|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 6:23AM #1|
" REAL JESUS "
AND THE REAL JESUS
Since we have the warning in scripture that there would be those coming to us preaching "another Jesus", disguising themselves as "apostles of Christ" (2 Cor.11:3,4,13-15 ) we need to examine Jehovah's Witnesses claims concerning Jesus Christ in the light of scripture.
JESUS CHRIST IS NOT ALMIGHTY GOD BUT A LESSER GOD
J.W. doctrine has two true Gods, Almighty God Jehovah, and beside Him a lesser " mighty god", Jesus Christ. John 1:1 has been altered from the original Greek in their bible to read "the word was a god" to accommodate this polytheistic doctrine. (see pages 150, 416 - 417, Reasoning From The Scriptures, 1985 edition published by the Watchtower Society).
JESUS CHRIST IS ALMIGHTY GOD
Christians are monotheists, believers in ONE GOD. "I am He. Before Me there was no God formed and there will be none after Me. I, even I, am the LORD and there is no Savior besides Me." ( Isaiah 43:10,11) See also Isa. 44:6, 8; 45:22,23 and 46:9. There is only ONE God by nature-- all others are man-made (Galatians 3:20 and 4:8) See also James 2:19.
Since there is only ONE God allowed in Scripture, if Jesus is called GOD, He is that one GOD.
Jesus is called "Almighty God"- Revelation 1:8, with Rev. 22:20.
Jesus is called "the true God" in 1 John 5:20.
Jesus is called "the only God" in 1 Timothy 1:16,17.
Be warned the JW's have altered even the interlinear side in their 1985 edition of the K.I.T. to distort the Deity of Jesus Christ.
JESUS IS NOT "HO THEOS"
"HO THEOS" means in Greek, "The God", and the Watchtower teaches that this term applies only to Jehovah God. (Kingdom Interlinear pages 1158 & 1159, 1969 ed., or page 1139 in the 1985 ed.).
JESUS IS "HO THEOS"
Prophecy says so Matthew 1:23
The disciples said so John 20:25-28
The Father Jehovah said so Hebrews 1:8
JEHOVAH IS THE CREATOR
"Insight On the Scriptures", page 526 says, Hence," Jehovah is fittingly and uniquely called the creator". The "Reasoning" book calls Jesus "...the second-greatest personage in the universe", and presents him as a helper for Jehovah in creation.
JESUS IS THE CREATOR
The Greek word for "first- created" is "protoktistos". This term is NOT used in connection with Jesus.
The term "Firstborn," "prototokos" means in Greek "Preeminence in rank." Jesus Christ is the Creator. ( John 1: 3,4; Hebrews 1; 10). Note how the Watchtower Bible has altered Colossians 1:16, 17 by adding to the Greek text the term "by means of him" and the word "other" four times. Read without these additions, Colossians 1:16,17 calls Jesus the Creator.
The "Master Worker" doctrine of the Jehovah's Witnesses is disproved by Isaiah 44:24,
"I, the LORD, am the maker of all things, stretching out the heavens BY MYSELF and spreading out the earth ALL ALONE."
J.W.'s will attempt to use parts of Proverbs chapter 8 to prove Jesus is a creature. Point out that Proverbs 8 is completely concerned with "wisdom" not "Jesus".
Jehovah's Witnesses likewise try to use the term "only begotten" to support their doctrine that Jesus was "begotten" or created at the time of creation. Without disputing over the meaning of "begotten", point out that the Bible plainly teaches that Jesus was "begotten" at the time of His resurrection. (Acts 13:32 33).
J.W. Claim -----------------------------------------------
JESUS CHRIST IS THE ARCHANGEL MICHAEL
"...the name Michael applied to God's Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return" (Page 393 of "Insight on the Scriptures".
JESUS CHRIST IS NOT AN ANGEL
Hebrews chapter 1 teaches that Jesus is "better than the angels" (vs 4 ); The Father never called ANY ANGEL HIS SON (vs. 5 );
The angels worship Jesus (vs. 6 ).
The Father never invited any angel to sit at His right hand (vs.13 ).
The Father calls His Son "God" (Ho Theos) in verse 8. NOWHERE does scripture say Jesus is Michael.
JESUS IS INFERIOR TO JEHOVAH
Jehovah's Witnesses bring forth texts like John 14:28 where Jesus said " the Father is greater than I" and John 5:19, which reads,
"the Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative but only what he beholds the Father doing."
These texts are used to support their doctrine that Jesus is lesser that Jehovah. "He is the second greatest personage in the universe" says the " Reasoning" book on page 209".
JESUS IS NOT INFERIOR
Colossians 2:8-10 proves that although Jesus was a man, he still had "ALL THE FULLNESS OF DEITY DWELLING IN HIM BODILY."
(The J.W.'s had to drastically alter this portion of scripture as it destroys their doctrine denying the Deity of Christ).
JESUS IS NOT THE "I AM"
The J.W. Bible has altered John 8:58 to read " I have been," robbing Jesus of His Divine title.
JESUS IS THE "I AM"
John 8:58 is a direct quote from Exodus 3:14. The Greek reads "ego eimi", "I AM" Jehovah's Witnesses even invented a new Greek tense to do away with this verse, called the "perfect indefinite tense". When informed of the nonexistence of this tense in ANY language, they stated the tense was really "the perfect tense indicative." This is also impossible for the verb "to be" from which "I AM" is taken. Any Greek student can tell a Jehovah's Witness that "ego eimi" is in the present tense, and Jesus meant what He said-- He is the "I AM'. just as Jehovah is the "I AM". (see Greek side K.I.T.pg.451, 1985 ed.)
It is a serious matter to deny Jesus is the "I AM", for Jesus Himself said in John 8:24,
"Unless you believe that I AM you shall die in your sins."
JESUS IS NOT TO BE WORSHIPPED
Page 214 of "Reasoning " book asks the question: "Does the fact that worship is given to Jesus prove that He is God?" Despite this admission that Jesus is worshiped they use the word "obeisance" to teach their followers not to worship Jesus.
JESUS IS WORSHIPPED
While on earth Jesus accepted the worship of men (Matthew 14:33; 28:9), even while directing worship to God alone (Matt. 4:10), showing Himself to be God.
Every knee must bow to Jesus (Phil. 2:9, 10).
JESUS WAS RAISED A SPIRIT
JW's teach Jesus materialized bodies after His resurrection. (Pg. 217, "Reasoning").
J.W's. use 1 Peter 3:18 which says Jesus was "made alive in the Spirit."
JESUS HAD A BODILY RESURRECTION
The term "in the Spirit" does not mean "a spirit". The apostle John was " in the spirit " in Rev. 1:10. Romans 8:9 tells us that the whole congregation was "in the Spirit." Does this mean John and the early church had become spirits and lost their fleshly bodies ? No! Read Romans 8:11.
Jesus Himself told His disciples He was NOT A SPIRIT after His resurrection [ Luke 24:33-45.] The thought of Jesus materializing fake nail prints on his fake body is nonsense to everyone but the Watchtower Society.
THE HOLY SPIRIT
"The Lord is the Spirit" says 2 Cor. 3:17,18. Who then is the Lord? "Jesus is Lord of All" says Acts 10:36. Deuteronomy 32:6 identifies the Lord as the Father. The three are the one Lord. The Holy Spirit is called "The Spirit of Christ" or "The Spirit of God" interchangeably in Romans 8:9.
Notice the terminology in Acts 5:1-10 where the three terms interchange. "Holy Spirit," "God" and "Spirit of the Lord". Truly " God is Spirit" [John 4:24]. Although the Father and Son seem to receive more mention in Scripture, the reason is stated in John 16:13-15 where the work of the Holy Spirit is revealed, namely to glorify the Father through the Son. Beautiful tri-unity!
JESUS CHRIST THE SON
In scripture Jesus is called "God" but is also spoken of as being "with God" or the "Son of God". In our natural thinking we cannot understand the "mystery" of Jesus Christ [Col. 2:2].
Scripture reveals that Jesus Christ is truly God and truly Man. Jesus is God [Heb. 1:8], the True God in [1 John 5:20], The Only God [1Tim. 1:16, 17.]
He came to earth as Emmanuel- God with Us [Matt. 1:23]. For a" little while" He became lower than the Angels [Heb. 2:9], and although existing in the form of God, He emptied Himself [ i.e. set aside His Divine privileges] and took the form of a man. [Phil. 2:5-8].
He was still Deity [Col. 2:9] but functioned as a man to buy back what Adam lost- a perfect human life [Rom. 5:12,15] While a perfect man, Jesus placed HIMSELF in the divine order [1 Cor. 11:3] and for this time said " The Father is greater than I am," [ John 14:28], "greater" being a Greek word denoting position [ not nature].
The Jews knew Jesus' claim to be the "Son of God' showed He considered Himself equal to the Father in nature [ John 5:18; 10:30-33; 14:7-9]. After proving faithful to death, Jesus was exalted and worshiped with a "name above every name' [Phil. 2:9,10].
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 7:31AM #2|
Ag123 - I assume you want us to point out to you some of the many errors in the source you quoted? I will zero in on one and let others point out some of the many other errors contained therein. The source you quote:
" REAL JESUS "
AND THE REAL JESUS "
[First, it should be pointed out that the Jesus that the many religions in this world believe in is real - it is the understandings and doctrines about Jesus that are often mistaken.]
"Since we have the warning in scripture that there would be those coming to us preaching "another Jesus", disguising themselves as "apostles of Christ" (2 Cor.11:3,4,13-15 ) we need to examine Jehovah's Witnesses claims concerning Jesus Christ in the light of scripture."
True. And we also need to examine all religion's claims about Jesus, be it Mormon, Catholic, Islam, Jewish, etc.
JESUS CHRIST IS NOT ALMIGHTY GOD BUT A LESSER GOD
J.W. doctrine has two true Gods, Almighty God Jehovah, and beside Him a lesser " mighty god", Jesus Christ. John 1:1 has been altered from the original Greek in their bible to read "the word was a god" to accommodate this polytheistic doctrine. (see pages 150, 416 - 417, Reasoning From The Scriptures, 1985 edition published by the Watchtower Society)."
It is this false statement that I will zero in on. I will let someone else explain to you in depth on the false charge that we are polytheistic - I will simply state these Scriptures and ask you - is this teaching polytheism?
(John 10:34-36) . . .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? - NW
When Jesus quotes Jehovah as saying "I said: you are gods" was he advocating polytheism or was he simply showing that "theos" in Greek and "elohim" in Hebrew has more than one definition? Here is another popular translation:
"In your own Law it says that men are gods!" he replied. "So if the Scripture, which cannot be untrue, speaks of those as gods to whom the message of God came, do you call it blasphemy when the one sanctified and sent into the world by the Father says, 'I am the Son of God'?" - John 10:34-36 - the Living Bible
Wasn't Jesus here defending his deity by showing a lesser definition of "theos" that applied to other sons of God? This is what Jehovah's Witnesses believe and your source is wrong in calling this polytheistic.
The Scripture Jesus was quoting as accurate and true in defense of his deity is:
(Psalm 82:6) . . .“I myself have said, ‘YOU are gods, And all of YOU are sons of the Most High.
The context confirms that there are many gods:
(Psalm 82:1) . . .God is stationing himself in the assembly of the Divine One; In the middle of the gods he judges:
Again, is Ps.82:1 teaching polytheism or is it not rather teaching what Jehovah's Witnesses really teach - that "elohim" (in the original Hebrew at Ps. 82:1,6) and "theos" (in the Greek LXX at Ps.82:6; and in the original Greek at John 10:34) has more than one definition and in these verses means "mighty one" not almighty?
I will post on the false charge that "John 1:1 has been altered from the original Greek in their bible to read "the word was a god" to accommodate this polytheistic doctrine" next. Suffice it to say for this post that our belief is in harmony with Jesus' defense of his deity when showing that others are properly called gods - and Jesus was not teaching polytheism in the definition the source meant.
And our NW translation of John 1:1 is the accurate literal translation from the Greek - I will prove that in my next post - btw I have posted this proof on other threads before.
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 7:42AM #3|
Ag 123 - Concerning the false charge that we altered the Greek in John 1:1:
John 1:1 - Many Trinitarian Bible translations do indeed translate this as “the Word was God.” However, this is not the literal translation of the Greek - it fails to distinguish the fact that Jehovah is referred to here as ‘the God’ (Greek ton theon - I.e. theos with the definite article 3588) while Jesus (ho logos - the Word) is referred to as ‘a god” (Greek theos without the definite article 3588).
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance in its Greek/English dictionary definition of theos (2516) states:
Of uncertain affinity; a deity, especially (with G3588) the supreme Divinity; figuratively a magistrate; by Hebraism very: - X exceeding, God, god [-ly, -ward].
[As reproduced by e-Sword]
Thus John 1:1, using these definitions of theos, should read:
In [the] beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the supreme Divinity, and the Word was a deity.
There are other translators who translated correctly as does NW here - but they are in the minority while most cling to the traditional (e.g. since KJV and Dy) pro Trinitarian rendering. I am truly thankful that our faithful and discreet slave has had the courage to translate this verse correctly despite how unpopular this is among worldly translators - to wit:
(John 1:1) . . .In [the] beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. - NW
“The Word was a god.” (The New Testament in an Improved Version)(NTIV)
“The Word was with God and shared his nature.” (The Translator’s New Testament)
“The Word was a God,” The New Testament, by James L. Tomanek, 1958
“a god was the Word,” - The Emphatic Diaglott, 1864, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson
These 3 German translation say “a god”:
Jeremias Felbinger, Oskar Holtzmann, Friedrich Rittelmeyer,
Emil Bock says, “a divine being.”
1808: “and the word was a god.” The New Testament in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome’s New Translation: With a Corrected Text.
1928: “and the Word was a divine being.” La Bible du Centenaire, L’Evangile selon Jean, by Maurice Goguel.
1946: “and of a divine kind was the Word.” Das Neue Testament, by Ludwig Thimme.
1975: “and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Siegfried Schulz.
1978: “and godlike kind was the Logos.” Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider.
Das Evangelium nach Johannes, Würzburg Germany, (1979) by Jürgen Becker reads: “ . . . und der Logos war bei dem Gott, und ein Gott war der Logos.” (English translation: “ . . . and the Logos was with the God, and a god the Logos was.”),
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god” - The New Testament—A New Translation and Explanation Based on the Oldest Manuscripts, by Johannes Greber (a translation from German into English), edition of 1937
Jesuit John J. McKenzie, S.J., in his Dictionary of the Bible, says: “Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated ‘the word was with the God [= the Father], and the word was a divine being.’”—(Brackets are his. Published with nihil obstat and imprimatur.) (New York, 1965), p. 317.
Not only is this the correct literal translation but it is also in harmony with the context - for example Jesus was with Jehovah in a beginning [ and is the beginning of God’s creation - Revelation 3:14] - Jesus was not with himself! This is clearly two persons. [many Trinitarians agree that Jesus is the Son of God and that Jehovah is the Father.]
These two persons are shown to be different - for example in John 1:18 we are told
“No man hath seen God at any time.”
Jesus has been seen by man - Jehovah has not been seen by man.
to be continued
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 7:47AM #4|
A little more on the grammar of John 1:1 confirming “a god” for the indefinite anarthrous (without the definite article) noun (theos) before the verb.
Following is a list of instances in the gospels of Mark and John where various translators have rendered singular anarthrous predicate nouns occurring before the verb with an indefinite article to denote the indefinite and qualitative status of the subject nouns:
New World Translation
King James Version
An American Translation
New International Version
Revised Standard Version
Today’s English Version
6:49 an apparition a spirit a ghost a ghost a ghost a ghost
11:32 a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet a real prophet a prophet
4:19 a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet
6:70 a slanderer a devil an informer a devil a devil a devil
8:44 a manslayer a murderer a murderer a murderer a murderer a murderer
8:44 a liar a liar a liar a liar a liar a liar
9:17 a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet a prophet
10:1 a thief a thief a thief a thief a thief a thief
10:13 a hired man an hireling a hired man a hired hand a hireling a hired man
10:33 a man a man a mere man a mere man a man a man
12:6 a thief a thief a thief a thief a thief a thief
[above from NW Appendix 6A]
Regarding this point the noted Bible translator William Barclay writes:
“Now normally, except for special reasons, Greek nouns always have the definite article in front of them, . . . When a Greek noun has not got the article in front of it, it becomes rather a description than an identification, and has the character of an adjective rather than of a noun. We can see exactly the same in English. If I say: ‘James is the man’, then I identify James with some definite man whom I have in mind; but, if I say: ‘James is man’, then I am simply describing James as human, and the word man has become a description and not an identification. If John had said ho theos ēn ho logos, using a definite article in front of both nouns, then he would definitely have identified the logos [the Word] with God, but because he has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description, and more of an adjective than a noun. The translation then becomes, to put it rather clumsily, ‘The Word was in the same class as God, belonged to the same order of being as God’. . . . John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God.”—Many Witnesses, One Lord (1963), pages 23, 24. - Wt. 5/15/77, p. 320
Interestingly, translators that insist on rendering John 1:1, “The Word was God,” do not hesitate to use the indefinite article (a, an) in their rendering of other passages where a singular anarthrous predicate noun occurs before the verb. Thus at John 6:70, JB and KJ both refer to Judas Iscariot as “a devil,” and at John 9:17 they describe Jesus as “a prophet.”
“and divine (of the category divinity) was the Word,” by scholar Ernst Haenchen, who goes on to state in his commentary.: “In this instance, the verb ‘was’ ([en]) simply expresses predication. And the predicate noun must accordingly be more carefully observed: [the·os´] is not the same thing as [ho the·os´] (‘divine’ is not the same thing as ‘God’).” - see A Commentary on the Gospel of John Chapters 1-6, page 108, translated by Robert W. Funk. [German commentary on John 1-6 translated into English.]
See w 12/15/85, p. 25
The Greek text of the Christian Scriptures has many examples of this type of predicate noun where other translators into English have added the indefinite article “a.” Consider, for example, Marshall’s interlinear translation of the following verses: “Says to him the woman: Sir, I perceive that a prophet [predicate] art [verb] thou [subject].” (John 4:19) “Said therefore to him—Pilate: Not really a king [predicate] art [verb] thou [subject]? Answered—Jesus: Thou sayest that a king [predicate] I am [verb, with subject included].”—John 18:37.
Did you notice the expressions “a prophet,” “a king” (twice)? These are anarthrous predicate nouns that precede the verb in Greek. But the translator rendered them with the indefinite article “a.” There are numerous examples of this in English versions of the Bible. For further illustration consider the following from the Gospel of John in The New English Bible: “A devil” (6:70); “a slave” (8:34); “a murderer . . . a liar” (8:44); “a thief” (10:1); “a hireling” (10:13); “a relation” (18:26).
To be continued if you need more evidence.
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 10:47AM #5|
President and CEO
Bible Translation Magazine
Yahoo IM: email@example.com
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 4:14PM #6|
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 4:38PM #7|
In the beginning was the Word this means that the Word was in the beginning.
And the Word was with God = THE Word was with THE God – lit Greek. Thus it is also true that God was with the Word… albeit in this sentence the Word is the subject.
and the Word was God = and God was THE Word – lit Greek. The Word, in this last clause has the definite article – God does not. “The Word” is the subject, and “was God” is the predicate. Was is a past tense tobe verb – meaning that the Word was existing as – God.
Thus God = Theon, in the Greek, was being used to describe the Word… meaning that the Word was God as to His nature. Gal 4:8-10
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 5:06PM #8|
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 6:12PM #9|
Theo - Another false statement you made is that you cannot insert "a" & that it makes no grammatical sense.
Again, I posted a number of examples of similar sentence structure in Greek grammar where most translators insert "a" because the definite article is absent.
You have, for example, ignored the fact that Greek has no indefinite article equivalent to the English "a." Therefore whenever any translator uses the word "a" in the Bible it is inserted. And, btw, Hebrew also has no indefinite article.
Just because in your belief calling Jesus "a god" or "a deity" makes no sense is not evidence that it is not grammatically correct. NW's rendering "a god" is not only grammatically correct and in harmony with the literal definition of theos without the definite article, but it also makes good grammatical sense.
I suppose now you will say when other verses refer to others as "a god" you would say - ah - now that makes grammatical sense!
Consider, for example:
(Acts 28:6) . . .But they were expecting he was going to swell up with inflammation or suddenly drop dead. After they waited for a long while and beheld nothing hurtful happen to him, they changed their mind and began saying he was a god.
The phrase "he was a god" is in Greek "auton einai theon" [literally him to be a deity]. auton= him; einai = to be; theon (without the definite article ho - 3588) = a deity [according to Strong's Greek dictionary].
Here are some translations of theon without the definite article in Acts 28:6
he was a god - KJV; NIV; Je; RS; Ph; LB; AMP; Yo; NAS; Dy; AS; NW; Mo; Ro; NAB
this man is a god - CEV
He is a god! - TEV
He is a god. - Diag.
All the translations I could find (some of mine are missing) agree on "a god" here!
(Acts 12:22) 22 In turn the assembled people began shouting: “A god’s voice, and not a man’s!”
Greek: theou phone kai ouk anthropou. Again no indefinite article of course, since such does not exisg in Greek. theou = of god [Diag.Int: of a god]; phone = voice; kai = and; ouk = not; anthropou = of man [Diag.Int: of a man]
There is, btw, nothing special about the absence of the definite article in front of theos (god) - a is usually inserted whenever any noun fails to be preceded by the definite artifcle - in the above verse "a man's."
Acts 12:22 is a little more variable in translations than Acts 28:6
It is the voice of a god, and not of a man - KJV; LB; Diag (Voice capitalized); AMP;Dy
This is a god speaking, not a mere man - Ph
The voice of a god, and not of man - RS
It isn't a man speaking, but a god! - TEV
This is the voice of of a god, not of a man - NIV
It is a god speaking, not a man! - Je; NEB
The voice of a god, and not of a man - Yo; AS; NAS
It is a god's voice, not a man's! - Mo
You speak more like a god than a man - CEV
This is the voice of a god, not a man! - NAB
A God's voice, and not a mans! - Ro; NW
While there are many translation differences - mostly minor - note all translators insert "a" before god.
The truth is not so hard to see if you look for it with an open mind rather than clinging to preconceived doctrines.
|7 years ago :: Feb 07, 2009 - 6:34PM #10|