiving worship. Otherwise, He is who He claimed to be, and therefore is deserving of such worship. Please answer this dilemma to your position.

Your last statement also needs to be addressed. You state, "Neither was Jesus a combination of the two natures, human and spirit while on earth, in other words a god-man, divine. The blending of two natures produces neither the one nor the other, but instead an imperfect, hybrid mutation which is obnoxious to the Creator and his divine arrangement." You are missing the very point the Bible makes about God's redemptive plan to save man from his sin. It is not impossible for God to be both Divine and human, just as it is not impossible for you to fulfill two roles in your life. For example, if you are married, did you cease being a son to your mother and your father the day you took on a wife? If you are a father, did you cease being a husband the day your first child was born? Is it possible to carry out both roles simultaneously? Of course it is. Likewise, Jesus became flesh to disarm the powers of the devil and defeat him by living sinlessly on earth. This is the very point to the first chapters of Hebrews. Both "roles" of Christ – His Divinity and His humanity – are portrayed.

If my words seem a bit strong, I mean them to be because there is nothing more central or core to the teaching of the Bible than whether or not Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. If He is not, He is a liar because He said He claimed to be Divine (Jn. 8:24). We all may as well burn our Bibles and take up any and all carnal pursuits and fulfill every lust of the flesh, for nothing else matters. If, however, He is as He claimed, you, I, and everyone else is going to have to come to grips with it and deal with it. For my part, I believe He is who He claimed to be and I have rested my complete hope on this one fact that makes all the rest of God's word meaningful and full of purpose for my life. What say you to this?

My hope for you is the same one for me...a continual search for Divine truth with an willing heart and an open Bible.

[email]

Thank you again for getting back to me, I seem to have caused quite a stir on the internet. But then so did the followers of Jesus when all of a sudden they hit the population with the Truth of God's Word in opposition to that which was being taught by the orthodox fraternity.

Concerning the Translation regarding John 1:1. This Scripture is of course well-documented and the quote I use is from Vatican Manuscript 1209 in the Vatican Library [word for word with the Greek Text]. I was an avid believer in the trinity many years ago until I became a Theocratic student whereby I was schooled not into what different churches and other movements were teaching but only in what the Bible itself taught.

This of course is not the only Translation I use as you will see by the list:

• KJV King James Version YLT Young's Literal Translation ED Emphatic Diaglott
• ASV American Standard Version AMP Amplified Bible NLT New Living Translation
• KJ21 21st Century King James Version CEV Contemporary English Version
• NASB New American Standard Version NWT New World Translation
• DARBY Darby Translation MSG The Message

You have mentioned an interesting scripture which speaks of Jesus as the only begotten, I would like to insert an extract here from my article on the Trinity due to the fact that many people today are still unaware of what 'only begotten' means.

Athanasius' comment that the Word was begotten not created; is a clever twist set to deceive those who lack insight and understanding. That which is begotten, is still created. While on the other hand, that which is created is not necessarily begotten of the original source. "Only-begotten, means to be created and fashioned personally by the true Father; Almighty God. In this way, the Word became the first-born of all creation. After this, everything else was then created by the only-begotten-one; according his Father's instructions. This is confirmed in the following: "He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist." (Colossians 1:15-17 NWT KJ21 ASV AMP NLT) Indeed, as he has been created in the image of God [just like man]; how therefore can he be God? Also, as he is the first-born of all creation; how therefore could Almighty God create himself?"

You mention of God's redemptive plan is actually the 'Key' to the whole of the Bible, unfortunately very few understand what it is. Because of the scripture which tells us that Christ came to save sinners, the majority take this as the answer to God's Plan. The actual Truth is that this is merely a generalization of a more intricate purpose which Almighty God has planned for the whole of the human race, which is why Jesus spoke of the Good News of the 'second chance'.

There are two separate classes mentioned in the scriptures, the first class chosen 'Before the founding of the World' (Ephesians 1:4) and the second class chosen 'From the founding of the World' (Matthew 25:34). The churches of Christendom have no knowledge of this at all and understand even less. The first class receive immortality in the heavens while the second class like us, will receive everlasting life on the earth.

The fact that you have raised the scripture which confirms that Jesus is the 'only-begotten' son of God actually proves that he is indeed the 'firstborn of creation' and the only creature ever to be fashioned by God's hand alone. Almighty God however is from everlasting to everlasting [no beginning and no end].

On the John 1:1 scripture, I thought you might like to examine the following:

Xenophon's Anabasis corresponds with what is stated in John 1:1. Instead of translating John 1:1 and the word was deity, this Grammar could have translated it, and the word was a god.

In the sentence" and the word was a god" the copulative verb "was" and the expression "a god" form the predicate of the sentence. In the original Greek there is no definite article ho (the) before theos' (god), and it is presumptuous to say that such a definite article is to be understood so that the sentence should therefore be translated "and the Word was God." That would mean that the Word was the God with whom the Word was said to be. This is unreasonable; for how can the Word be with the God and at the same time be that same God?

The proposition "And the word was a god" is a convertible one. That is, we can properly read it: "A god was the word." Or, "the word was a god." Both are equally true.

This claim to render the sentence in John 1:1 "and the word was a god." we find in an early publication which also reads that way, namely, The New Testament, in an Improved Version, upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: with a Corrected Text, printed in London, 1808. It renders John 1:1: "The Word was in the beginning, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."

This material is completely in context with the rest of the scriptures which when examined we find that there are three specific gods named in the Bible and each one has a different status:

• Almighty God the Creator (Exodus 6:3)
• The Mighty God and Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6)
• The god of this World System, Satan (2Corinthians 4:4)

Regarding the fact that the Word is created in the image of God [which to my mind proves that he therefore could not be God] he also posses the qualities of God. This is being used by the Trinitarians as proof that he is God. However, if this is so, then they have a problem because man is also created in God's image with the same qualities. Does this make us all God?

Jesus said: "My Father is in me just as I am in him," again the Trinitarians use this as proof of their claim. However, if we take the whole scripture in context: "My Father is in me just as I am in him, and I am in you just as you are in me." On the basis of the Trinity, suddenly we have 144,003. The context of course is the same as in Jesus' words: "I and my Father are one [In purpose].

"If you have seen me, you have seen the Father." The Viceroy of India many years ago was berated by the reception committee of India who were indignant that they had not been visited by Queen Victoria herself, to which the Viceroy replied: "If you have seen me, you have seen the Queen." This term has been used for centuries in the context just presented.

Just something for you to ponder over, I look forward to your reply.

[SimplyAStudent]

I also appreciate your promptness in replying to my earlier response. As
long as people maintain an open and willing heart to learn more of the truth
from God's word, only good can come from that.

I noticed in your reply that you did not comment on any of the verses I gave
you except one: Jn. 1:1. While that is indeed a good passage, I gave you
several texts to consider and comment on. You ignored all of them except
Jn. 1:1.

Before we go any further in our exchange, allow me to suggest we do the
following. Afterwards, we can discuss anything you would like relative to
the Trinity argument. However, I believe it would be prudent to nail down
the essential truth behind the argument. If we cannot come to an agreement
on that, all our exchanges would be a complete waste of time.

Please answer these questions without too much commenting. A simple "Yes"
or "no" will suffice. That way, I will get a better understanding of your
perspective.

1) Do you believe Jesus is the Christ (Messiah, Anointed One), the Son of
God?
2) If you do believe such, what does that belief and conviction do to this
position you seem to be advocating?
3) If you do not believe this, then who was He? He cannot even be labeled
"good" because He claimed to be Divine and the Son of God. Such a claim
would make Him a lunatic or a liar if in fact He was not.

My answers are:
1) Yes, most definitely, He is the Christ. He has always been with the
Father and is not a created being. He is eternal. I do not believe this
with "blind faith" but based on the evidence contained the Bible.

Questions 2 & 3 take care of themselves because of how I answered question
1.

To me, there is nothing more central or core to the teachings of the gospel
than Jesus and His identity. Either He is the Christ or He is not.

Please reply to these questions and then we can proceed from there.

[truth]

i would like to ask question to SimplyAStudent or to any with his line of thinking.
what dose the first born of creation mean?
the Common Bible: "He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities-all things were created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together."-Col. 1:15-17.

[JSM17]

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exists." (Col. 1:15-17, for context. The New World Translation - Emphasis added. Note the NWT’s addition of “other” into the text four times.)

The Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the word "firstborn" here to mean "first created" because it is consistent with their theological presupposition that Jesus is a created thing. Of course, Jesus, the word become flesh (John 1:1,14) is not a created thing. But that hasn't stopped the Watchtower organization from claiming He is. Nevertheless, there is a Greek word for "first created" and it was in use at the time of Paul's writing to the Colossians. He did not use it here. The Greek for "firstborn" is proto with tikto which would give us "firstborn" and that is what we find here in Colossians 1:15. The Greek for "first created" would be proto with ktizo and it is not used here.
Second, the biblical use of the word "firstborn" is most interesting. It can mean the first born child in a family (Luke 2:7), but it can also mean "pre-eminence." In Psalm 89:20, 27 it says, "I have found David My servant; with My holy oil I have anointed him...I also shall make him My first-born" (NASB). As you can see, David, who was the last one born in his family was called the firstborn by God. This is a title of preeminence.
Third, firstborn is also a title that is transferable:

Gen. 41:51-52, "And Joseph called the name of the first-born Manasseh: For, said he, God hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house. And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath made me fruitful in the land of my affliction" (NASB)

Jer. 31:9, "...for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn (NASB)."

Scripture best interprets scripture. Firstborn does not require a meaning of first created as the Jehovah's Witnesses say it means here. "Firstborn" can mean the first born person in a family and it can also be a title of preeminence which is transferable. That is obvious since Jesus is God in flesh (John 1:1,14) and is also the first born son of Mary. In addition, He is the pre-eminent one in all things. The Jehovah's Witnesses should consider this when they examine Col. 1:15. They should also abandon the Watchtower which guides them in their thinking and believing.

[truth]

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him. Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exists." (Col. 1:15-17, for context. The New World Translation - Emphasis added. Note the NWT’s addition of “other” into the text four times.)


Colossians 1:15-18 (New American Standard Bible)
15He is the (A)image of the (B)invisible God, the (C)firstborn of all creation.

16For (D)by Him all things were created, (E)both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether (F)thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--(G)all things have been created through Him and for Him.

17He (H)is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

18He is also (I)head of (J)the body, the church; and He is (K)the beginning, (L)the firstborn from the dead, so that He Himself will come to have first place in everything.



Colossians 1:15-18 (Amplified Bible)
15[Now] He is the [a]exact likeness of the unseen God [the visible representation of the invisible]; He is the Firstborn of all creation.

16For it was in Him that all things were created, in heaven and on earth, things seen and things unseen, whether thrones, dominions, rulers, or authorities; all things were created and exist through Him [by His service, intervention] and in and for Him.

17And He Himself existed before all things, and in Him all things consist (cohere, are held together).(A)

18He also is the Head of [His] body, the church; seeing He is the Beginning, the Firstborn from among the dead, so that He alone in everything and in every respect might occupy the chief place [stand first and be preeminent].


Colossians 1:15-18 (American Standard Version)

15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation;

16 for in him were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things have been created through him, and unto him;

17 and he is before all things, and in him all things consist.

18 And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence
it would seem the nwt is not that unique as you make it out to be.

The Jehovah's Witnesses interpret the word "firstborn" here to mean "first created" because it is consistent with their theological presupposition that Jesus is a created thing. Of course, Jesus, the word become flesh (John 1:1,14) is not a created thing. But that hasn't stopped the Watchtower organization from claiming He is. Nevertheless, there is a Greek word for "first created" and it was in use at the time of Paul's writing to the Colossians. He did not use it here. The Greek for "firstborn" is proto with tikto which would give us "firstborn" and that is what we find here in Colossians 1:15. The Greek for "first created" would be proto with ktizo and it is not used here.
Second, the biblical use of the word "firstborn" is most interesting. It can mean the first born child in a family (Luke 2:7), but it can also mean "pre-eminence." In Psalm 89:20, 27 it says, "I have found David My servant; with My holy oil I have anointed him...I also shall make him My first-born" (NASB). As you can see, David, who was the last one born in his family was called the firstborn by God. This is a title of preeminence.
Third, firstborn is also a title that is transferable:

Gen. 41:51-52, "And Joseph called the name of the first-born Manasseh: For, said he, God hath made me forget all my toil, and all my father’s house. And the name of the second called he Ephraim: For God hath made me fruitful in the land of my affliction" (NASB)

Jer. 31:9, "...for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is My firstborn (NASB)."

Scripture best interprets scripture. Firstborn does not require a meaning of first created as the Jehovah's Witnesses say it means here. "Firstborn" can mean the first born person in a family and it can also be a title of preeminence which is transferable. That is obvious since Jesus is God in flesh (John 1:1,14) and is also the first born son of Mary. In addition, He is the pre-eminent one in all things. The Jehovah's Witnesses should consider this when they examine Col. 1:15. They should also abandon the Watchtower which guides them in their thinking and believing.

so let me get this strate . you dont believe that jesus had a beginning before he was born as a man, is that when you feel he came into being? do you really wish to ignore Colossians 1:15 (American Standard Version) 15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. find that very odd , for even in the book of Proverbs 8: 22 speaks of him ]"Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. 24 When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. 25 Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, 26 when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. 27 When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28 when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, 29 when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, 30 then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31 being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.[/color]_________in deed Jesus did have a beginning________Mark 16:16-17
16 " He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
NASU

[sledford]

so let me get this strate . you dont believe that jesus had a beginning before he was born as a man, is that when you feel he came into being? do you really wish to ignore Colossians 1:15 (American Standard Version) 15 who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. find that very odd , for even in the book of Proverbs 8: 22 speaks of him ]"Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way, the earliest of his achievements of long ago. 23 From time indefinite I was installed, from the start, from times earlier than the earth. 24 When there were no watery deeps I was brought forth as with labor pains, when there were no springs heavily charged with water. 25 Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, I was brought forth as with labor pains, 26 when as yet he had not made the earth and the open spaces and the first part of the dust masses of the productive land. 27 When he prepared the heavens I was there; when he decreed a circle upon the face of the watery deep, 28 when he made firm the cloud masses above, when he caused the fountains of the watery deep to be strong, 29 when he set for the sea his decree that the waters themselves should not pass beyond his order, when he decreed the foundations of the earth, 30 then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and I came to be the one he was specially fond of day by day, I being glad before him all the time, 31 being glad at the productive land of his earth, and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.[/color]_________in deed Jesus did have a beginning________Mark 16:16-17
16 " He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
NASU

Friend, there is indeed a great deal that must be harmonized to understand what the WHOLE conveys about Jesus. Jesus is unique in human experience being both 100% man and 100% God, God with us, God in the flesh. Given his uniqueness, it will take much to understand things about him such as this topic suggests. But, what you are proposing is that Col 1 trumps all other statements of clear unambiguous language on the subject. That is not harmonization of scripture. The context quoted in Col 1:15 must be also harmonized with the great weight of scriptures such as this one:

Mar 14:62 And Jesus said, I AM! And you will see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of the heaven.
Mar 14:63 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, What further need do we have of witnesses?

Why did the High Priest tear his clothes and make this accusation? He understood the assertion that Jesus made in v62: I AM! That phrase is used throughout scripture ONLY of God. It was used and given as the name of God when Moses was to deliver Israel as to who sent him. Moses was not the I AM but the one who sent him. Jesus on the other hand is saying he is the "I AM". That one simple phrase "I AM", carries all the characteristics of God-nature chief of which is the eternal nature of God. The phrase "I AM" means an ever presence without beginning or end. There are many other passages where Jesus clearly identifies himself has having and being complete and full God and there are many prophecies that speak of him as such:

Isa 9:6 For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given; and the government shall be on His shoulder; and His name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

So, returning to the context of Col 1, I will ask a question: how is Jesus the firstborn of all creation and also the same eternal nature he claims in the statement "I AM"? What creation is this in reference to?

[JSM17]

The WT defines God as one Person only. God = Father according to the WT. If a person were to take an unbiased look at how the Bible uses the word God, Jehovah, Almighty God, or any of the titles applied to the Father, they would clearly see that these same names and titles are applied to Jesus Christ as well. Because when we read the Scriptures in an unbiased manner we find that the word God = Deity.

The Father is called God because He possesses the divine nature. When a Christian says the Father is God, He is saying the Father is truly Deity. One who possesses the divine nature. When a Christian says Jesus is God, He is saying Jesus Christ is Deity.

This statement means Jesus Christ possesses the divine nature and is of equal substance with the Father. Hence, orthodox Christians believe not only that Jesus and the Father are two distinct Persons but we also believe in the Deity of the Father and also in the Deity of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father.

So when a JW says Jesus Christ is not God and means it in the sense that Jesus Christ is not God the Father "IDENTIFYING THE PERSON" of the Father, we stand in agreement. We agree Jesus Christ is not God the Father.

However, when a JW says Jesus Christ is not God in the sense that Jesus Christ is not Deity or truly and intrinsically does not possess the divine nature, this is heresy. Because to believe Jesus Christ is not Deity or does not possess the divine nature is to reject, ignore, or outright close your eyes to multitudes of Scriptures. I repeat MULTITUDES.

If the Bible used the word God in the limited sense the WT does they would have a case. The truth is, it does not and we are not to define God the way the WT does or any religion. We are to define the word the way God uses it in the Bible. If any open minded logically thinking person has read at least a little bit of the Bible, he would definitely know that the Scriptures emphatically call Jesus Christ God.

Now we know that Jesus and the Father are two distinct Persons. So when the Bible calls Him God, we know the New Testament is not calling Him the Father but is indeed ascribing the title of God to Jesus Christ because He does possess the divine nature.

John 1:1,2 is clearly one example of the Bible calling Jesus "God" and is totally a Trinitarian statement.

Here is a loose paraphrase insofar as my studies in the Greek, "1) In the beginning (or in the origin of time), the Word already was existing—and the Word was with (face to face as an equal with) God the Father, and the Word Himself was Deity, just as the Father is Deity. 2) He was present originally with God the Father."

John makes another very emphatic statement concerning the Deity of the Son in his first epistle, "And we know that the Son of God has come and has given us an understanding, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life" (1John 5:20).

Concerning whether Jesus Christ is God (capital G) as the Bible and the Scriptures use the word there is no doubt (see, for instance: Gen 19:24; Ps 45:7; Isa 7:14; 9:6; Jer 23:5,6; Zech 2:10-3:2; 12:10; Matt 1:22,23; John 1:1; 5:18; 20:28; Acts 20:28; Rom 8:9; 9:5; Phil 2:5-9; Col 2:9; 1Tim 3:16; Titus 2:13; Heb 1:3,8,9; 2Pet 1:1; 1John 5:20).

We as Christians are not asking the JWs to believe anything contrary to Scripture; we would just try to persuade you to believe ALL the Scriptures and not just the ones that seem to agree with you. And we would like that you use the title "God" as the Scriptures do.

If the apostles call Him God and He himself claimed to be so, are you saying they are wrong as well as we?

[JSM17]

Paradise Book

The quotes are taken from the Wathc Tower book intitled Paradise, pages 39-40 in a chapter titled, "God—Who Is He?" under the subtitle of "Is God Jesus or a Trinity?"

Paradise: Who is this wonderful God? Some persons say his name is Jesus. Others say he is a Trinity, although the word "trinity" does not appear in the Bible.

Comment: This argument holds not water for neither does the word "Theocratic."5 Just because a word is not used in the Bible does not mean the doctrine is not taught.

Paradise: According to the teaching of the Trinity, there are three Persons in one God, that is, there is "one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

Comment: Amen. Three distinct Persons who are "one" (Hebrew, echod) in unity (Deut 6:4). One of the only times in the history of the WT that they have defined my belief correctly; but they quickly confuse the teaching in the mind of the reader just two sentences away. Watch!

Paradise: Many religious organizations teach this, even though they admit it is "a mystery."

Comment: After studying the doctrine, it really is not such a mystery.

Paradise: Are such views of God correct? Well, did Jesus ever say that he was God?

Comment: Here they go! Remember, how do you define the word God??? Did Jesus ever say He was God the Father??? In agreement with the WT we would say NO; but as we have seen the WT does not use the word God the way the Bible does. Now, did Jesus ever say He was God, not in the sense that He's the Father but in the way the Bible uses the word God? Emphatically Yes! If anyone would like to have an intelligent discussion on John 8:58 please oblige me, for it was He who saw Abraham in Genesis chapter 18.

Paradise: No, he never did. Rather, in the Bible he is called "God's Son." And he said: "The Father is greater than I am." (John 10:34-36; 14:28) Also, Jesus explained that there were some things that neither he nor the angels knew but that only God knew. (Mark 13:32)

Comment: You see, here is the WT pointing out the distinction between the Persons. They are not making a case against the Deity of Christ but against MODALISM/ MONARCHIANISM which rejects the distinction between the Persons.

Paradise: Further, on one occasion Jesus prayed to God, saying: "Let, not my will, but yours take place." (Luke 22:42) If Jesus were the Almighty God, he would not have prayed to himself, would he? In fact, following Jesus' death, the Scripture says: "This Jesus God resurrected." (Acts 2:32) Thus the Almighty God and Jesus are clearly two separate persons.

Comment: As we have seen, distinguishing between the Persons does not disprove anything. The WT does this again and again and again and again in all their publications. This is truly sad for those who have been duped into believing that born again Christians believe the Father and the Son are the same Person. JWs are being deceived and they're not even aware of it.

Paradise: Even after his death and resurrection and ascension to heaven, Jesus was still not equal to his Father.—1 Corinthians 11:3; 15:28.

Comment: Here the WT is displaying it's true ignorance and misunderstanding. Let's take a peek at these two passages of Scripture they are referencing:

11:3: But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

15:28: Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.

The WT's quotation of these passages demonstrates another misconception. The WT can not understand how someone can be subject to another and yet be equal. Let's look at the illustration from Scripture. God the Father is the head of Christ just as man is the head of the woman. I am married now for 10 years. I am the head of my household.

I hold a higher position in my household because God appointed it so. I am by virtue of my position greater than my wife. The president of the United States is by virtue of his office greater in position than you or I. He is the head of this country.

While I am greater than my wife in position and I am her head I am not BETTER than her concerning our nature. Concerning our nature, power, and authority over our household WE ARE EQUAL. We are both human and my wife is equal with me in authority and power over my two children. The president while greater in position is not better than you or I. He is a human being just like the rest of us.

The WT has not grasped this basic concept and the fact that while someone can be our head whether it be the head of the house or the head of the country they at the same time can be our equal. Yes, God the Father is the head of Christ; yet Christ is the Father’s equal concerning their nature or substance, power, and authority. The Scriptures explicitly state this in John 5:18; 10:22-39; Phil 2:6; etc. Is this starting to make sense yet???

Paradise: "But isn't Jesus called a god in the Bible?" someone may ask.

Comment: NEVER IS HE CALLED A GOD IN THE BIBLE, NOT ONCE, THIS WOULD BE THE INTRODUCTION OF POLYTHEISM. The definition of Polytheism is to place your faith in more than one god.

Paradise: This is true. Yet Satan is also called a god. (2 Corinthians 4:4)

Comment: What blasphemy, to place Satan's Creator (Col 1:17) on a par with him, how insulting to Jesus.

Paradise: At John 1:1, which refers to Jesus as "the Word," some Bible translations say: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Comment: Actually, every single recognized Bible translation throughout the world. Only one or two corrupt ones state "a god" which breaks the laws of New Testament Greek grammar.6

Paradise: But notice, at verse 2 says that the Word was "in the beginning with God." And while men have seen Jesus, verse 18 says that "no man hath seen God at any time."

Comment: If they had quoted the rest of this verse it would have been made clear that John is referring to the Father. This is true. No man has seen God the Father at any time. Jesus even took it one step further when He stated "You have neither heard His voice at any time, nor seen His form" (John 5:37).

Yet throughout the Old Testament we find numerous times when God had appeared to men, spoke to men, and even ate with them (Gen 18; Exod 24:9-11; 33:11,20). The simple answer to this dilemma is that no man has seen God the Father just as John states. Who did they see??? God the Son (Isa 6:1; John 12:41).

"Then the LORD [Jehovah - on earth who had talked with Abraham] rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah, from the LORD [Jehovah] out of the heavens" (Gen 19:24). Two Persons called Jehovah in one verse.

Paradise: So we find that some translations of John 1 verse 1 give the correct idea of the original language when they read: "The Word was with God, and the Word was divine," or was "a god," that is, the Word was a powerful godlike one. (An American Translation) Clearly, Jesus is not Almighty God. In fact, Jesus spoke of his Father as "my God" and as "the only true God."—John 20:17; 17:3.

Comment: What the WT is failing to mention is that just as the Son calls the Father God, so does the Father call Jesus God and the true God and eternal life: Heb 1:8; 1John 5:20.

[truth]

(Psalm 82:6) "I myself have said, 'YOU are gods, And all of YOU are sons of the Most High.


john 10:34 Jesus answered them: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said: "YOU are gods"'? 35 If he called 'gods' those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scripture cannot be nullified, 36 do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, I am God's Son? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me. 38 But if I am doing them, even though YOU do not believe me, believe the works, in order that YOU may come to know and may continue knowing that the Father is in union with me and I am in union with the Father."

1 Corinthians 8:5) For even though there are those who are called "gods," whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many "gods" and many "lords,"



There is no doubt in our mind that Jehovah is the God of Jesus Christ, the God that raised Jesus from the dead; the God of faithful Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the forefathers of Israel; the God of Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah and the other faithful prophets; the One whom Moses confessed, David honored and Noah served; the God of the Holy Bible, whose name is Jehovah. "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to anyone else I shall not give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images." Of him the prophet Moses wrote: "Even from time indefinite to time indefinite you are God."-Isa. 42:8; Ps. 90:2.

[sledford]

(Psalm 82:6) "I myself have said, 'YOU are gods, And all of YOU are sons of the Most High.


john 10:34 Jesus answered them: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said: "YOU are gods"'? 35 If he called 'gods' those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scripture cannot be nullified, 36 do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, 'You blaspheme,' because I said, I am God's Son? 37 If I am not doing the works of my Father, do not believe me. 38 But if I am doing them, even though YOU do not believe me, believe the works, in order that YOU may come to know and may continue knowing that the Father is in union with me and I am in union with the Father."

1 Corinthians 8:5) For even though there are those who are called "gods," whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many "gods" and many "lords,"



There is no doubt in our mind that Jehovah is the God of Jesus Christ, the God that raised Jesus from the dead; the God of faithful Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the forefathers of Israel; the God of Samuel, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah and the other faithful prophets; the One whom Moses confessed, David honored and Noah served; the God of the Holy Bible, whose name is Jehovah. "I am Jehovah. That is my name; and to anyone else I shall not give my own glory, neither my praise to graven images." Of him the prophet Moses wrote: "Even from time indefinite to time indefinite you are God."-Isa. 42:8; Ps. 90:2.

Can I ask a confirmation on what you're saying here? Are you concluding that Jesus is god with a little "g" and not God with a big "G", as in Jesus being equal and of the exact same nature as God the Father, Jehovah?

[truth]

Can I ask a confirmation on what you're saying here? Are you concluding that Jesus is god with a little "g" and not God with a big "G", yes as in Jesus being equal no not equal and of the exact same nature as God the Father, Jehovah? in that he Jesus , is made of spirit stuff ,yes.tho i wonder what you mean "the same nature"
i find the idea that Jesus and Jehovah as being the same person a ridiculous idea and not backed up by Scripture at all.

[sledford]

Can I ask a confirmation on what you're saying here? Are you concluding that Jesus is god with a little "g" and not God with a big "G", yes as in Jesus being equal no not equal and of the exact same nature as God the Father, Jehovah? in that he Jesus , is made of spirit stuff ,yes.tho i wonder what you mean "the same nature"
i find the idea that Jesus and Jehovah as being the same person a ridiculous idea and not backed up by Scripture at all.

I will elaborate on what I mean by "God nature". It is a phrase to encapsulate (as best as human minds can grasp) the characteristics of God. Sometimes it is summarized in the "omni" attributes: omniscient (all knowing), omnipresent (everywhere), and omnipotent (all powerful). But that really only is the beginning as God is also characterized by being eternal, perfectly Just, righteous, and loving.

The key as I see it though is that you seem to believe that Jesus is NOT equal with God and does NOT have or partake equally of God nature, God characteristics. If so, then you and I truly are on opposite sides of understanding on this topic. I don't want to leave it at that and therefore, can you suggest a starting point in your chain of logic to reach your conclusion? I'd like to find where we do agree so we can use that as a basis for further reasoning and study.

[truth]

So what does equal mean? Jesus taught his disciples to pray: "Our Father which art in heaven, hallowed be thy name." Our heavenly Father, whose name is Jehovah, is described in the Bible as being superior to his Son. For example, Jehovah is "from everlasting to everlasting." But the Bible says that Jesus is "the firstborn of every creature." That Jehovah is greater than Jesus, Jesus himself taught when he said: "My Father is greater than I." (Matthew 6:9; Psalm 90:1, 2; Colossians 1:15; John 14:28, King James Version) Yet, the Trinity doctrine holds that the Father and the Son are "equally God."

The Father's superiority over the Son, as well as the fact that the Father is a separate person, is highlighted also in the prayers of Jesus, such as the one before his execution: "Father, if you wish, remove this cup [that is, an ignominious death] from me. Nevertheless, let, not my will, but yours take place." (Luke 22:42) If God and Jesus are "one in essence," as the Trinity doctrine says, how could Jesus' will, or wish, seem different from that of his Father?-Hebrews 5:7, 8; 9:24.

Furthermore, if Jehovah and Jesus were the same, how could one of them be aware of things of which the other was not? Jesus, for instance, said regarding the time of the world's judgment: "Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father."-Mark 13:32.

[JSM17]

The Nature of Christ
If the New Testament clearly affirms the divine nature of Jesus Christ, and yet the Lord referred to the Father as “my God,” then obviously there is no compromise of the Savior’s nature by his use of this expression.

The biblical affirmations of the divine nature of Jesus Christ are beyond dispute to any student of the scriptures who has a threshold level of interpretative ability. The following facts are evident.

First, the Old Testament unequivocally foretold the coming of the incarnate God (Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; 40:3; 44:6; Jeremiah 23:5-6; Micah 5:2; Zechariah 13:7).

Second, Christ claimed to be deity in nature (John 5:17-18;10:30), and others acknowledged him as such, even worshipping him—both angels (Hebrews 1:6), and men (Matthew 2:2; 14:33; John 20:28).

There must, therefore, be a way of harmonizing these facts with the Savior’s use of the expression “my God.”

[truth]

I do dispute the fact that Jesus has the power that only a god can have, he raised the dead , removed blindness,cured
every disease, he even walked on water. the thing that i want you to under stand is that power was given to him .yes, given to him, that same power Jesus gave to the apostles and they raised the dead and cured all infirmities. did that power make them gods? no not hardly.
it is all so quite evident that Jesus worshiped the father just as he instructed us to do ,he gave all honer and glory to the father , he prayed to the father ,every thing Jesus did do was because his god wanted him to do it .
the position that he now holds is that of mediator between god and man. he does not speak as god but for god.
I would like to give some examples from different bible translations that show my point, at Jesus is not equal with God
For instance, the Revised Standard Version published in 1952 reads: "Have this mind among yourselves, which you have in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped."

The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson published about a hundred years ago reads: "Let this disposition be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, though being in God's form, yet did not meditate a usurpation to be like God."

An American Translation published by Smith and Goodspeed reads: "Have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had. Though he possessed the nature of God, he did not grasp at equality with God."

The New Testament in an Improved Version upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new translation published in 1808 reads: "For let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus also: who, being in the form of God, did not eagerly grasp at the resemblance to God."

The Emphasised Bible by J. Rotherham reads: "The same thing esteem in yourselves which also in Christ Jesus ye esteem, who in form of God subsisting, not a thing to be seized accounted the being equal with God."

The Riverside New Testament translated by William G. Ballantine, D.D., reads: "Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not think that equality with God was some thing to be grasped."

Note that none of these translations that are here quoted says that Jesus possessed equality with God in heaven before becoming a man. He did not imitate the Devil's example, who tried to make himself like God, to be equal with God. Other modern translations can be found to support the foregoing presentation. The trouble with those translations that try to make it appear that Jesus possessed equality with God in heaven before becoming a man is that they insert the small pronoun "it" into their English translations, such as the King James Version: "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God." The pronoun "it" is not in the original Greek.

[JSM17]

I thought that the scriptures would be overlooked in the reponse, so I thought I would post them so others could see the argument. What does the scriptures say about Christ, is he GOD? Sometimes when you point scriptures out to people they like to go to other passages that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Again here are the questions and thought that I posted prior:





First, the Old Testament unequivocally foretold the coming of the incarnate God

1. Isaiah 7:14
14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
NKJV

Immanuel, which means GOD with us! Matthew 1:23

2. Isaiah 9:6
6 For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
NKJV

Please try to see this as it is and not to ignore it!

3. Isaiah 40:3
3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
"Prepare the way of the LORD;
Make straight in the desert A highway for our God.
NKJV

John the baptizer said that Jesus was God as well as the prophet Isaiah!

4. Zechariah 13:7-9
"Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
Against the Man who is My Companion,"
Says the LORD of hosts.
"Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered;
Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.
8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,"
Says the LORD,
"That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one-third shall be left in it:
9 I will bring the one-third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, 'This is My people';
And each one will say, 'The LORD is my God.'"
NKJV

The prophet said “THE LORD IS MY GOD” this scripture is talking about CHRIST who according to the prophet is GOD!

Second, Christ claimed to be deity in nature

1. John 5:17-19
17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father has been working until now, and I have been working." 18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
NKJV

Making Himself equal with GOD, notice that Jesus does not correct them in this thought because Jesus is GOD!

2. John 10:30
30 I and My Father are one."
NKJV

ONE NOT TWO!

3. Why do men in scripture worship HIM?
John 20:28
28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
NKJV

Thomas knew that Jesus was GOD, not only did he worship Him he said it as plain as day!

4. Matt 14:33
33 Then those who were in the boat came and worshiped Him, saying, "Truly You are the Son of God."
NKJV

I understand that the texts says Son of God, but notice that again they worshipped Him, if God is truly the only one worthy of worship why did not Christ stop them from worship?

These passages need to be dealt with, these are not the only scriptures that continue to prove that Jesus is worthy of the title GOD and worthy of all praise anf worship!


JESUS IS GOD!

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

Hello there!
First off, I don’t like to post on these boards. Too much: “you didn’t respond to EVERY SINGLE THING I POSTED” nonsense. Points get tossed about, and the real issues are always pushed into the background. However, I figured I’d respond to the following seemingly “unanswerable questions” given us here by the resident Trinitarian(s).

Let me start by saying that technically Trinitarianism does NOT teach Jesus is GOD (without qualification). Trinitarians are guilty of redefining words to meet their preconceived theological bias. Something they accuse the “cults” of doing. It is like the pot calling the kettle black. Trinitarians SAY Jesus is God, but big deal, so do Oneness Pentecostals that teach modalism, and THEY deny Trinity. So calling Jesus God is NOT an argument for trinity. So then, when Trinitarians SAY Jesus is God, they are REDEFINING the word GOD (grk. theos) to mean “a person **of** the triune God, or a person **OF** God. So Trinitarians are guilty of redefining the word ‘theos, god,’ to mean something NO Greek lexicon grammatically defines the word as!

See, if Jesus is the Almighty ONE True God, then there can be no trinity, because Jesus is ONE PERSON, not three. Remember, God, according to Trinitarian theology, the Almighty One and ONLY True God, is 3 persons who are the ONE WHAT (The One God). Not One Person, One what (God). Yet, this 1 who 1 what God that Trinitarians DENY is EXACTLY The God Jesus taught IN the Bible, as we will develop below.

That being stated, Trinitarianism can be easily defeated from the outset, as the Bible NOWHERE CALLS Jesus, the Father or holy spirit, a person *of* God. Nor does it anywhere define The Only True God as 3 persons, Father Son and Holy Spirit. The Bible nowhere SAYS Jesus is a Person OF a Triune God, or any sort of words that create that meaning.

Trinitarianism cannot be proven from Scripture, nor can it be proven from the Grammar of the Bible. It can only “attempt” to be reasoned out, from what is called “Systematic Theology.” This, for the uninitiated, is simply two big fancy words that simply mean: “It’s our interpretation of what it is we think the Bible MEANS.” This, sad to say, is accepted over what the Bible ACTUALLY SAYS.

But now we ask, just whom DOES the Bible SAY is the Only True God? Does it SAY the Father Son and holy spirit, ARE the Only True God anywhere in scripture?? NO! Okay, so what DOES it say with regard to our question? Whom does the Bible articulate “as” The Only True God? Turn to John 17:3 and read it for yourself. Jesus here tells us that in order to “gain everlasting life” (this is what you Trinitarians would call an “essential doctrinal teaching”), we would need to know the FATHER (One person of John 17:1) as THE ONLY TRUE GOD.. AND Jesus Christ whom is sent forth FROM, or distinct FROM the ONE PERSON, the Father, whom he stated was The Only true God!

Paul, (as a second witness) also articulated the ONE God as The Father at 1Cor 8:6. Oh and before we get the typical response to this verse, YES, The Father is NOT the One Lord (or mediator) of the Christian congregation (the US to whom Paul is writing), the Son, Jesus is. 1Tim. 2:5. So Paul ALSO knew nothing about the One God being 3 whos.

Now, with this being stated, let me begin: I will put my response in RED, scriptures in black. YOUR WORDS in BLUE. You WROTE:

************************************************************************************************************************
I thought that the scriptures would be overlooked in the response, so I thought I would post them so others could see the argument. What does the scriptures say about Christ, is he GOD? Sometimes when you point scriptures out to people they like to go to other passages that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Again here are the questions and thought that I posted prior:

The issue sir, is NOT whether or not Jesus is GOD, but rather, whether or not God is a triune being and Jesus is ONE Person therein. So basically you are attacking an argument no one is making. I would state YOU sir are the one posting scriptures. “that have nothing to do with the topic at hand,” as the topic is The Deity of Jesus AND THE TRINITY. None of the scriptures you present below, define God, the Only One True, Almighty, and Living God as a Triune Being. None. Zero. Zilch. Nadda

First, the Old Testament unequivocally foretold the coming of the incarnate God

1. Isaiah 7:14
14 Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel.
NKJV

Immanuel, which means GOD with us! Matthew 1:23

I find it quite amusing that one would take such a simple verse out of context. First this verse says NOTHING about an Incarnate God coming in the future! Have you not read Isa. 7:14? Question: “What would the birth of this son signify?” Answer from vs 14, a SIGN! And just what would that sign signify? That Jehovah God was WITH the nation of Israel. Notice from Isa 8:1-10:

“And Jehovah proceeded to say to me: “Take for yourself a large tablet and write upon it with the stylus of mortal man, ‘Ma´her-shal´al-hash-baz.’ 2 And let me have attestation for myself by faithful witnesses, U·ri´ah the priest and Zech·a·ri´ah the son of Je·ber·e·chi´ah.” Then I went near to the prophetess, and she came to be pregnant and in time gave birth to a son. Jehovah now said to me: “Call his name Ma´her-shal´al-hash-baz, 4 for before the boy will know how to call out, ‘My father!’ and ‘My mother!’ one will carry away the resources of Damascus and the spoil of Sa·mar´i·a before the king of As·syr´i·a.” And Jehovah proceeded to speak yet further to me, saying: 6 “For the reason that this people has rejected the waters of the Shi·lo´ah that are going gently, and there is exultation over Re´zin and the son of Rem·a·li´ah; 7 even therefore, look! Jehovah is bringing up against them the mighty and the many waters of the River, the king of As·syr´i·a and all his glory. And he will certainly come up over all his streambeds and go over all his banks 8 and move on through Judah. He will actually flood and pass over. Up to the neck he will reach. And the outspreading of his wings must occur to fill the breadth of your land, O Im·man´u·el! Be injurious, O YOU peoples, and be shattered to pieces; and give ear, all YOU in distant parts of the earth! Gird yourselves, and be shattered to pieces! Gird yourselves, and be shattered to pieces! 10 Plan out a scheme, and it will be broken up! Speak any word, and it will not stand, for God is with us! "


Yes, the birth of this son to the prophet, was a sign in the initial fulfillment, that Jehovah was indeed with Israel. Notice that this boys’ literal name would be “Ma´her-shal´al-hash-baz” showing that the title Immanuel (‘with us is God’), was just that, a title! What was the name (title) of the boy born of the Virgin Mary? Immanuel! What was the literal name given him? Jesus! Matt 1:21. She will give birth to a son, and you must call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

Yes the name Jesus means “Jehovah is Salvation.” This reminds us of John 3:16 which shows us that “GOD…. (was the one)… who loved the word so much (that he did something about it) … (and what did he do?) …..he sent his only begotten SON, in order that…”

Secondly: The meaning of a name or a title that is bestowed upon someone hardly is an identification of just WHO that person is! The name of the prophet Jehu (1Kings 16:1-4, 7, 12) means “Jehovah is he.” Now are you going to argue that Jehu WAS Jehovah? The name Isaiah means “Salvation of Jehovah.” This is the same basic meaning of the name Jesus. Are you going to argue Isaiah was Jesus just because both their names mean the same thing?

Finally, the term maiden here, is the Hebrew ‘almah. It means just that, a maiden, either one who is or may not be a virgin. This word is used, as opposed to the Hebrew word ‘BETHULAH’, which specifically means virgin. So here we see that there can and WAS an initial fulfillment of the verse in Isaiah’s day, and a greater or ANTI-TYPICAL fulfilment in the messiah, in the first century. Unless you want to be dogmatic and say the son born in the initial fulfilment in Isaiah’s day literally was God because verse 10 of Chapter 8 identifies this birth as being a sign that "God is with us!"?

I didn’t think so.

2. Isaiah 9:6
6 For unto us a Child is born,
Unto us a Son is given;
And the government will be upon His shoulder.
And His name will be called
Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
NKJV


Please try to see this as it is and not to ignore it!

Yes we see it. It is a messianic prophecy fulfilled in Jesus. He was the Child born.
He is the one of whom the government is upon his shoulders (Dan 2:44).
He is the one who’s name (title, position) will be called:
Wonderful Counselor (Funny, the LXX here reads “Angel of Grand Counsel”, showing even the Jews understood the Messiah to be an angel)
Mighty God (Yes ‘El Gibbohr’ not ‘El Shaddai.) Only Jehovah (YHWH) is called El Shaddai Gen 17:1. Jesus is NEVER called ‘El Shaddai’, even though Jehovah is ALSO called ‘El Gibbor,’ Isa 10:21, but then again angels are called Elohim (gods) in Psalms 8:5, are they not also mighty gods?
Everlasting Father: So tell us, you’re the Trinitarian here, “Is Jesus the Everlasting Father?” If so, then I guess you not have TWO Everlasting Fathers in your Trinity?
But that isn’t what Trinitarianism teaches now does it? Modalism teaches Jesus is the “Everlasting Father”… not Trinitarianism! So please do tell us just how this Jesus of yours, of whom you declare to be “second person of your Triune God” can be called the “EVERLASTING FATHER” and NOT **be*** the Father, but a separate and distinct person FROM ANOTHER called the Father?
(hint: This verse is not at all difficult for true Christians) (okay, another hint: Look up the meaning of the Hebrew word here translated “everlasting,” ‘ad’)
Prince of Peace. Yes, a Prince is a Son of a King. Jehovah is NEVER referred to as a PRINCE in the Bible. The Bible shows Jesus was MADE LORD and CHRIST (Acts 2:36) as he was also made and given to become, King of Jehovah’s kingdom. Luke 1:32

3. Isaiah 40:3
3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness:
"Prepare the way of the LORD;
Make straight in the desert A highway for our God.
NKJV

John the baptizer said that Jesus was God as well as the prophet Isaiah!

No sorry, neither John the Baptizer nor Isaiah was saying Jesus was God! Again, here we have a classic illustration of one who doesn’t bother reading what the text is saying, and seeing how it was/is to be fulfulled, but rather someone taking a verse out of context and jamming it into a preconceived theological construct. Notice:

In the initial fulfillment, the "road" of Jehovah was literally created in the wilderness that led the nation of Israel out of Babylonian captivity to Jerusalem in the year 539 b.c.e. Yes this road led to their freedom out of the enslavement from Babylon, as they made their way back to Jerusalem marking the end of the 70 years of Babylonian captivity in 537 b.c.e. (Jer 25:11). Now we ask, “was a "literal road" made in the wilderness in Jesus’ day? No! In the spring of 29 C.E., John the Baptizer started his work as a "messenger," or a "forerunner" or Jesus. He was given the assignment "to prepare the way of Jehovah." Not that Jehovah would come literally, because Jehovah did not come literally in 537 b.c.e. did he?
If we examine the record, after the road was completed that safely allowed the Jews to travel from Babylon to Jerusalem, who were the ones who technically walked on that road? Was it Jehovah himself? NO! It was the Jews! And neither would Jehovah come literally in the first century. Rather, John would prepare the nation of Israel for the judgment of Jehovah, by getting the Israelites ready for the coming of God’s Chief Representative, Jesus Christ.

Remember who John the Baptist understood Jesus to be. Did John say that Jesus WAS Jehovah? Lets see at John 1:33,34: “Even I did not know him, but the very One who sent me to baptize in water said to me, ‘Whoever it is upon whom you see the spirit coming down and remaining, this is the one that baptizes in holy spirit.’ 34 And I have seen [it], and I have borne witness that this one is the Son of God." So then, whom did John understand Jesus to be? "The Son "of" God," not Jehovah himself!


4. Zechariah 13:7-9
"Awake, O sword, against My Shepherd,
Against the Man who is My Companion,"
Says the LORD of hosts.
"Strike the Shepherd,
And the sheep will be scattered;
Then I will turn My hand against the little ones.
8 And it shall come to pass in all the land,"
Says the LORD,
"That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die,
But one-third shall be left in it:
9 I will bring the one-third through the fire,
Will refine them as silver is refined,
And test them as gold is tested.
They will call on My name,
And I will answer them.
I will say, 'This is My people';
And each one will say, 'The LORD is my God.'"
NKJV

The prophet said “THE LORD IS MY GOD” this scripture is talking about CHRIST who according to the prophet is GOD!

This account does indeed have Messianic prophecies, namely "Strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered” which occurred when the Messiah was cut off in 33 CE (Dan 9:26 Mark 14:27). However notice the account goes on to state:

9 And I shall certainly bring the third [part] through the fire; and I shall actually refine them as in the refining of silver, and examine them as in the examining of gold. It, for its part, will call upon my name, and I, for my part, will answer it. I will say, ‘It is my people,’ and it, in its turn, will say, ‘Jehovah is my God.’”

Yes, after this striking down of the shepherd, a refined “third part” will call upon JEHOVAH’S name, and he will be their God and they will be his people (Revelation 21:7) “Anyone conquering will inherit these things, and I shall be his God and he will be my son.” God’s people are called by the name Jehovah Acts 15:14,17. Jehovah is the GOD of Jesus and the name Jehovah is SUPERIOR to the name Jesus. (Micah 5:4)

Second, Christ claimed to be deity in nature

1. John 5:17-19
17 But Jesus answered them, "My Father has been working until now, and I have been working." 18 Therefore the Jews sought all the more to kill Him, because He not only broke the Sabbath, but also said that God was His Father, making Himself equal with God.
NKJV

Making Himself equal with GOD, notice that Jesus does not correct them in this thought because Jesus is GOD!

First off, in verse 18, these are John's writings of what the Jews imagined. (not what Jesus said as in vs. 17) How do we know this? Well, did Jesus actually break the Sabbath? NO. Jesus fulfilled the law, he didn't break it. If Jesus broke the Sabbath, he would be imperfect!! (and the apostle John obviously knew this, for this was written many years after it happened) So the Jews were wrong about saying that Jesus broke the Law. They were also wrong about what Jesus meant when he called God his Father. They imagined that Jesus meant THAT HE WAS EQUAL to God. But that is NOT what Jesus said or implied. Notice his response to their concepts in verse 19: “Therefore, in answer, Jesus went on to say to them: "Most truly I say to YOU, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner.” If Jesus WAS equal to God, and the Jews were correct in their understanding of his words, his reply could not have been as it was above. If Jesus was equal to God, then he would NOT have to wait to behold what his Father did, and then mimic him. He would do "everything" of his own initiative.

The Jews claim that Jesus “broke the Sabbath” was FALSE, just as their claim that he was “making himself equal with God.” Compare John 14:28; Rev. 3:21

2. John 10:30
30 I and My Father are one."
NKJV

ONE NOT TWO!

Correct One. Just one. Not “one GOD”, or One Being. I and my Father are ‘One.’ Again, does it say “I and the Father are one GOD?” No! So then why do you Trinitarians use this verse? We can only imagine it is because by some far stretch of the imagination, you imagine the scripture to read: “I and my Father are One God.” But it doesn’t. So then what do Jesus words mean? We, let’s see how the word is used in the Bible and let the Bible interpret itself!. First off the Greek word for one here is hEN. It means “of one accord, in agreement, of like mind, a unity of fellowship.” How does the Bible use this term elsewhere? Let’s see what Paul said of himself and Appollos at 1Cor 3:8:

Now he that plants and he that waters are one, but each [person] will receive his own reward according to his own labor”. Is Paul here saying that He and Apollos (the one who watered) were One being? NO! Yet he used the same Greek word, 'hen."

Then let’s look at John 17:11,21,22. Let's see how Jesus used this word "hEN" at these scriptures. There we read: "Also, I am no longer in the world, but they are in the world and I am coming to you. Holy Father, watch over them on account of your own name which you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are. in order that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, in order that the world may believe that you sent me forth. 22 Also, I have given them the glory that you have given me, in order that they may be one just as we are one.”

So what do we find Jesus praying to his Father about in these verses? His disciples. And what does he request of the Father? That they would be one "just as" Jesus and his Father were One. Thus the trinitarian philosophers are faced with a dilemma. "If they define the oneness that Jesus shares with the Father as a "oneness of substance within the Godhead," then they HAVE to say the disciples are also God! Because, Jesus said that the disciples would be one, "just as" he and his Father were One!

Again, we have nothing more that a stab in the dark, trying to read into the text something it is not saying.

3. Why do men in scripture worship HIM?

Because the “worship” they gave Jesus was not “worship as God,” but rather obeisance or homage due to his position. The Greek word translated “worship” in the KJ, or NIV, as found, let’s say in Heb 1:6 (“Let all Gods angels worship him [Jesus]) is “proskuneo.” Again, what does it mean? Greek lexicons reveal its meaning as: "to do obeisance to, show honor for, prostrate oneself, adore, welcome respectfully." Men also receive this ‘worship’ or honor in the Bible as well! In the LXX at 1Chr. 29:20, we read:

“And David went on to say to all the congregation: "Bless, now, Jehovah YOUR God." And all the congregation proceeded to bless Jehovah the God of their forefathers and bow low and prostrate (worship, grk proskuneo) themselves to Jehovah and to the king." Here we see the nation of Israel "bow low and prostrate" ("proskuneo.") Jehovah AND the King. Was King David God? No.

Revelation 3:9 reads: “Look! I will give those from the synagogue of Satan who say they are Jews, and yet they are not but are lying-look! I will make them come and do obeisance (worship, grk. proskuneo) before your feet and make them know I have loved you.” Here we see the disciples are commanded by Jesus to receive "worship," or "proskuneo" from the unbelieving Jews. Does this mean the disciples are God as well? Of course not!

Now, I am not going to get much more technical here, but I will add, that the highest form of “worship as God” (greek latreuo) is only given to Jehovah by true disciples of God in the Bible. This is found in Matt 4:10 where Jesus said to Satan:

'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, (proskuneo) and it is to him alone you must render sacred service (latreuo).” Here it is made plain. Jehovah God does indeed receive 'proskuneo,' meaning 'honor, obeisance, or worship.' However, it is Jehovah God ALONE who also receives something special from true followers of him. It is the Greek word 'latreuo.' What does this word mean? Its meaning is: "sacred service, religious worship, religious service." Yes, this word is the "highest form of religious worship" that one can give and receive in the Bible. It is religious worship, or sacred service, and NO ONE but Jehovah God receives by his true people, anywhere in the Bible.

John 20:28
28 And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
NKJV

Thomas knew that Jesus was GOD, not only did he worship Him he said it as plain as day!

There is nothing in this verse that says “Thomas worshipped Jesus as God.” I mean, are we reading the same verse here? Why do Trinitarians always insert words and phrases into texts that just don’t appear there? I know. It is simply another evidence of pre-conceived theological views.

First, this was an exclamation by Thomas, to the Father for raising Jesus. This is why most English translations add “exclamation points” to the English translation. Remember, the context of these words were Thomas’ lack of belief that Jesus was resurrected. NOT that Jesus was or was not God! Notice Jesus’ response to Thomas’ words:

“Jesus said to him: “Because you have seen me have you believed? Happy are those who do not see and yet believe. To be sure, Jesus performed many other signs also before the disciples, which are not written down in this scroll.”

Yes, Jesus reassured Thomas lack of faith in his RESSURECTION by appearing before him, and from verse 30, also did many other signs to PROVE his resurrection!

Secondly. If you want to state Thomas called Jesus God, fine. But we already stated above, this is not an affirmation of Trinitarian thinking. Thomas did NOT claim Jesus to be a person *OF* God in this verse. Let’s continue. If Thomas’ claim by Trinitarians is true, namely that Thomas called Jesus “the God of me,” (greek ‘hO theos mou’) and that this now means Thomas is less than, not equal to Jesus, whom Trinitarians state is Thomas’ God, then fine. This in NO Way makes Jesus, the ALMIGHTY, MOST HIGH GOD! Why? Because back 12 verses in John 20:17 we read:

“Jesus said to her: “Stop clinging to me. For I have not yet ascended to the Father. But be on your way to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and YOUR Father and to my God and YOUR God.’” He we find that Jesus TOO has one who is God to him!

Psalms 83:18 states:
“That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah,You alone are the Most High over all the earth.”
One who is the MOST HIGH CANNOT have one who is GOD to him!!

And in heaven, Jesus again affirms he has one who is HIS GOD! In Rev 3:12 we read:
‘The one that conquers—I will make him a pillar in the temple of my God, and he will by no means go out [from it] anymore, and I will write upon him the name of my God and the name of the city of my God, the new Jerusalem which descends out of heaven from my God, and that new name of mine”

Conclusion. Thomas’ words of exclamation are directed to the Father for resurrecting Jesus. The Father is the Only True God John 17:3, and Thomas knew that. Further, how did John conclude this chapter, we notice:

“But these have been written down that YOU may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, YOU may have life by means of his name.”

John did not use this occasion to somehow “affirm Jesus as God,” but rather he affirmed Jesus as the Son OF God.

4. Matt 14:33
33 Then those who were in the boat came and worshiped Him, saying, "Truly You are the Son of God."
NKJV

I understand that the texts says Son of God, but notice that again they worshipped Him, if God is truly the only one worthy of worship why did not Christ stop them from worship?

See above on your worship question. With regard to just whom Jesus is articulated as in this verse, it is plain. He is God’s Son, His kid, His offspring. Jesus had a daddy, a Father, one who gave him life. John 3:16, John 6:57, Rev 3:14, Col. 1:15. This is the language of the Bible, written to us by God in terms we can understand and relate to. 2John 3 affirms this when it states of Jesus’ relationship to God as that of a Father (lifegiver) and a Son (offspring):


“There will be with us undeserved kindness, mercy [and] peace from God the Father and from Jesus Christ the Son of the Father, with truth and love.”

Yes, Jesus is the Son of God, the Father. A Father/Son relationship is one of lineage or time. There is no understanding of a Father/Son relationship OTHER than One who gives another life (of some kind).

Jesus was God’s Son PRIOR to his coming to earth. (Heb.1:2; Prov. 30:4) John 3:16 does NOT say God would sent one “who would become” his only begotten son!” Only Begotten means “of sole descent, without brothers or sisters.” Begotten is the past tense of the word beget. The word beget means “to make, sire, produce, come into being.” God did not come into being. 1John 4:15 tells us exactly whom we are to confess Jesus as: Let’s read it shall we?

”Whoever makes the confession that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, God remains in union with such one and he in union with God.” Does this verse say to confess Jesus as God? Or as second of person of God? Trinitarians want this verse to read that we would confess him as GOD! But it does not!

As we stated at the top, Trinitarianism CANNOT be established from SCRIPTURE or from the GRAMMAR of the Bible.

These passages need to be dealt with, these are not the only scriptures that continue to prove that Jesus is worthy of the title GOD and worthy of all praise anf worship!

Well I just dealt with all of them, and I spared you the exhaustive response to each of the verse. This response is already way longer than initially anticipated, so I actually cut my responses. I could have given far more prove texts than what I offered, but I am sure what is presented is plenty to prove the inadequacies of the Trinitarian Anti Biblical Mindset.

JESUS IS GOD!

After all the above, we can only conclude your statement is not in line with Biblical truth. Why? Because Jesus teaches IN THE BIBLE, that “in order to gain everlasting life” (an essential doctrinal statement if I ever saw one in scripture) we would need to KNOW THE FATHER (grk. ‘pater of vs 1) as THE ONLY TRUE GOD and Jesus Christ whom was sent forth FROM, distinct FROM the ONE PERSON the Father, whom Jesus SAID was The ONLY TRUE GOD at John 17:1,3

Trinity is an Anti Biblical teaching. One Jesus, nor the apostles, ever knew anything about. Jesus is to be confessed as God’s Son, not as God. 1John 4:15.
Deal with it. Confess it.

Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical

[JSM17]

CHRIST AS GOD

The Scriptures do not speak of Christ as just a man, however. They also acknowledge His divine nature. In most of its occurrences, “Jehovah” is applied to the first person of the Godhead (i.e., the Father—Matthew 28:19). For example: “Jehovah said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool” (Psalm 110:1). Jesus later explained that this verse pictures the Father addressing the Christ (Luke 20:42).

Yet the name “Jehovah” also is used on occasion to refer to Christ. For example, Isaiah prophesied concerning the mission of John the Baptizer: “The voice of one that crieth, Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah; make level in the desert a highway for our God” (Isaiah 40:3; cf. Matthew 3:3, Mark 1:3, Luke 3:4). John was sent to prepare the way for Jesus Christ (John 1:29-34). But Isaiah said that John would prepare the way of Jehovah. Clearly, Jesus and Jehovah are the same.

The writer of Hebrews quoted the Father as addressing His Son in this way: “Thou, Lord [Jehovah—Psalm 102:25], in the beginning did lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thy hands” (Hebrews 1:10). Not only does this verse apply the word “Jehovah” to Jesus, but it actually attributes the quotation to the mouth of God. Again, Jesus and Jehovah are used synonymously.

Furthermore, Jesus spoke and acted like God. He affirmed that He was “one” with the Father (John 10:30). He forgave sins—a prerogative of God alone (Mark 2:5,7). He accepted the worship of men (John 9:38) which is due only to God (Matthew 4:10), and which good angels (Revelation 22:8-9) and good men (Matthew 4:10) refuse.

In addition, Jesus is plainly called “God” a number of times within the New Testament. In John 1:1, regarding Him Who became flesh and dwelt among men (1:14), the Bible says: “the Word was God.” And in John 20:28, one of the disciples, Thomas, upon being confronted with empirical evidence for the Lord’s resurrection, proclaimed: “My Lord and my God!” Significantly, and appropriately, Christ accepted the designation. Additional passages that reveal Christ as God include Philippians 2:5ff., 2 Corinthians 4:4, Colossians 1:15, and many others.

[JSM17]

According to Jehovah’s Witnesses, “Jesus is not God,” and thus should not be worshiped by Christians. The Watchtower, a magazine published twice a month by Jehovah’s Witnesses, emphatically stated in its November 1, 1964 issue: “…it is unscriptural for worshipers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ” (p. 671). More recently, the October 15, 2004 issue of The Watchtower concluded an article about Jesus not being the true God with these words: “Jehovah, and no one else, is ‘the true God and life everlasting.’ He alone is worthy to receive exclusive worship from those whom he created—Revelation 4:11” (p. 31). Since God alone is worthy of worship, and since Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Jesus is only an angel and not God (see “The Truth About Angels,” 2001), He (allegedly) should not be worshiped.

GOD ALONE IS WORTHY OF WORSHIP

There is no argument over the fact that God alone is worthy of worship. Jehovah revealed His will to Moses on Mt. Sinai, saying, “You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a carved image—any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God” (Exodus 20:3-5). Regarding the Gentiles who were sent to live in Samaria after the Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom of Israel, the Bible says:

To this day they continue practicing the former rituals; they do not fear the Lord, nor do they follow their statutes or their ordinances, or the law and commandment which the Lord had commanded the children of Jacob, whom He named Israel, with whom the Lord had made a covenant and charged them, saying: “You shall not fear other gods, nor bow down to them nor serve them nor sacrifice to them; but the Lord, who brought you up from the land of Egypt with great power and an outstretched arm, Him you shall fear, Him you shall worship, and to Him you shall offer sacrifice” (2 Kings 17:34-36, emp. added).
The Bible reveals time and again that God alone is to be worshiped. Luke recorded that King Herod was eaten with worms because, instead of glorifying God Almighty, he allowed the people to glorify him as a god (Acts 12:21-23). Herod’s arrogant spirit stands in direct contrast to the reaction that Paul and Barnabas had when the citizens of Lystra attempted to worship them (Acts 14:8-18). After Paul healed a man who had been crippled from his birth, the people of Lystra shouted: “The gods have come down to us in the likeness of men.” They even called Paul and Barnabas by the names of their gods (Hermes and Zeus), and sought to worship them with sacrifice. Had these two preachers had the same arrogant spirit as Herod, they would have accepted worship, and felt as if they deserved such honor. Instead, these Christian men “tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude, crying out and saying, ‘Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you’ ” (Acts 14:14-15). Paul recognized that it is unlawful for humans to worship other humans, and thus sought to turn the people’s attention toward God, and away from himself.

The Bible also reveals that man must refrain from worshipping angels. When the apostle John fell down to worship before the feet of the angel who had revealed to him the message of Revelation, the angel responded, saying, “See that you do not do that. For I am your fellow servant, and of your brethren the prophets, and of those who keep the words of this book. Worship God” (Revelation 22:9, emp. added; cf. Revelation 19:10). Angels, idols, and humans are all unworthy of the reverent worship that is due only to God. As Jesus reminded Satan: “It is written, ‘You shall worship the Lord your God, and Him only you shall serve’ ” (Matthew 4:10, emp. added).

JESUS ACCEPTED WORSHIP

The dilemma in which Jehovah’s Witnesses find themselves is that, unlike good men and good angels who have always rejected worship from humanity, Jesus accepted worship. If worship is to be reserved only for God, and Jesus, the One “who knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21; 1 Peter 2:22), accepted worship, then the logical conclusion is that Jesus believed that He was deity. Numerous times the Bible mentions that Jesus accepted worship from mankind. Matthew 14:33 indicates that those who saw Jesus walk on water “worshiped Him.” John 9:38 reveals that the blind man whom Jesus had healed, later confessed his belief in Jesus as the Son of God and “worshiped him.” After Mary Magdalene and the other women visited the empty tomb of Jesus, and the risen Christ appeared to them, “they came and held Him by the feet and worshiped Him” (Matthew 28:9). When Thomas first witnessed the resurrected Christ, he exclaimed, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28). Later, when Jesus appeared to the apostles in Galilee, “they worshiped Him” on a mountain (Matthew 28:17). A few days after that, His disciples “worshiped Him” in Bethany (Luke 24:52). Time and again Jesus accepted the kind of praise from men that is due only to God. He never sought to correct His followers, and redirect the worship away from Himself as did the angel in Revelation or the apostle Paul in Acts 14. Nor did God strike Jesus with deadly worms for not redirecting the praise He received from men as He did Herod, who, when being hailed as a god, “did not give praise to God” (Acts 12:23).

Sadly, Jehovah’s Witnesses have attempted to circumvent the obvious references to Jesus accepting worship by changing the word “worship” in their New World Translation to “obeisance” every time the Greek word proskuneo (the most prominent word for worship in the New Testament) is used in reference to Jesus. Over thirty times in the New World Translation (first published by the Jehovah’s Witnesses Watchtower Bible and Tract Society in 1950) proskuneo is correctly translated “worship” when God the Father is the recipient of glory and praise. This Greek word occurs fourteen times in the New Testament in reference to Jesus, yet not once does the New World Translation render it “worship;” instead, every time it is translated “obeisance.” Allegedly, Mary Magdalene, the apostles, the blind man whom Jesus healed, etc., never worshiped Jesus; rather, they only paid “obeisance” to Him.

In twenty-first-century English, people generally make a distinction between the verbs “worship” and “do obeisance.” Most individuals, especially monotheists, use the word worship in a positive sense when talking about God, whereas “obeisance” is used more often in reference to the general respect given to people held in high regard. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language defines obeisance as “1. A gesture or movement of the body, such as a curtsy, that expresses deference or homage. 2. An attitude of deference or homage,” whereas the verb worship is defined as “1. To honor and love as a deity. 2. To regard with ardent or adoring esteem or devotion” (2000, emp. added). The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society agrees with the distinction often made between these words in modern English: God should be “worshiped,” while Jesus (we are told) should only receive “obeisance” (i.e., the respect and submission one pays to important dignitaries and superiors).

The Greek word proskuneo, which appears in the New Testament a total of 60 times, literally means “to kiss the hand to (towards) one, in token of reverence” (“Proskuneo,” 1999). According to Greek scholars Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker, this word was used in ancient times “to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before a person and kissing his feet, the hem of his garment, the ground, etc.; the Persians did this in the presence of their deified king, and the Greeks before a divinity or something holy” (1979, p. 723). Admittedly, the word obeisance could be used on occasions to translate proskuneo. The problem is that Jehovah’s Witnesses make a distinction between obeisance and worship when it comes to the token of reverence that Jesus was given. They arbitrarily translate proskuneo as “obeisance” every time Jesus is the object, yet never when God the Father is the recipient of honor and praise.

Consider the circumstances surrounding some of the occasions when Jesus is mentioned as the object of man’s devotion.

In John chapter nine, Jesus miraculously healed a man who was “blind from his birth” (vs. 1). When the man upon whom this miracle was performed appeared before various Jews in the synagogue and called Jesus a prophet (vs. 17), he was instructed to “give glory to God,” not Jesus, because allegedly Jesus “is a sinner” (vs. 24). Later, after the man born blind was cast out of the synagogue, Jesus informed him of His true identity—that He was not just a prophet, but also “the Son of God.” At that moment, the gentleman exclaimed, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped Him (vs. 38). Although the Greek word proskuneo was used in ancient times of paying respect or doing obeisance to people, no such translation is warranted in this passage. In the gospel of John, this word is found eleven times. In every instance, Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation renders it “worship,” except in John 9:38 where it is translated “obeisance.”

Following a day in which Jesus miraculously fed 5,000 men (not including women and children) with only five loaves of bread and two fish, Matthew recorded how Jesus literally walked on the water in the midst of the Sea of Galilee during a violent storm, saved Peter from drowning, and then walked onto a boat where He was met with those who “worshiped him, saying, ‘Truly You are the Son of God’ ” (Matthew 14:33). Jesus’ worshippers did not merely pay Him the same respect (or “obeisance”) that one pays a respected ruler, teacher, or master. On the contrary, they recognized that Jesus had overcome the laws of nature, and that His actions warranted praise and adoration—not as a man, but as the “Son of God.” If Jesus was not worthy of such praise, why did He accept it? If Jesus was not to be adored, why did the angel of the Lord not strike Him with the same deadly worms with which he struck Herod (Acts 12:23)?

After defeating death and rising from the grave, a sign which declared Him to be “the Son of God with power” (Romans 1:4), Jesus accepted worship (proskuneo) from Mary Magdalene and the other women who went to visit the tomb of Jesus (Matthew 28:8-9), as well as all of the apostles (Matthew 28:17). Jesus was not the only one ever to be resurrected from the dead, but He was the only resurrected individual the Bible mentions as receiving praise and adoration (i.e., worship) from man. The widow’s son of Zarephath (1 Kings 17:22), the son of a Shunammite (2 Kings 4:32-35), the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:21-24,35-43), the widow of Nain’s son (Luke 7:11-16), Lazarus (John 11:1-45), Tabitha (Acts 9:36-43), and Eutychus (Acts 20:7-12) all were raised from the dead, but none received worship. The Bible never reveals any resurrected person other than Jesus who ever received and accepted worship. Jesus’ followers recognized that His resurrection was different. It was a proof of His deity.

The disciples worshiped Jesus again at His ascension. After recording that Jesus was “carried up into heaven,” Luke wrote: “[T]hey worshiped Him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple praising and blessing God” (Luke 24:52-53). Notice that the word “worshiped” (proskuneo) is used in this passage along with such words as “praising” and “blessing”—words that carry a religious connotation in connection with God. Also, the disciples offered worship to an “absent” Savior. The disciples did not just bow before some earthly ruler; they worshiped their Lord Who had defeated death 40 days earlier, and had just ascended up into heaven before their eyes.

Jesus did not receive proskuneo on these occasions because He was a great teacher, or because He was viewed at these moments simply as an earthly king. Rather, all of these instances of worship were surrounded by miraculous events that were done to prove He was Heaven sent, and that “in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily” (Colossians 2:9). There is every reason to believe that on such occasions as these, Jesus’ disciples meant to pay divine, religious honor to Him, not mere civil respect or regard that earthly rulers often receive.

WAFFLING ON THE WORSHIP OF JESUS

To the church at Philippi the apostle Paul wrote: “Therefore God also has highly exalted Him [Jesus] and given Him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:9-11, emp. added). The reference to the bowing of the knee is an obvious allusion to worship (cf. Isaiah 45:23; Romans 11:4). Such worship, Paul wrote, would not only come from those on Earth, but also from “those in heaven” (Philippians 2:10). This statement harmonizes well with Hebrews 1:6. In a section in which the writer of Hebrews exalted Jesus above the heavenly hosts, he affirmed that even the angels worship Christ. He wrote: “Let all the angels of God worship (proskuneo) Him.” The KJV, ASV, NKJV, NAS, ESV, NIV, RSV and a host of other translations render proskuneo in this verse as “worship.” How does the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World Translation render this passage? Unfortunately, as with all other times in the NWT when Jesus is mentioned as being the object of proskuneo, the word is translated “do obeisance,” not “worship.” Hebrews 1:6 reads: “Let all God’s angels do obeisance to him” (NWT).

Interestingly, however, the NWT has not always rendered proskuneo in Hebrews 1:6 as “do obeisance.” When Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower Bible and Tract Society first printed the NWT in 1950, the verse actually rendered proskuneo as “worship” instead of “do obeisance.” Even the revised 1961 edition of the NWT translated proskuneo as “worship.” But, by 1971, Jehovah’s Witnesses had changed Hebrews 1:6 to read: “Let all God’s angels do obeisance to him.”

The fact is, the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society has been terribly inconsistent in its teachings on whether or not Jesus should be worshiped. In the past few decades Jehovah’s Witnesses’ Watchtower magazine has claimed that “…it is unscriptural for worshipers of the living and true God to render worship to the Son of God, Jesus Christ” (1964, p. 671; see also 2004, pp. 30-31). But, “from the beginning it was not so.” Notice what Jehovah’s Witnesses used to teach in The Watchtower regarding whether or not Jesus should be worshiped:

“…to worship Christ in any form cannot be wrong” (1880, p. 83).
“…although we are nowhere instructed to make petitions to him, it evidently could not be improper to do so; for such a course is nowhere prohibited, and the disciples worshiped him” (1892, p. 1410).
“Yes, we believe our Lord Jesus while on earth was really worshiped, and properly so” (1898, p. 2331).
“…whosoever should worship Him must also worship and bow down to Jehovah’s Chief One in that capital organization, namely, Christ Jesus…” (1945, p. 313).
For more than half of a century, Jehovah’s Witnesses taught that it was acceptable to worship Jesus. Now, however, they claim it is unscriptural. Such inconsistency regarding the nature of Christ (which is no small matter!) reveals to the honest truth seeker that the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society is an advocate of false doctrine.

Sadly, Jehovah’s Witnesses not only reject the worship of Jesus because of their belief that He is not deity, they also must deny Him such religious devotion because they teach He actually is an angel. The February 15, 1979 issue of The Watchtower indicated that Jehovah’s Witnesses believe God’s Son to be “Jesus Christ, whom we understand from the scriptures to be Michael the Archangel” (p. 29). Fifteen years later this Jehovah’s Witnesses publication stated their belief more forcefully, saying, “Michael the great prince is none other than Jesus Christ himself ” (1984, p. 29). Since, according to Revelation 19:10 and 22:8-9, angels do not accept worship, but rather preach the worship of God, and no other, Jehovah’s Witnesses must reject paying religious praise and devotion to Jesus. But, notice (again) how inconsistent Jehovah’s Witnesses have been. Charles Taze Russell, the founder of The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society (originally called Zion’s Watch Tower Tract Society), stated in The Watchtower magazine near the end of its inaugural year: “Hence it is said, ‘let all the angels of God worship him’: (that must include Michael, the chief angel, hence Michael is not the Son of God)…” (1879, p. 4, emp. added). The founder of the Jehovah’s Witnesses taught that Jesus is not Michael the archangel, and that He should be worshiped. In the twenty-first century, Jehovah’s Witnesses teach that Jesus is Michael the archangel, and that He should not be worshiped. Clear contradictory statements like these found throughout the years in The Watchtower should compel current and potential members of this religious group to consider carefully these untruths in light of the Truth found in God’s Word.

“WORTHY IS THE LAMB”

One final passage to consider in regard to the worship of Jesus is Revelation chapters four and five. In chapter four, the scene in this book of signs (cf. 1:1) is the throne room of God. The “Lord God Almighty” is described as sitting on His throne while “the living creatures give glory and honor and thanks to Him” (4:9). Also, “the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying: ‘You are worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for You created all things, And by Your will they exist and were created’ ” (4:10-11). In chapter five, the Lamb that was slain is introduced as standing “in the midst of the throne” (5:6). No one argues the fact that this Lamb is Jesus—the One Whom John the Baptizer twice called “The Lamb of God” (John 1:29,36), and Whom Peter called the “lamb without blemish and without spot” (1 Peter 1:19). Regarding this Lamb, the apostle John recorded the following in Revelation 5:11-14:

Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne, the living creatures, and the elders; and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands, saying with a loud voice: “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom, and strength and honor and glory and blessing!” And every creature which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, I heard saying: “Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever!” Then the four living creatures said, “Amen!” And the twenty-four elders fell down and worshiped Him who lives forever and ever.
In this chapter, John revealed that both God the Father and Jesus are worthy to receive worship from all of creation. In fact, Jesus is given the same praise and adoration that the Father is given. Just as God is “worthy…to receive glory and honor and power” (4:11), so Jesus is “worthy…to receive power…and honor and glory…” (5:12). Indeed, “lessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever” (5:13, emp. added). Although Jehovah’s Witnesses use Revelation 4:11 as a proof text for worshiping God the Father (see “What Does God Require”), they reject and call “unscriptural” the worship that Jesus rightly deserves.

CONCLUSION

Jesus once stated during His earthly ministry, “[A]ll should honor the Son just as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him” (John 5:23). Sadly, Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse to honor Jesus in the same way they honor God the Father. While on Earth, Jesus was honored on several occasions. His followers worshiped Him. They even worshiped Him after His ascension into heaven (Luke 24:52). Unlike good men and angels in Bible times who rejected worship, Jesus unhesitatingly received glory, honor, and praise from His creation. Truly, such worship is one of the powerful proofs of Jesus’ deity.

REFERENCES

American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2000), (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin), fourth edition.

Arndt, William, F.W. Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker (1979), A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press), second edition revised.

Clarke, Adam (1996), Adam Clarke’s Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

“Proskuneo: 4352” (1999), Logos Library System: Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Logos Research Systems, Inc.: Bellingham, WA).

The Truth About Angels (2001), [On-line], URL: http://www.watchtower.org/library/w/199 ... angels.htm, originally appeared in The Watchtower, November 1, 1995.

The Watchtower, 1879, November.

The Watchtower, 1880, March.

The Watchtower, 1892, May 15.

The Watchtower, 1898, July 15.

The Watchtower, 1945, October 15.

The Watchtower, 1964, November 1.

The Watchtower, 1979, February 15.

The Watchtower, 1984, December 15.

The Watchtower, 2004, October 15.

“What Does God Require of Us?” (2000), [On-line], URL: http://www.watchtower.org/library/rq/article_02.htm.

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

I guess my pre suppositions were correct.

No one will actually attempt to deal with the arguments presented.

Why would I imagine this forum would be different.

JSM17........... You sir, have proven you are unable to deal with any scriptural evidence that totally destroys your anti BIBLICAL trinitarian views. By the very fact that YOU sir, have shown this forum that you refuse to answer line for line, the arguments YOU presented, (when you made such a big deal of OTHERS who won't respond to YOUR comments) I can only conclude that you are not a serious Bible student, but an immature person who simply cant deal WITH the evidence, so you run FROM it.

I therefore will NOT waste another minute responding to your childish immature comments.

This is rubbish and a complete waste of my time.. what a farse.. but heh.. at least you trinitarians are consistent...

Trinity_is_ANTI_Bibilcal

[JSM17]

Acts 20:28-29
28 Therefore take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the church of God which He purchased with His own blood.
NKJV

It is small passages like these that do not allow me to get caught up in your doctrine of chaos

Things like the word ELOHIM which is plural and used some 2000 times in the bible. Besides the scriptures say in Gen 1:26 "US" and "OUR"!

I have seen what the JW do with John 1, I have a copy right here of your translation where it renders the translation of "the word was a god" and then in 1:18 "only begotten god" What do you make of that? Was Jesus God or a god and what is the difference, it seems as though it demands more than one God. Whether you believe he is God or a god are you proclaiming that there are more than one GOD? Why not explain to me John 1.

The argument of the JW's is that John 1:1 does not have the article and is referring to God the Son (Jesus Christ), then Jesus Christ is a god (among many); that is, he was a created being-- not being a part of the Godhead(Col.2:9).
The argument for this page is that if Greek text refers to Jesus Christ with the definite article and also refers to God the Father without the article, then there is nothing to the JW's contention that in John 1:1 indicates that Jesus Christ is not Deity (Since it fails to have the article in John1:1)

The article with God the Son
1. John 20:28 cap. "g" in k.i.t. (kingdom interlinear translation)
2. 1 John 5:20 cap. "g" in kit
3. Colossians 2:9 small "g" in kit (Consistency?)

God the Father without the article
1. John 1:6 cap. "g" in kit
2. Romans 9:5 cap. "g" in kit
3. Phil. 2:5-8 cap. "g" in kit
4. Matthew 6:24 cap. "g" in kit
5. 2 Corithians 5:19 cap. "g" in kit

God with the article referring to devil
2 Corinthians 4:4 small "g" in kit

God with the article referring to false gods
Acts 7:43 small "g" in kit

[sledford]

Well, I was out of the country on business for the past week and was catching up on a few threads. This one took a markedly bad turn I would rather have not seen happen with some nasty "ad hominem" attacks by a poster that I think is pretty obvious to the casual observer, and does not require much commentary.

Can I come back to my original question from some 10 days ago? From the response there are some rather strong views on the subject matter. Now none of us are going to convince the other of much of anything if the scriptures are wielded like a bat to "bash" someone over the head because of their current point of view. I'd like to break down the discussion a little further by proposing to first begin to define and understand the nature of Jesus. I think it would be productive to first see what scripture says about his eternal nature. That may provide a base for us to build from.

[sledford]

This one took a markedly bad turn I would rather have not seen happen with some nasty "ad hominem" attacks by a poster that I think is pretty obvious to the casual observer, and does not require much commentary.

I did some further reflection and just to make sure no one is confused by who I meant, the above refers to Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical. Those were some decidedly intemperate responses IMHO.

[truth]

JSM17
you've made a bit of an error when you assumed that Jesus was worship , yes i under stand that your bible does say
worship,how ever you are using a bible that is not as accurate as it should be . for instance the word worship , it may come to be a surprise to you that the word "worship" is not only a noun but that it can all so be a verb.
worship
;noun #2: reverence offered a divine being or supernatural power; also : an act of expressing such reverence
#3; a form of religious practice with its creed and ritual .

such an act of worship would include not just a bow but a repeated bows and as well chanting and veneration etc.

worship ;verb 1 : to honor or reverence as a divine being or supernatural power
2 : to regard with great or extravagant respect, honor, or devotion

"reverence"

noun
1 : honor or respect felt or shown : DEFERENCE; especially : profound adoring awed respect
2 : a gesture of respect (as a bow)
3 : the state of being revered
synonym see HONOR

Main Entry: hon·or
1 a : good name or public esteem : REPUTATION b : a showing of usually merited respect



so as to under stand what you would of seen if you were there,you would of seen men bow before him,it would more
accurately be described as act of obeisance


Main Entry: obei·sance
Pronunciation: O-'bE-s&n(t)s, &-, -'bA-
Function: noun
1 : a movement of the body made in token of respect or submission : BOW
2 : acknowledgment of another's superiority or importance : HOMAGE <makes obeisance to her mentors>

i appreciate and under stand your confusion on this mater . maybe if you could consult other bible translations you might have a better under standing and be less confused by the words that the bible translator did choose to use .
i hope i have helped you. by for now .

[Journey]

Good Morning Truth:

Very interesting thought on obeisance. Your common dictionary for the word obeisance is an accurate response. There does seem to be a problem that you might want to check out.

Matthew 28:9 An look! Jessus met them and said "Good day! They approached and caught him by his feet and did PROSKUNE NW or proskuneo to him.

Notice the word subtutite "proskune Nw" is the Greek word that would be used here.

Matthew 4:9-10 and he said to him "All these things I will give you fall down and do an act of PROSKUNE NW to me." Then Jesus said to him: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, It is Jehovah your God you must PROSKUNE NW, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.

As you will notice the same Greek word is written in both cases of the scriptures mentioned. The difference is in the translation you used seems to be a problem. The translators did not translate the Greek word "proskune Nw" the same in both of the scriptures here. In Matthew 28:9 for "proskune nw" your translation uses the "obeisance. In Matthew 4:9-10 the same Greek word is used "proskune Nw" but here the translation you used translates the word "proskune Nw" to "worship". Is this not an inconsistancy in the translation.

Please feel free to look this up in your Lexion. Look also for your word "obeisance", you will find that such a word is not in the original Greek.

Looking forward to speaking with you,

Journey

[Journey]

Sorry see a typo error. Truth, it is Lexicon, missed the "c." I am sure a bible searcher as yourself you would have figured that out right a way.

God Bless and have a good day,

Journey

[truth]

The King James reading of Matthew 28:9 appears on the face of it to look like a flat contradiction of what Jehovah's witnesses teach, but, of course, the King James Bible translators would naturally want to support their trinitarian view by rendering the Greek word here into English as "worshipped." However, it is interesting to note how The Complete Bible, An American Translation by Smith and Goodspeed renders Matthew 28:9. It reads: "And Jesus himself met them, and said, 'Good morning!' And they went up to him and clasped his feet, and bowed to the ground before him." The New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures says: "They approached and caught him by his feet and did obeisance to him." This bowing to the ground or doing obeisance to the resurrected Jesus does not mean worshiping him. If it did, then men of God in ancient times could be found guilty of worshiping human creatures, because they bowed before them; whereas the angel that was used to transmit the Revelation to the apostle John stopped him when he wanted to worship the angel, and told him to worship only God.-Rev. 19:10; 22:8.

The Greek verb in Matthew 28:9 that the King James Version renders as "worshipped" is proskynéo. This Greek verb occurs in the Greek Septuagint version of the Hebrew Scriptures. It occurs in the Greek Septuagint in its rendering of Genesis 23:7, where the King James Version reads: "And Abraham stood up, and bowed himself to the people of the land, even to the children of Heth." The book published by Samuel Bagster & Sons, Ltd., of London, England, and entitled "The Septuagint Version, the Old Testament With an English Translation," shows this Greek verb proskynéo in the Greek text of the Septuagint, and instead of saying that Abraham worshiped the people of the land, even the sons of Heth, this English translation of the Greek Septuagint says in Genesis 23:7: "And Abram rose up and did obeisance to the people of the land, to the sons of Chet."

Consequently, for trinitarians to argue that the rendering of Matthew 28:9 by the King James Version, or some other trinitarian version, proves that we must worship Jesus as a member of the trinity, means that these trinitarians base their argument on a very weak foundation. All the way through the King James Version the Greek verb proskynéo is rendered as "worship," even in Revelation 3:9, where Jesus says to his followers: "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee." Here the King James Version shows the weakness of its translation, since not even trinitarians claim that others will worship Jesus' followers.

While the King James Version renders proskynéo as "worship" throughout, other modern translations do not uniformly do so. This variation agrees with the Hebrew text, for in Hebrew the verb shahháh is the one that is translated in the Greek Septuagint by the verb proskynéo and it is the Hebrew verb that occurs in Genesis 23:7. In the King James Version this Hebrew word shahháh is translated in various places as "to bow down, to make to stoop, to humbly beseech, to crouch, to fall down, to fall flat, to do obeisance, to make obeisance, to do reverence and to worship." Since the Greek verb proskynéo is the equivalent of the Hebrew word shahháh, the same thing should be done with regard to rendering proskynéo into English so as to indicate that it does not always mean worship such as is to be rendered to the Most High God Jehovah himself, alone.

Other translations, such as An American Translation, recognize the need to do this. Weymouth's The New Testament in Modern Speech renders Matthew 28:9 this way: "And then suddenly they saw Jesus coming to meet them. 'Peace be to you,' He said. And they came and clasped His feet, bowing to the ground before Him." The New English Bible, published in 1961, renders it in this manner: "Suddenly Jesus was there in their path. He gave them his greeting, and they came up and clasped his feet, falling prostrate before him." So these, as well as other translations, show that because the King James Version renders proskynéo as "worshipped," this does not make it right. Hence, Matthew 28:9, in its correct rendering, by no means contradicts the teaching of Jehovah's witnesses that Jesus is not to be worshiped, as we worship only Jehovah God.

[Journey]

Hello Truth:

We do agree that the Greek word for "worship" is proskune nw, or your writing of the same word proskyne'o is the same Greek word. The claim you are making against the KJV is not accurate. For the Old Testament was written in the original Hebrew and the word for Gen. 23:7 is "bowed" translated from the Hebrew Lexicon "shachah."

Let us agree on some other issues, the KJV or any other version of the bible is not a preference on what the scriptures have to say. The word "trinity" is not a scriptural word either, at least the word is not found in the bible.

Journey

[truth]

i must admit , i do have problem with the KJV of the bible . one has to be so aware of were the problems are,
what the problems are , and then be able to explain why or how it should be different .with that ,its easy to see why people have gotten so confused .
on the other hand, i have a great deal of knowledge from my experience dealing with it.

[Madeline]

This passage explicitly says that Thomas referred to Jesus as "his" God.

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
This is not an exclamation of surprised, Jesus would have rebuked Thomas for taking the Lords name in vain. It was also directed towards Jesus "my" God. It literally translates as "The Lord of me and the God of me." Again the Lord would have rebuked Thomas if what he had said were not true.

Love,
Madeline

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

You wrote:
While the King James Version renders proskynéo as "worship" throughout, other modern translations do not uniformly do so. This variation agrees with the Hebrew text, for in Hebrew the verb shahháh is the one that is translated in the Greek Septuagint by the verb proskynéo and it is the Hebrew verb that occurs in Genesis 23:7. In the King James Version this Hebrew word shahháh is translated in various places as "to bow down, to make to stoop, to humbly beseech, to crouch, to fall down, to fall flat, to do obeisance, to make obeisance, to do reverence and to worship." Since the Greek verb proskynéo is the equivalent of the Hebrew word shahháh, the same thing should be done with regard to rendering proskynéo into English so as to indicate that it does not always mean worship such as is to be rendered to the Most High God Jehovah himself, alone.

I agree. A little more on this however is needed to articulate the argument a bit more concise. Whilst "proskyneo" can be translated as "worship" as we see in the NWT at Matt 4:10, it is never understood as "religious worship or servitude." What does it mean? Greek lexicons reveal its meaning as: "to do obeisance to, show honor for, prostrate oneself, adore, welcome respectfully." So then let us draw our attention back to Matt 4:10.

There we read: "10 Then Jesus said to him: "Go away, Satan! For it is written, 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'" Here Jesus answers the Trinitarian question by using two separate and distinct words that refer to worship. Notice what Jesus said to Satan: 'It is Jehovah your God you must worship, (proskyneo) and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.'"(latreuo) Here it is made plain. Jehovah God does indeed receive 'proskuneo,' meaning 'honor, obeisance, or worship.' However, it is Jehovah God ALONE who also receives something special. It is the Greek word 'latreuo.' What does this word mean? Its meaning is: "sacred service, religious worship, religious service." Yes, this word is the "highest form of worship" that one can give and receive in the Bible. It is religious worship, or sacred service, and NO ONE but Jehovah God receives this rightfully anywhere in the Bible.

The Bible is loaded with places where MEN receive "proskyneo" (1Chor 29:20, Ex 18:7 LXX; Rev. 3:9 for a few) as does Jesus, but NO ONE ever receives LATREUO rightfully in the Bible other than Jehovah himself.

Again the Trinitarian myth is shattered by the weight of the Bible.

Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

This passage explicitly says that Thomas referred to Jesus as "his" God.

John 20:28 - And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
This is not an exclamation of surprised, Jesus would have rebuked Thomas for taking the Lords name in vain. It was also directed towards Jesus "my" God. It literally translates as "The Lord of me and the God of me." Again the Lord would have rebuked Thomas if what he had said were not true.

Well then, if Jesus is God, then there aint no trinity! As Jesus is ONE PERSON, not 3!

Folks SAY what you MEAN and MEAN what you SAY. The Almighty God, the ONLY True God, of the Trinitarian Fantasy Island, is 3 PERSONS that are the ONE GOD. Not one person, one God. So if Jesus, ONE PERSON is GOD, then there cannot be a trinity. Now if you folks want to admit you are REDEFINING the word GOD when applied to Jesus to mean "a person of God" then fine, you can say Jesus is God. But that is what the CULTS do. They REDEFINE words to meet a PRE CONCEIVED Theological Bias.

So any Trinitarian out there care to show me ONE single Greek Lexicon that defines the Greek word THEOS (God) as "a person **OF** God?"

Secondly, Let me make this plain. Thomas' supposed calling Jesus HIS GOD is not and cannot be viewed as "taking the Lords name in vain." Where on earth did you invent this from? Certainly not the Bible! God my dear is NOT a name! It is a Title. Angels are called gods at Psalm 8:5. Are they Jehovah? Men are called gods at Psalms 82:6. Are they Jehovah? Satan is called ho theos (The God) (just like Jesus according to your understanding of John 20:28) at 2Cor 4:4! Is he Jehovah? Jehovah is the ONE and ONLY name of The Almighty, Sovereign God of the Bible Isa 42:8; Psalms 83:18.

3rd: Thomas' supposed calling Jesus "his God" is NOT an identity of Jesus being the MOST HIGH GOD. As the Most High God CANNOT have one who is GOD to Him (otherwise he would NOT be the Most High God now would he?) Jesus in HEAVEN says the he has one who is GOD TO HIM! Rev 3:12. So then even if Thomas DID address Jesus as HIS GOD, Jesus CANNOT be the Most High God, as he clearly has one who is HIS God in heaven! (and on earth John 20:17)

4th: Thomas' words MOST CERTAINLY were an exclamation as indicated by a large majority of Translations that use exclamation points after Thomas' words!!! Remember, Thomas was NOT concerned as to whom Jesus was. Thomas doubted Jesus RESSURECTION! That is why Jesus responded as he did, stating happy are those who did NOT see and yet believe. Believe in what? That Jesus was God? NO that Jesus was RESSURECTED!!!

5th: The literal Greek words used here PROVE Thomas did NOT address Jesus as "his Lord and his God." Notice the words "Ho Kyrios." (The Lord) The form of the word that is translated Lord, kyrios, is the nominative case. This case is used when one is making an "exclamation." There is another case used of a "direct address" called the vocative. The vocative case of "kyrios" is "kyrie." Now if anyone knew how to address God, it was Jesus. Let us look at Jesus own address to his Father in Matthew 11:25: 25 At that time Jesus said in response: "I publicly praise you, Father, Lord ( ho kyrie) of heaven and earth, because you have hidden these things from the wise and intellectual ones and have revealed them to babes. Here we see that Jesus addressed his Father as "Lord of Heaven......" The Greek here reads "ho kyrie" It is the vocative case of the word "kyrios." Thus, this is a formal direct address to his Father as THE LORD.

However, at John 20:28 we do NOT see the vocative " ho kyrie," but the nominative "ho kyrios." Thus what Thomas said was directed to Jehovah, the Father with Jesus as the object, or subject of the reason for the exclamation. Thomas in essence was saying to Jehovah: "Thank you for resurrecting Jesus!!" For remember Jesus next words: 29 Jesus said to him: "Because you have seen me have you believed? Happy are those who do not see and yet believe."

I could go on... with more examples, but why? None of you Trinitarians on this board will deal with these facts anyway. (as indicated by my previous posts)

Folks. Confess Jesus the way the Bible tells you to do so.... as God's SON.. his kid.. his offspring, as 1John 4:15 tells you to do.

Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical

[sledford]

In total, Jesus is UNIQUE in the human experience being 100% God and 100% flesh as evidenced in John 1:

Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

Joh 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

Please bear in mind that trying to wrap the brain around God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is an effort requiring divine revelation and inspiration. We're not going to be able to make a complete conclusion based on one passage or scripture but the total of revelation throughout Scripture.

Here are a few other passages that further elaborate on who Jesus was and is.

Heb 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
Heb 1:3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Heb 1:4 Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
Heb 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Heb 1:6 And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

and this is where it gets really interesting as we have recorded through divine revelation a conversation between God the Father and God the Son. The speaker, God the Father, addresses Jesus, the son as "O God" and "Thou, Lord":

Heb 1:8 But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is forever and ever: a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of thy kingdom.
Heb 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Heb 1:10 And, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth; and the heavens are the works of thine hands:

and we have this revelation in Isaiah:

Isa 9:6 For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The phrase "mighty God" is the same phrase to also describe God the Father as well in passages such as:

Deu 7:21 Thou shalt not be frightened at them: for the LORD thy God is among you, a mighty God and terrible.

Deu 10:17 For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward:

Isa 10:21 The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the mighty God.

Jer 32:17 Ah Lord GOD! behold, thou hast made the heaven and the earth by thy great power and stretched out arm, and there is nothing too hard for thee:
Jer 32:18 Thou showest lovingkindness unto thousands, and recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them: the Great, the Mighty God, the LORD of hosts, is his name,

The phrase "mighty God" comes from the Hebrew phrase "gibbor el", and is but one way expressed to describe God to us. The passages above use the same Hebrew phrase in relation to God the Father as the first on quoted in Isaiah 9 as a reference to God the Son.

Frankly, I'm not quite sure what is being argued any longer. If the "anti trinity" view is being expressed to knock down Jesus from equality with God the Father, as I have quoted above, you've got some issues with scripture that you're going to have to look at. If the "anti trinity" view is expressed because the word "trinity" does not appear in Scripture, ok. Then what is really the point as it would be expressed as simply as that and be done with it?

These are serious questions and I would like a response, please. I've studied scripture on this topic for near on 20 years and I am no where close to understanding it all or having it all "figured out". But, what I see being proposed is to NOT give Jesus, as God the Son, his proper due and glory that he so rightfully deserves (Heb 1).

[Journey]

John 1:1 says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Here John 1:1 is speaking of only One God, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), Word.

New World Translation is the Jehovah's Witnesses bible version, it reads, John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
In the NWT of the JW's, we have one big God and a lesser,little god, so we have two God's whatever way you want to look at it.

John 1:2-3, "He (God the Son) was in the beginning with God (God the Father). All things were made through Him (God the Son), and without Him (God the Son) nothing was made."

Is the JW's doctrine right God the Father created the Son? God the Son was with God the Father, in the beginning. God the Son was always with God the Father. Now let's look at the next line. All things were made through Him (God the Son). Notice "All." If some things were made by the God the Father, as the JW says that God the Father created Jesus. Than "All" things could not have been made through God the Son. The bible verse here in John has to be a written wrong, but it is written the same way in the NWT.

If some things were made by the God the Father, like the creation of the Son, than God the Son did not create all things. We know that this is not true, the JW doctrine is false. The bible says that God the Father made all things and the bible says that God the Son made all things. The same things were made by God the Father and by God the Son, thus God the Father and God the Son are equal. Phil. 2:6 "who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God." God the Son was not created, but always existed with God the Father. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead. All equal to one another, all of the same divinity or diety. "Theos" in the Lexicon ascribes to the plurality of the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Most Jehovah's Witnesses do not even know Greek, the Lexicon that they use was written by the WatchTower Track Society, it is a biased version of the Lexicon.

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

John 1:1 says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Here John 1:1 is speaking of only One God, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), Word.

New World Translation is the Jehovah's Witnesses bible version, it reads, John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
In the NWT of the JW's, we have one big God and a lesser,little god, so we have two God's whatever way you want to look at it.

John 1:2-3, "He (God the Son) was in the beginning with God (God the Father). All things were made through Him (God the Son), and without Him (God the Son) nothing was made."

Is the JW's doctrine right God the Father created the Son? God the Son was with God the Father, in the beginning. God the Son was always with God the Father. Now let's look at the next line. All things were made through Him (God the Son). Notice "All." If some things were made by the God the Father, as the JW says that God the Father created Jesus. Than "All" things could not have been made through God the Son. The bible verse here in John has to be a written wrong, but it is written the same way in the NWT.

If some things were made by the God the Father, like the creation of the Son, than God the Son did not create all things. We know that this is not true, the JW doctrine is false. The bible says that God the Father made all things and the bible says that God the Son made all things. The same things were made by God the Father and by God the Son, thus God the Father and God the Son are equal. Phil. 2:6 "who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God." God the Son was not created, but always existed with God the Father. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead. All equal to one another, all of the same divinity or diety. "Theos" in the Lexicon ascribes to the plurality of the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Most Jehovah's Witnesses do not even know Greek, the Lexicon that they use was written by the WatchTower Track Society, it is a biased version of the Lexicon.

Journey wrote:
John 1:1 says, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Here John 1:1 is speaking of only One God, God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), Word.

What? The term “God the Son” is not a Biblical term. It is found nowhere in scripture. Secondly, as we will develop below, John 1:1 is telling us about TWO DIFFERENT TYPES of God, both of whom are “In Beginning.”

Journey wrote:
New World Translation is the Jehovah's Witnesses bible version, it reads, John 1:1, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.
In the NWT of the JW's, we have one big God and a lesser, little god, so we have two God's whatever way you want to look at it.

Well, I guess if you want to look at it from a capitalization stand point, one could say one big ‘G’ God and a lesser little ‘g’ god. But to add “so we have two God's whatever way you want to look at it.” You defeat your initial statement, as you point out two big ‘G’ Gods is the teaching from the NWT translation of this passage. And that is simply false. I sense confusion on your part, let’s see what else you have to say

Journey wrote:
John 1:2-3, "He (God the Son) was in the beginning with God (God the Father). All things were made through Him (God the Son), and without Him (God the Son) nothing was made."
Is the JW's doctrine right God the Father created the Son? God the Son was with God the Father, in the beginning.

Well first off, the Bible does NOT say “God the Son was with God the Father, in the beginning.” I’m not sure what Bible you are reading, but no translation of John 1:1 says what you just said. John used the term “hO Logos” as being “with” ‘ton theon,’ and nothing about “theos (hO) huis” or God the Son being with theos pater (God the Father)
John describes hO logos in terms of theos, (god) not persons. John also does NOT say hO logos was with God THE Father, but simply “THE GOD” (hO Theos) And the use of the preposition PROS indicates TWO “theos” in opposition to one another, as PROS means with or literally FACE TO FACE, TOWARD. So then the phrase, “The Word was “with GOD,” indicates TWO beings, one called hO logos (the Word) being FACE TO FACE WITH, TOWARDS ANOTHER, called THE GOD (hO Theos)

Sorry, no Trinitarian language here. hO Logos plainly is not the same hO theos he is pros.

Journey wrote:
God the Son was always with God the Father.

Oh really? Care to prove that from the Bible? Again, quit using unbiblical terms like “God the Son.” The Bible calls Jesus the Son **OF** God, NOT God *THE* Son 1John 4:15. Even the late great Trinitarian Walter Martin denied the Eternal Sonship of Jesus (Kingdom of the Cults pg. 103 section E, 1st edition). The language of the Bible describes Jesus as God’s Son, his kid, his offspring. That is what the relationship of a Father to a Son is. I might add, that is the ONLY definition of a Father and a son, one who gives life to, sires, brings into being, another, and one who is the offspring of another. A Father and Son relationship denotes lineage, time, origin. God has no lineage, is outside of time, and has no origin. 2John 3 calls Jesus the Son of the Father. Jesus has a Father, a life giver, a daddy, a papa. God does not have a papa, a daddy, a life giver.

So unless you want to rewrite the Bible, you have no Biblical basis to say “anyone was with God the Father “always.” Let’s continue.

Journey wrote:
Now let's look at the next line. All things were made through Him (God the Son). Notice "All." If some things were made by the God the Father, as the JW says that God the Father created Jesus. Than "All" things could not have been made through God the Son. The bible verse here in John has to be a written wrong, but it is written the same way in the NWT.

Well so much for the NWT getting John 1:1 wrong! Yes the Greek word ‘panta’ “ALL” appears in John 1:3. However remember a little word CONTEXT. ALL means ALL in the limitation of its CONTEXT. It is not “all inclusive.” I will demonstrate that ALL in John 1:3 is NOT “all inclusive, and this argument presented above is worthless and ignorant of the facts:

First to prove panta “ALL” does not mean ALL regardless of its use, notice Col. 1:23b section:

“….from the hope of that good news which YOU heard, and which was preached in all creation that is under heaven. Of this [good news] I Paul became a minister.”

Paul here tells us that in his day, the good news was preached in “all creation that is under heaven.” Now does ALL (panta) mean ALL? Well Did Paul and the apostles travel to North America (that is under heaven) and preach to the Indians? Did Paul and the Apostles and disciples preach in China? Isn’t that under heaven? Did Paul preach to the penguins in the Artic? Are not they a part of ALL CREATION under heaven? How bout the koala bears in Australia? Shall I go on?

No ALL (panta) means ALL in the context of its use. In the above cited verse of scripture, Paul was obviously referring to the then known and reachable parts of creation that is under heaven, namely the Mediterranean section of the world of which they inhabited.

Now let’s turn our attention to the CONTEXT of ALL (panta) in John 1:3-4.
There we read:

All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence. What has come into existence 4 by means of him was life, and the life was the light of men.
Now, the verse indeed says “all things” came into existence THRU (dia) him. This preposition dia, means “passive agency, means, channel” and it does not mean SOURCE as does the preposition ek (out of). (See the contrast in 1Cor 8:6 for an example of the difference usages of these two Greek prepositions.) Jesus clearly is the PASSIVE means by which someone ELSE created, namely God (Heb. 1:2)

Now if John had simply said “all things were created thru him,” and stopped there. You might have a case. But John didn’t! John goes on to LIMIT the use of ALL panta! Notice John’s flow of thought and the CONTEXT:

All things came into existence through him,
(yes all things, but does John qualify what things he is speaking of?)

and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
(Wow seems pretty iron clad…nothing “came into existence” apart from him)

What has come into existence
(Wait, John is going to tell us just what things he is speaking of that came into existence by means of Jesus? What on earth could he be limiting the use of ALL panta things to?)

4 by means of him was life,
(oh yes, life, but is it all life like angels and such?)

and the life was the light of men.
(oh! I get it! The life created THRU Jesus that John was speaking of, was the “light of MEN” So the ALL THINGS that came into existence THRU him was the creation of MEN! So now I understand that the “IN THE BEGINING” of John 1:1 is the SAME “In The Beginning” of Gen 1:1, the creation of the heavens and the EARTH! And the Angels were there as well! Job 38:7)

Pretty simply to see huh? The creation that took place THRU Jesus, was the creation of MEN. How can we say that? Simple, cus THAT IS WHAT JOHN SAID!

Journey wrote:
If some things were made by the God the Father, like the creation of the Son, than God the Son did not create all things. We know that this is not true, the JW doctrine is false.

No what is false is your twisting of scripture and your blatant misunderstanding of the CONTEXT of the verse in question.

Journey wrote:
The bible says that God the Father made all things and the bible says that God the Son made all things.

No the Bible says God the Father created THRU his Son Heb.1:2. The Bible ALSO shows Jesus to be God’s “only begotten Son, the only begotten God. John 3:16; 1:18

Only begotten means: “of sole descent, without brothers or sisters.” Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the NT. Vol 4 page 738. Begotten means MADE produced, sired. It is the past tense of the word BEGET. Look it up in a dictionary for cryin’ out loud. School is really a wonderful thing. It is where you can get an education.

Journey wrote:
The same things were made by God the Father and by God the Son, thus God the Father and God the Son are equal.

Not according to Jesus who said he (in heaven mind you) had one who was God to HIM (Rev 3:12). Lesson in simple logic for you: “One who has one who is God to HIM, cannot be “equal” to the God he worships!” This is your “penetrating glimpse” into the obvious for today.

Journey wrote:
Phil. 2:6 "who being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God."

Actually the verse reads:
who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God

The literal Greek reads:

Ouk (not) hArpagmon (snatching) hEgesato (he considered) to (the) einai (to be) isa (equal) theo (to God)

So this verse plainly shows that Jesus did not seek to SNATCH or STEAL the idea or position of equality with GOD!
Notice:

“yet he laid no claim to equality with God (The Revised English Bible)

“counted not the being on an equality with God a thing to be grasped. )American Standard Version)

“counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God.” (New American Standard Bible)

I suggest you expand your Bible collection!

Journey wrote:
God the Son was not created, but always existed with God the Father. God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit make up the Godhead.

As demonstrated above, you simply are wrong. Care to show us where Jesus ever taught 3 whos are the 1 what?

Journey wrote:
All equal to one another, all of the same divinity or diety. "Theos" in the Lexicon ascribes to the plurality of the Godhead, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Sorry! But to be blunt, you are a liar. You simply are lying to us on this forum. Please provide the name of ANY Greek Lexicon (include page number) that defines the word “theos” as a “plurality of the Godhead.” Here are the FACTS: There is not one GREEK LEXICON that defines the word THEOS the way you just typed. This is a BOLD, LIE. What? You think you can just type stuff and it will be taken as fact? Or I know, you just make it up as you go along and hope no one will catch on? Is your name Tattoo? Are you seeing planes? Cus I swear you’re living on Fantasy Island.

Journey wrote:
Most Jehovah's Witnesses do not even know Greek, the Lexicon that they use was written by the WatchTower Track Society, it is a biased version of the Lexicon.

What the heck are you babbling on about now? Most JW’s do not know Greek? Really? Do you know most JW’s personally? It is obvious YOU know nothing about Greek by you blatant lies above. Then you say: the Lexicon that they use was written by the WatchTower Track Society

Now I know you are simply making stuff up as you go along. FACT: The Watchtower Society NEVER EVER EVER produced a LEXICON! (oh and the word is spelled “Tract” not “Track”) Do you even know what a Lexicon is? From this thread, I can see the answer is apparent. You haven’t the slightest idea what a LEXICON is!

When Trinitarians need to run and MAKE things up to try and support their ideology, it is a sad thing. Tell ya what “Journey,” I suggest you take a journey to your local 2nd grade school and learn the meaning of words. I mean, you write and argue like you are 13 or something. And I’m being generous here.

Class Dimissed.

Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical

[Journey]

May the Lord guide me through His Word to give you a biblical answer, Anti Trinity. Please remember I am as human as the next person on this sight, subject to human errors. I call upon those who are my brothers and sisters in the body of Christ to be of help or of correction to me where ever an answer is not based on the Lord's Holy Word. For correction is good to come to the truth of God's Word.

Anti Trinity,

It seems to offend you that I used God the Son, you can change that to Jesus Christ. The truth still remains according to John 1:2-3 Thru Jesus Christ "all" things were created or as stated here "made." The Father did not create the Son, Jesus Christ, for Jesus was present when the Father created "all" things, based on scripture.

Walter Martin or any of the " historical fathers", is NOT who I look to for answers from God's Word. The Word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edge sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. The Word of God has all answers.

You claim that "all" is not meant here in John 1:2-3. You than quote Col 1:23 saying, "from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to "every creature" (your bible translation placing "all" here) under heaven of which I, Paul, became a minister." "All" according to you is "all is inclusive" here in John and Col.

I believe what the scripture says. "the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven of which I, Paul, became a minister." Every creature under heaven or "all" under heaven did hear the gospel preached, it is Paul word written under inspiration, in God's Word. It is true. You ask if Paul preached to China, to my understanding even in the writings of the Chinese they very well understood stood much about the bible. Amazing if the bible says the gospel was preached to "all" in the time of Paul, that is what it means.

Turn over to Matthew 24:14 "And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come." Yes, Paul is right the gospel was preached in all the world at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, the end of the Jewish nation as it was known back than.

I do realize that this causes a problem for your belief system for you do not believe the gospel was preached in all the earth until the very end of the world. Who is trying to use the bible to fit who's belief system???

You try so hard to reason things out of the bible with your many words but in "all truth" you fail.

May the Lord open your heart,

Journey



PS. I was a Jehovah Witness for 26 years, I do not babble over your beliefs as if I do not know.

[Journey]

Anti Trinity:

You are a rude and arrogant person. You attack the person rather than prove your point. The Lexicon on the internet located at http://www.studylight.org/com is where I got the information on "theos." Go there yourself to the Lexicon and New and Old Testament and type in the word "theos" and see what you get.

In John you quote the NWT "What has come into existence" is not even quoted in the translation that I use. The NWT is a bias bible translation.

Journey

[Trinity_is_ANTI_Biblical]

PS. I was a Jehovah Witness for 26 years, I do not babble over your beliefs as if I do not know.

Well this explains the darkness you wallow in. No wonder you dont get it. 2Cor 4:4 This ends this exchange. 1Cor 5:11

[Journey]

Anti Trinity,

With tears, you can't hurt me or control me. You can call me an unbeliever. I could not stay with the JW's, I left in an honest manner. I had the elders come to talk with me, but I told them I did not believe as the JW believes. I asked them to remove me from their kingdom hall, they told me they could not until I did something wrong or until I wrote a letter disassociating myself. I wrote a DA letter. If you or anyone else refuses to speak to me that is your concern. I live daily being shunned and not talked to by JW relatives and once JW friends..the only thing that I can say is at least God cares.

I have been on a wonderful journey, searching for the true God, my Lord and my Savior. It has brought me to the church of Christ. Hearing, believing, repenting, confessing, and be baptized for the remission of sins, in response to what the Lord has commanded in His Word. The day will come when we both will stand before our Lord, and be judged on His terms only.

You should be careful judging others by man's standard "explains the darkness you wallow in." Will pray for you.

Journey

[Madeline]

Angels are called gods at Psalm 8:5. Are they Jehovah? Men are called gods at Psalms 82:6.

Do you understand NT Greek? "ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou" which translates to "the Lord of me and the God of me" ho theos is an example of the use of a definite article. So Thomas didn't refer to Jesus as "a" God, but "the" God referring to the one True and Supreme God. Angels are called "gods", not God.

4th: Thomas' words MOST CERTAINLY were an exclamation as indicated by a large majority of Translations that use exclamation points after Thomas' words!!! Remember, Thomas was NOT concerned as to whom Jesus was. Thomas doubted Jesus RESSURECTION! That is why Jesus responded as he did, stating happy are those who did NOT see and yet believe. Believe in what? That Jesus was God? NO that Jesus was RESSURECTED!!!

there are no exclamation marks in the Greek.

• NASB: Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
• GWT: Thomas responded to Jesus, "My Lord and my God!"
• KJV: And Thomas answered and said unto him, My LORD and my God.
• ASV: Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
• BBE: And Thomas said in answer, My Lord and my God!
• DBY: Thomas answered and said to him, My Lord and my God.
• WEY: "My Lord and my God!" replied Thomas.
• WBS: And Thomas answered and said to him, My Lord and my God.
• WEB: Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
• YLT: And Thomas answered and said to him, 'My Lord and my God;'

I personally use the KJV since it is translated from the TR. Again, there are no exclamation marks in the NT Greek. It's up to you to decide.

Love,
Madeline

[sledford]

When Trinitarians need to run and MAKE things up to try and support their ideology, it is a sad thing. Tell ya what “Journey,” I suggest you take a journey to your local 2nd grade school and learn the meaning of words. I mean, you write and argue like you are 13 or something. And I’m being generous here.

Class Dimissed.

Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical

Here we go again. Can you please address the context of Heb 1 that I quoted in a previous post, the one in which we have a conversation of God the Father addressing God the Son as "God" and "Lord". Also, please address the context of Is 9 and how the Hebrew phrase "gibbor el", a phrase used for God the Father, is ascribed to God the Son?

As some would say in a part of the country I lived in, "You've got some 'splaining to do".

[grand_puba]

Based on the above correspondence (pertinent portions quoted below), and that the following user has rejected petitions to apologize for the language, the user, Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical, has been banned from these forums. Regardless of one's beliefs, such unkind language that mocks, scoffs, taunts, disdains, and disregards their opponent will be grounds for banning.

This forum provides a fair amount of leniency in letting people "blow up", but they should always apologize. If a person does not self-correct, and if he refuses to be corrected, then he will be banned just as was this person.

Based on this, I would encourage everyone to strive to be charitable towards each other:

Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails. ... (1 Corinthians 13:4-8)

Furthermore, let me also point out that uses of insults and slurs suggests that the scoffer cannot answer his opponent on legitimate grounds; otherwise, he would do it! Such arrogant statements make both the issuer and his argument look bad.

Sorry! But to be blunt, you are a liar. You simply are lying to us on this forum. Please provide the name of ANY Greek Lexicon (include page number) that defines the word “theos” as a “plurality of the Godhead.” Here are the FACTS: There is not one GREEK LEXICON that defines the word THEOS the way you just typed. This is a BOLD, LIE. What? You think you can just type stuff and it will be taken as fact? Or I know, you just make it up as you go along and hope no one will catch on? Is your name Tattoo? Are you seeing planes? Cus I swear you’re living on Fantasy Island.

...

What the heck are you babbling on about now? Most JW’s do not know Greek? Really? Do you know most JW’s personally? It is obvious YOU know nothing about Greek by you blatant lies above. Then you say: the Lexicon that they use was written by the WatchTower Track Society

Now I know you are simply making stuff up as you go along. FACT: The Watchtower Society NEVER EVER EVER produced a LEXICON! (oh and the word is spelled “Tract” not “Track”) Do you even know what a Lexicon is? From this thread, I can see the answer is apparent. You haven’t the slightest idea what a LEXICON is!

When Trinitarians need to run and MAKE things up to try and support their ideology, it is a sad thing. Tell ya what “Journey,” I suggest you take a journey to your local 2nd grade school and learn the meaning of words. I mean, you write and argue like you are 13 or something. And I’m being generous here.

Class Dimissed. [sic]

Trinity_Is_Anti_Biblical

...

Well this explains the darkness you wallow in. No wonder you dont get it. [sic]