Are Jehovah's witnesses real Christians?

[Ronald Nolette]

Jesus is never called God in Scripture sir, only in some versions of the Bible that have been altered to support a belief, as you did earlier. God doesn't lie, imperfect humans do. I personally don't think Peter lied either when Jesus asked him who he thought he was, and I side with Peter especially since Jesus said God revealed that to Peter. Although I showed you his answer before, I will post the account again sir: (Matthew 16:13-17) . . .Jesus asked his disciples: “Who are men saying the Son of man is?” 14 They said: “Some say John the Baptist, others E·liʹjah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them: “You, though, who do you say I am?” 16 Simon Peter answered: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 In response Jesus said to him: “Happy you are, Simon son of Joʹnah, because flesh and blood did not reveal it to you, but my Father in the heavens did.
As time progressed, like you many have elevated their opinion on who Jesus is, claiming him to be God. Perhaps God revealed it to me, but at any rate I side with Jesus and Peter and state for the record that Jesus is the anointed one, the son of the living God Jehovah sir. It is possible that you learn from this account, but not probable. Why do you suppose that is Ron? Are you able to look at your responses to me and see the distinction? You should be able to. Mal 3:18

Well you say altered, but fail to show so!

But anyone with a cursory knowledge of Koine Greek knows that the NWT doesn't even qualify as a paraphrase!

I gave you many verses where Jesus is called Gods. I won't give them again, you know them and are now accountable before God for them!

But if the Scriptures have been altered- present the evidence or recant!

show the greek and then show where close to 40 English translations altered teh translation of the manuscriptus.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
All that we know of in the cosmos-- all life, matter, and energy --is
constructed with elements listed on the so-called periodic table. There was
a time when every one of those elements were indigenous, but now several
of them are invasive, viz: man-made.

Well; it seems reasonable to me that if God was intelligent enough,
resourceful enough, and capable enough, to create the elements we know of,
then it shouldn't be too difficult for Him to create any number of elements
heretofore unknown.

• 1 Corinthians 15:50 . . However, this I say, brothers, that flesh and blood
cannot inherit God’s kingdom, neither does corruption inherit incorruption.

(According to John 3:3-12, a portion of God's kingdom will be established on
Earth.)

Now; if I am reading the 15th chapter of 1st Corinthians correctly, then
verse 50 refers to Adam, i.e. to the original chemistry of the human body.
Supposing Jesus' spiritual body is composed of elements nobody has ever
heard of; so that instead of it transparent as thin air, it's visible as material
easily seen by the naked eye?

• Acts 1:11 . . Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This
Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the
same way as you have watched him go into heaven.

• 1 John 3:2 . .We shall see him just as he is.

• Revelation 1:7 . . Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will
see him, even those who pierced him

And not only visible, but also capable of dining upon ordinary foods and
beverages.

• Matthew 26:29 . . I tell you: I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from
now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father's kingdom.

• Luke 22:15-16 . . I have eagerly desired to eat this Passover with you
before I suffer. For I tell you: I will not eat it again until it finds fulfillment in
the kingdom of God.

• Luke 22:28-30 . . However, you are the ones that have stuck with me in
my trials; and I make a covenant with you, just as my Father has made a
covenant with me, for a kingdom, that you may eat and drink at my table in
my kingdom,

NOTE: The Greek word translated "spiritual" is ambiguous. It doesn't
necessarily refer to the characteristics of thin air. Below is a list of spiritual
things that bear absolutely no resemblance whatsoever to the bodily
chemistry of an angel or a demon.

Spiritual gifts (Rom 1:11)
Spiritual law (Rom 7:14)
Spiritual things (Rom 15:27)
Spiritual people (1Cor 2:15)
Spiritual nourishment (1Cor 10:3)
Spiritual water (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual rock (1Cor 10:4)
Spiritual counselors (Gal 6:1)
Spiritual blessings (Eph 1:3)
Spiritual music (Eph 5:19)
Spiritual understanding (Col 1:9)
Spiritual housing (1Pet 2:5)
Spiritual sacrifices (1Pet 2:5)
_

 

[marks]

Basically I respond to the post I am responding to sir, I knew you would not be able to, but I thought you would might at least come up with something. If you want to provide a passage or two to support your statement great, we will move forward from there, if not so be it.

If you would have answered my question, then you would have had your answer sir. No shame in not knowing it, and if you would have asked I would have been glad to share it with you, wouldn't you have to honestly admit, you really do not care to know?

What was your question? Seems like we've already covered a lot of ground. But if you want to clarify . . .

Nevermind . . . I looked back . . . Jesus did as all men in flesh do, He worshipped His Father. This is Biblical principle . . . God spoke this through Jeremiah, that God is the God of all flesh,

Philippians 2:7-8 LITV
7) but emptied Himself, taking the form of a slave, having become in the likeness of men
8) and being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, having become obedient until death, even the death of a cross.

Jesus humbled Himself - He was glorious, sharing glory with the Father. He became obedient - He was sovereign, Creator of all.

He was baptized with the baptism of repentance by John, to fulfill all righteousness. And He worshipped the Father, even knowing He is the Lord from heaven, yet still fulfilling all righteousness.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Either what I say is true or false, so state your Scriptural proof if I am incorrect, not just your opinion Marks.

I've been doing that a lot, perhaps you've missed it, maybe some review? I dislike cluttering a thread posting the same things repeatedly.

Much love!

 

[tigger 2]

.
Continued From No.822


I took the liberty to alter the verses below to keep them consistent with the
Watchtower Society's translations of John 1:1-3 and Colossians 1:16-17.

• Gen 1:1 . . In the beginning a god created the heavens and the earth.

• Heb 3:4 . . Of course, every house is constructed by someone, but he that
constructed all other things is a god.
_

Too bad you won't actually examine my study of John's Grammar concerning John 1:1c. You could have easily escaped this ignorant post.

My studies of this restrict proper examples to the usage by John. Gen 1:1 was not written by John. Heb. was not written by John.

Gen. 1:1 uses ho theos at Gen. 1:1 in the Septuagint. This is the same way John (and all other Gospel writers) always describes God. This is shown in great detail in the DEF study.

In Gen. 1:1 "God" is not a predicate noun found before the verb (as trinitarian scholars insist is what makes theos in John 1:1c equivalent to ho theos) but is the subject.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Continued From No.902

FAQ: what is the meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:45?

REPLY: When that verse is taken with John 1:14, it's readily seen that the
Word spoken of by John 1:1-3 came into the world as a spirit being and a
physical being simultaneously.

REACTION: That's impossible.

REPLY: Well; I can't see how it's any more impossible than creating ex nihilo
all the life, matter, and energy of an entire cosmos. Christianity contains
quite a few supernatural elements that we shouldn't be surprised make no
sense at all to the limited intellect of the human mind.
_

 

[Keiw]

You cannot prove that God forbids transfusions, and the commandment against eating blood is exactly that, a commandment against eating blood. That's all they did, they didn't do transfusions.

How do you know that God doesn't want one man to offer that small sacrifice to save the life of another man?

And besides, we have various examples in the Bible where human life is held above certain laws because God does in fact give precedence to human life. Even animals, rescuing your animals on the Sabbath, does God care for the animals, or is this written for us?

How rigid should you be in your observance of a law that's not written as you stand and watch some die who could be treated?

Much love!

Something that cannot be proven either way should not be discussed then. The only fact there is, is that God forbids putting blood in ones body by eating it. I believe he meant transfusions as well. The OT teaches--The soul is in the blood.

 

[Keiw]

God designed our bodies, so when my tummy tells me it fancies a nice juicy steak I give it what it wants..:)
“Then he sent some more servants and said, ‘Tell those who have been invited that I have prepared my dinner: My oxen and fattened cattle have been butchered, and everything is ready. Come to the wedding banquet" (Matthew 22:1-4)

We arent forbidden to eat meat--we are told to abstain from blood.

 

[Aunty Jane]

I don’t think so. That is, every translation is stating something that o e denomination interprets differently.

Truth should not be a matter of interpretation, since truth is not altered by anything but perception....so if our perception of scripture is altered by cherished beliefs, we are in trouble.
The truth will not change to suit what we wish to believe....will it?

The action done to Jesus is ‘made alive.’ Scripture states repeatedly that Jesus is a man and Thomas physically felt his wounds. This confirms the man was not a ghost or spirit.

What do the scriptures tell us about spirit beings? Spirits are not visible and they do not inhabit a visible realm....mere humans find that hard to comprehend since everything we know is bound to this earth. God’s prophets of old were granted spiritual visions of the heavenly realm but they were presented in ways that humans could still understand....they were related to things that humans had seen or experienced. e.g. a king on his throne...attendants.....the glorious appearance of spirit beings...etc....but in reality, who knows what the spirit realm is like?

When angels appeared to God’s earthly servants to deliver his messages, they were always in material form. The angels who visited Abraham at Mamre were “men” who ate and drank what was provided for them according to the customs of hospitality to strangers. Two went on to visit Sodom to rescue Lot and his family and also ate and drank what was provided by their host.
The angel Gabriel visited Daniel in human form as he did to Mary some 500 years later....so spirit beings can materialize as humans for all intents and purposes. Even Jesus after his resurrection ate with his apostles.

When we read of the physical condition of Jesus prior to his execution, do we see mention of his wounds in every appearance? If God resurrected him, why would his body bear the cause of his death? Who was resurrected in the Bible with the illness that took their life?
Wouldn’t we expect Jesus to be hale and hearty, devoid of all physical defects, if God raised him from the dead? Yet we only see mention of the physical wounds of his hands and the spear mark in his side, produced to convince his disciples (especially Thomas) that it was really him?

God’s law prevented communication with spirits, so God’s agents always materialized.

The verse of what was done to Jesus explains how or in what way, ‘in the Spirit.’

He would not have taken back the body he sacrificed....when animals were offered by the Israelites, prefiguring the sacrificial blood of the Christ, were the animals given back their lives or were the bodies destroyed?

Being raised as a spirit, meant being able to go back to where he was going to prepare a place for his elect “in his Father’s house” which is not on earth. The last house of God was destroyed by the Romans nearly 2,000 years ago....it has never been rebuilt because it was a type or shadow of the heavenly things. God’s grand spiritual Temple is in heaven where Jesus and his elect serve their God as priests.

Now some might argue that God cannot do anything any other way. I say this is merely for emphasis of Gods live for us.

We can only go by what the scriptures say about spirit beings....they demonstrate the ability to materialize.....so why couldn’t Jesus after his resurrection do the same. It would explain why he could walk through locked doors, and disappear before the eyes of the apostles....and also why he was often not recognised.

Said differently , ‘in the Spirit’ applies to God, the one who acted on Jesus and not the object of the sentence, Jesus.

No doubt about the Bible’s clear statement that God resurrected Jesus, but the question was in what form? Philippians 2 tells us that he was “in God’s form” before his earthly mission. What form does God have? John tells us that “God is a spirit”....Paul tells us that he is “invisible”.....so in order to return to the Father, Jesus must of necessity be raised as an invisible spirit. Flesh cannot live outside of this earth, which is why those who are of the elect must be “born again” as spirit beings in order to inhabit the spirit realm.

That’s the way we see it. The scriptures explain themselves.

 

[Keiw]

Well I am glad you added trhe qword practicing- because that is the issue. Not someone who may fail and fall some times, but an unrepentant practicioner of sin.

And yes the Road to life is very narrow- it is Jesus

And to get on that road one has to believe in the death and physical resurrection of Jesus for their sin debt.

Actually they must also obey every thing Jesus taught-John 3:36--Those not obeying Jesus remain in Gods wrath. No trinitarian is taught to obey Jesus-They fail 100%. They dont even know the truths he teaches correctly.

 

[marks]

Something that cannot be proven either way should not be discussed then. The only fact there is, is that God forbids putting blood in ones body by eating it. I believe he meant transfusions as well. The OT teaches--The soul is in the blood.

So it is a matter of the personal conscience, is that what you are saying? That if you believe this is sin, than for you it is sin, but if you believe this is OK then for you it is not sin, though we should keep such matters private lest we cause another to stumble? Like that?

If so, I'm good with that!

Much love!

 

[The Learner]

.


Mr.Franz was given a shout-out once already back in post No.775.

It might be time to wrap this thread; I've noticed we've been repeating
ourselves.
_

I agree time to close this one.

 

[Keiw]

So it is a matter of the personal conscience, is that what you are saying? That if you believe this is sin, than for you it is sin, but if you believe this is OK then for you it is not sin, though we should keep such matters private lest we cause another to stumble? Like that?

If so, I'm good with that!

Much love!

It only matters in the end what God thinks. He is eternal ruler. He has that right. I have studied Jesus carefully. His teachings are the same in every translation on earth( except-EARTH or LAND at Matt 5:5) Earth is correct. There is 0 doubt in all creation his teachings back my teachers all the way, as does true God worship history. There is no other backing besides those 2 things. My teachers say blood transfusions are wrong. They have exposed many false teachings done by the other side through the years. One few know about-- In trinity translations it always said the 3 witness bearers in heaven are the Father, son and holy spirit. But back in the 1960,s or 70,s Catholicism let the JW leaders into their archives. They came out with proof-the 3 witness bearers are the spirit, water and blood. Many translations changed because it was proven error. Its like i have been saying all along. Catholicism translated many errors in to fit false council teachings created centuries ago. After the JW,s came out with that proof, were not allowed back in. Trinity translations contradict Jesus to the core.
John 1:1 is error--In the Greek Lexicons( trinity translating) the true God is called HoTheos in the second line=The God--plain Theos is in the last line-clearly shows a difference-a god is correct. Only 1 other spot in the NT has both of those-2Cor 4:4--God called Ho Theos, satan called-Theos-god small g. The rule is the same at both places. 0 doubt about that.

 

[Dropship]

We arent forbidden to eat meat--we are told to abstain from blood.

Yeah ancient heathens probably drank cupfulls of blood so God had to tell 'em to lay off because it wasn't good for them.
Some races probably still like their food sopping with blood, rather them than me-




How about it Worf?

 

[Webers_Home]

.

In Gen. 1:1 "God" is not a predicate noun found before the verb (as trinitarian scholars
insist is what makes theos in John 1:1c equivalent to ho theos) but is the subject.

The grammatical issue pertaining to the Greek article "ho" was addressed
back in post No.239
_

 

[Aunty Jane]

I really love this one, the old “what if everyone refused to go to war.” Think this make believe world through just a little. Where would Hitler be if all Germans had been JW’s? In the real world Germany was full of Catholics and Protestants who were willing to commit the atrocities that real history records.

Yes, I had an old gentleman at the doors accuse us of being cowards in the war...he had lost his son and was tearing up telling us about him.
I offered my condolences and told him that there was one thing I was certain of....that his son was not killed by one of Jehovah's Witnesses.

The one thing that defines the truth of Christianity for me is that, as you said, if all the people who participated in a war were JW's, then no wars could have been fought. We will not hate our enemies or do harm to them in obedience to Christ's command...
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"...(Matthew 5:43-44 NASB)

We can't obey the convenient things and ignore the more important things, justifying doing what Christ told us not to do. How do we "agape" our enemies? You do so in the sense of not allowing yourself to hate them. If you allow hatred into your heart, you lose your Christianity. Self-control is a fruit of God's spirit. (Galatians 5:22-23) Those who become what God hates....those with blood on their hands.....will have no part with Christ in his kingdom. It prevents our prayers from reaching the Father. (Isaiah 1:15)

 

[tigger 2]

.


The grammatical issue pertaining to the Greek article "ho" was addressed
back in post No.239
_

...................................
And was totally debunked in post 245 for those with enough integrity to research it.

 

[Webers_Home]

.
Continued From No.906

FAQ: What is the meaning of 1 Corinthians 15:45?

REPLY: When that verse is taken with John 1:14, it's readily seen that the Word spoken
of by John 1:1-3 came into the world as a spirit being and a physical being
simultaneously.

If asked its opinion of the discussion above; the Watchtower Society would
robustly disagree with the reply; yet the Society's published doctrine
supports it.

The Word's life force was transferred to Mary's ovum so as not to lose his
continuity of life. (Watchtower magazine, 2-15-82, p.7)

Well; the Word's life force is the life force of an angelic being, whereas the
life force of baby Jesus was the life force of a human being; resulting in Jesus
existing as a spirit being and a physical being simultaneously.
_

 

[Aunty Jane]

It's the pronunciation used for the combination of the consonants of YHWH and the vowels of Adonai.

It is the accepted English translation of the Hebrew YHWH, going back quite a ways.
The KJV as well as other popular translations render the divine name as "Jehovah". It is not a transliteration like Yahweh because no one really knows if that is how it was pronounced in Hebrew....so a translation into English is exactly what we did to "Jesus"...how many people stumble over the name of the Father in English, but use the name of the son, freely? If they are both "God" then that is really mindless.....and totally hypocritical.Both are English translations. Would you go back and change every "J" name in the Bible, just because its not the way the Jews pronounced it? The majority of those "J" names incorporate the divine name.

This combination was invented as a means to prevent people from attempting to pronounce YHWH, and instead, when they came to that place, to say "Adonai" instead. So people saw that, and pronounce it Jehovah, even there there isn't "J" sound in the Hebrew. And even though this vowel points were imported from a different word.

It's not a translation of YHWH, it's not a transliteration, it's a substitute word based on combining 2 different words.

Its the accepted name of God in English...no one says you have to use it, but if you pray the Lord's Prayer, then the words "hallowed be thy name" ring hollow. Its a name no one uses in Christendom, but instead there is a substitution with the title "Lord", which could apply to anyone in authority in Bible times. Slaves called their masters, "Lord"....Sarah called Abraham "Lord"...did it make them God? The God of Israel was not a nameless God.

As far as the Jews are concerned, there was no excuse for ceasing to utter God's name which was used by the Bible writers freely, frequently, and reverently.

Exodus 3:14-15....The Complete Tanakh....
"God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'" ידוַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־משֶׁ֔ה אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֣ר אֶֽהְיֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֗אמֶר כֹּ֤ה תֹאמַר֙ לִבְנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֶֽהְיֶ֖ה שְׁלָחַ֥נִי אֲלֵיכֶֽם:


And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation. טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה זִכְרִ֖י לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר:"

God's instructions were...."This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation."
Is this what God's people obediently followed? There was no real reason to stop using the divine name except that that they were using it inappropriately. The remedy was to punish the wrongdoers...not to lose Jehovah's name, which was always associated with his people.

Jesus said in prayer to his Father...."and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.” (John 17:26)

Even so, Robert was adding a word to a verse to make a word play as if Jesus is "Jehovah's Witness" in the sense that Robert is. And that's not valid.

I don't think he was doing any such thing....any more than Jehovah himself calling Israel his "witnesses" was. (Isaiah 43:10)
What is a *witness* when all is said and done? It is someone who testified as to what is truth about a matter.
Jesus himself commanded his disciples to be 'witnesses' of him too. (Acts 1:8)
Jesus called himself “the faithful and true Witness”. (Revelation 3:14)

 

[Robert Gwin]

I don’t think so. That is, every translation is stating something that o e denomination interprets differently.

The action done to Jesus is ‘made alive.’ Scripture states repeatedly that Jesus is a man and Thomas physically felt his wounds. This confirms the man was not a ghost or spirit.

The verse of what was done to Jesus explains how or in what way, ‘in the Spirit.’

Now some might argue that God cannot do anything any other way. I say this is merely for emphasis of Gods live for us.

Said differently , ‘in the Spirit’ applies to God, the one who acted on Jesus and not the object of the sentence, Jesus.

You do understand Wrangler, that virtually every time an angel interacted with men they were in bodily form correct? The account with Thomas is no exception, it was not Jesus sacrificed body however as his intimate friend did not recognize him bodily, rather by the marks shown to him. The account also stated that Jesus came through locked doors, indicating to us that he passed through the walls as a spirit being and then materialized.