A Question for Jehovah's Witnesses

[MonoBiblical]

I already showed from greek grammar by Mounce they are connected and refer to the same person.

The noun phrase doesn't connect both names to μου, because there are 2 of them.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Can I ask who told you that? It could not be further from the truth…..the UN is the devil’s organization for the accomplishment of his will, not God’s. It will be the uniting force of the NWO….a toothless tiger in all its history, and never a force for peace in the world, until it is given power by the beast who controls it.
The Bible is never wrong….we are about to experience Bible prophesy in the midst of the greatest tribulation the world has ever seen…..are we ready?

I had a visit by some JWs. It didn't go down. But they assured me that the UN deserved respect and that the US military didn't.

 

[Jack]

Thou shouldest realize there is a Hebrew participle before "Mighty God" and Everlasting Father cognate wise!

Thou shouldest realize you're not a Hebrew expert. All our Bible say Jesus is God!

 

[Aunty Jane]

I had a visit by some JWs. It didn't go down. But they assured me that the UN deserved respect and that the US military didn't.

I guess you didn’t quite listen with your ears open…..it happens when selective hearing is employed…..all government agencies stand placed where they are by God for now, (Rom 1:1-2) because if they didn’t there would be anarchy and not a fitting environment for Christ’s message to be preached “in all the inhabited earth”, (Matt 24:14) so in that aspect they deserve a measure of respect (not necessarily approval for what they do, but no opposition either.) God will deal with them as he has used worldly authority in the past for his own purpose.

He allows governments and their agencies a measure of power for now, but the military of any nation are slaves of human governments, not slaves of Christ…..they are just doing as they are told. If they are told to kill their fellow believers of another nation, they will do so in the name of the god of war, with an apparently clear conscience. The UN has no religious preferences but those in the military often do. Where then are the Christians who were told to ‘love their enemies’. (Matt 5: 43-48)

Jesus highlighted the difference in accountability in reference to the Roman soldiers who nailed his flesh to the stake upon which he was hung. He asked his Father to forgive them because they did not really know what they were doing. The religious leaders by contrast certainly did.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Thou shouldest realize you're not a Hebrew expert. All our Bible say Jesus is God!

Then use the Blue Letter Bible.

 

[Aunty Jane]

@MonoBiblical…can you explain the sad face? It is sometimes hard to read your responses especially without words….what was sad about my post? Just needing some clarification here….

 

[Wrangler]

How about some Bible?

Acts 2:36 God has made Jesus both Lord and Christ.

NOTE: Jesus did not make himself Lord and Christ. Who made Jesus Lord and Christ?

 

[Runningman]

Acts 4:24-27 does not rule out Jesus as a creator like we know from John 1 and Col 1.

Why do you think Jesus is the creator in either John 1 or Col 1?

2 Peter 1:1​

​

Easy-to-Read Version​

​

​

1 Greetings from Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ.
To all of you who share in the same valuable faith that we have. This faith was given to us because our God and Savior Jesus Christ always does what is good and right.

The grammar doesn't necessitate that God and Jesus be the same person in the easy-to-read version's production of 2 Peter 1:1.

If you will look at the very next verse, it's clear that they are not the same person.

2 Peter 1
2 Grace and peace be given to you more and more, because now you know God and Jesus our Lord.

 

[Runningman]

Hebrews 1​

​

Easy-to-Read Version​

​

​

God Has Spoken Through His Son​

1 In the past God spoke to our people through the prophets. He spoke to them many times and in many different ways. 2 And now in these last days, God has spoken to us again through his Son. He made the whole world through his Son. And he has chosen his Son to have all things. 3 The Son shows the glory of God. He is a perfect copy of God’s nature, and he holds everything together by his powerful command. The Son made people clean from their sins. Then he sat down at the right side[a] of God, the Great One in heaven. 4 The Son became much greater than the angels, and God gave him a name that is much greater than any of their names.
5 God never said this to any of the angels:
“You are my Son.
Today I have become your Father.”
God also never said about an angel,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my son.”
6 And then, when God presents his firstborn Son to the world,[b] he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”[c]
7 This is what God said about the angels:
“He changes his angels into winds[d]
and his servants into flaming fire.”
8 But this is what he said about his Son:
“God, your kingdom will last forever and ever.
You use your authority for justice.
9 You love what is right and hate what is wrong.
So God, your God, has chosen you,
giving you more honor and joy than anyone like you.”
10 God also said,
“O Lord, in the beginning you made the earth,
and your hands made the sky.
11 These things will disappear, but you will stay.
They will all wear out like old clothes.
12 You will fold them up like a coat,
and they will be changed like clothes.
But you never change,
and your life will never end.”
13 And God never said this to an angel:
“Sit at my right side
until I put your enemies under your power.[e]”
14 All the angels are spirits who serve God and are sent to help those who will receive salvation.

Footnotes​

1. Hebrews 1:3 right side The place of honor and authority (power).
2. Hebrews 1:6 world This may mean the world into which Jesus was born (see Lk. 2:1-14), or it may have the same meaning as in Heb. 2:5—the world to come, to which the risen Christ is presented as king (see Php. 2:9-11).
3. Hebrews 1:6 “Let … him” These words are found in Deut. 32:43 in the ancient Greek version and in a Hebrew scroll from Qumran.
4. Hebrews 1:7 winds This can also mean “spirits.”
5. Hebrews 1:13 until I put … power Literally, “until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

Yes. I have read Hebrews 1 before. Thank you. What were you looking at specifically?

 

[Wrangler]

The grammar doesn't necessitate that God and Jesus be the same person in the easy-to-read version's production of 2 Peter 1:1.

If you will look at the very next verse, it's clear that they are not the same person.

2 Peter 1
2 Grace and peace be given to you more and more, because now you know God and Jesus our Lord.

Trinitarians must reject context to support their idol.

 

[Runningman]

Trinitarians must reject context to support their idol.

The fact that Jesus is still a man is the elephant in the room after all of the debating is done. A man as God, even with the hypostatic union, is idolatry and yet the Bible makes no distinction between Jesus the human and Jesus the Son of God. The resolution is being offered, but very few seem to like it.

 

[Wrangler]

The fact that Jesus is still a man is the elephant in the room after all of the debating is done. A man as God, even with the hypostatic union, is idolatry and yet the Bible makes no distinction between Jesus the human and Jesus the Son of God. The resolution is being offered, but very few seem to like it.

One of the things that I realized is undeniable is the theological argument. The reason Jesus cannot be God compared to the reason it is claimed he must be.

The must be pulls out of the air that by no other means could all the sins of the world be covered. That's it. That's the basis. This is anti-Scriptural since Scripture tells us explicitly that by one man sin entered the world and by another man, sin will be absolved. NOTE: The text does not say by God sin will be absolved.

If it did, they'd cling to that like white on rice - reading into the text that by "God" the text is referring to Jesus. But because the text says by another man sin is absolved, it does not strengthen their case. So, they ignore it. Give it to weight.

OTOH, there is a compelling reason the Lamb of God cannot be God. The wages of sin is death. Not a partial death or a death of half of one's nature. The price of sin is total and complete death. And the eternal God cannot pay this price.

Fools argue God can do anything. They are in denial that dying is an inability to stay alive. It turns virtue on its head, like saying God can be weak. Not even God can violate his essential nature and his defining characteristic is eternally existing. Therefore, the Lamb cannot be God for he is to be completely slaughtered for our sake. Or we must admit that death is not the wages of sin per Scripture.

Of course, trinitarians rely on dualism, a way of thinking where the constraints of logic and the Mutual Exclusivity principle do not apply.

 

[The Learner]

Why do you think Jesus is the creator in either John 1 or Col 1?



The grammar doesn't necessitate that God and Jesus be the same person in the easy-to-read version's production of 2 Peter 1:1.

If you will look at the very next verse, it's clear that they are not the same person.

2 Peter 1
2 Grace and peace be given to you more and more, because now you know God and Jesus our Lord.

The Scholar says they do.

John 1

Easy-to-Read Version

​

Christ Comes to the World​

1 Before the world began, the Word was there. The Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was there with God in the beginning. 3 Everything was made through him, and nothing was made without him. 4 In him there was life, and that life was a light for the people of the world. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not defeated it.

Colossians 1:15-20

Easy-to-Read Version

​

The Son of God Is the Same as God​

15 No one can see God,
but the Son is exactly like God.
He rules over everything that has been made.
16 Through his power all things were made:
things in heaven and on earth, seen and not seen—
all spiritual rulers, lords, powers, and authorities.
Everything was made through him and for him.
17 The Son was there before anything was made.
And all things continue because of him.
18 He is the head of the body, which is the church.
He is the beginning of everything else.
And he is the first among all who will be raised from death.
So in everything he is most important.
19 God was pleased for all of himself to live in the Son.
20 And through him, God was happy to bring all things back to himself again—
things on earth and things in heaven.
God made peace by using the blood sacrifice of his Son on the cross.​

 

[The Learner]

Yes. I have read Hebrews 1 before. Thank you. What were you looking at specifically?

aside: https://www.blueletterbible.org/assets/pdf/study/cults/exposejw/expose33.pdf

Hebrews 1

Easy-to-Read Version

​

God Has Spoken Through His Son​

1 In the past God spoke to our people through the prophets. He spoke to them many times and in many different ways. 2 And now in these last days, God has spoken to us again through his Son. He made the whole world through his Son. And he has chosen his Son to have all things. 3 The Son shows the glory of God. He is a perfect copy of God’s nature, and he holds everything together by his powerful command. The Son made people clean from their sins. Then he sat down at the right side[a] of God, the Great One in heaven. 4 The Son became much greater than the angels, and God gave him a name that is much greater than any of their names.
5 God never said this to any of the angels:
“You are my Son.
Today I have become your Father.”
God also never said about an angel,
“I will be his Father,
and he will be my son.”

Me: I understand that to mean, Jesus is the Messiah and King.

6 And then, when God presents his firstborn Son to the world, he says,
“Let all God’s angels worship him.”[c]
7 This is what God said about the angels:
“He changes his angels into winds[d]
and his servants into flaming fire.”
8 But this is what he said about his Son:
“God, your kingdom will last forever and ever.
You use your authority for justice.
9 You love what is right and hate what is wrong.
So God, your God, has chosen you,
giving you more honor and joy than anyone like you.”
10 God also said,
“O Lord, in the beginning you made the earth,
and your hands made the sky.
11 These things will disappear, but you will stay.
They will all wear out like old clothes.
12 You will fold them up like a coat,
and they will be changed like clothes.
But you never change,
and your life will never end.”
13 And God never said this to an angel:
“Sit at my right side
until I put your enemies under your power.[e]”
14 All the angels are spirits who serve God and are sent to help those who will receive salvation.

Footnotes​

1. Hebrews 1:3 right side The place of honor and authority (power).
2. Hebrews 1:6 world This may mean the world into which Jesus was born (see Lk. 2:1-14), or it may have the same meaning as in Heb. 2:5—the world to come, to which the risen Christ is presented as king (see Php. 2:9-11).
3. Hebrews 1:6 “Let … him” These words are found in Deut. 32:43 in the ancient Greek version and in a Hebrew scroll from Qumran.
4. Hebrews 1:7 winds This can also mean “spirits.”
5. Hebrews 1:13 until I put … power Literally, “until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

 

[Runningman]

One of the things that I realized is undeniable is the theological argument. The reason Jesus cannot be God compared to the reason it is claimed he must be.

The must be pulls out of the air that by no other means could all the sins of the world be covered. That's it. That's the basis. This is anti-Scriptural since Scripture tells us explicitly that by one man sin entered the world and by another man, sin will be absolved. NOTE: The text does not say by God sin will be absolved.

I agree. The theological argument begins with a stated belief and then attaches verses to the belief for supporting evidence, but it's impossible to begin with verses and then attach the doctrine to it. Why? The doctrine is neither explained or described in the Bible. Jesus and the apostles never told anyone which verses to look at to support it. So yes it is essentially pulled out of thin air.

Would anyone dare to say God became sin?

2 Cor. 5
21For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

If it did, they'd cling to that like white on rice - reading into the text that by "God" the text is referring to Jesus. But because the text says by another man sin is absolved, it does not strengthen their case. So, they ignore it. Give it to weight.

OTOH, there is a compelling reason the Lamb of God cannot be God. The wages of sin is death. Not a partial death or a death of half of one's nature. The price of sin is total and complete death. And the eternal God cannot pay this price.

Fools argue God can do anything. They are in denial that dying is an inability to stay alive. It turns virtue on its head, like saying God can be weak. Not even God can violate his essential nature and his defining characteristic is eternally existing. Therefore, the Lamb cannot be God for he is to be completely slaughtered for our sake. Or we must admit that death is not the wages of sin per Scripture.

Of course, trinitarians rely on dualism, a way of thinking where the constraints of logic and the Mutual Exclusivity principle do not apply.

"Do not divide the essence" and yet of God's essence is immortality and He alone possesses it since time eternal, but the Son of Man is the Son of God. Since the Son of Man died the Son of God died. Theologically, a member of the Trinitarian Godhead died, the essence was divided, and therefore logically God ceased to exist before spontaneously reappearing only to resurrect Himself.

We now have a scenario in which we have to decide if the chicken came first or the egg. While either may be plausible, one cannot survive without the other. It doesn't make sense and isn't Scriptural. Almost all of the major scholars will ultimately confess that this doctrine is an incomprehensible, impenetrable, paradox.

 

[Wrangler]

spontaneously reappearing only to resurrect Himself again.

Greek influence of the god Phoenix.

Almost all of the major scholars will ultimately confess that this doctrine is an incomprehensible, impenetrable, paradox.

Inherently contradictory, like square circles.

What is so odd is how they make this IDOL, completely absent from Scripture, the central message. It’s so odd!

 

[The Learner]

2 Thessalonians 2:1-2

King James Version


2 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,

2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.



In the Kingdom Interlinear, it has "day of Christ" as "day of Jehovah" from the NWT.

Both Lord there in "Lord Jesus Christ" is kyrous. Grammar is the same, if one translate one as Jehovah, one must also translate "Jehovah Jesus" too.



what is the Edward's Unabridged Dictionary

 

[Runningman]

Greek influence of the god Phoenix.

Inherently contradictory, like square circles.

What is so odd is how they make this IDOL, completely absent from Scripture, the central message. It’s so odd!

Yes exactly like a Phoenix from paganism, an idol. Someone died then they resurrected themselves therefore they didn't die. Creates a problem for who or what the sin sacrifice is exactly in Trinitarianism. Did the Son of God die for sins? If so how? Would love to see someone from the other side answer this.

 

[tigger 2]

The confession of Thomas, coming as it does at the climax of John's Gospel, is perhaps the clearest affirmation of Christ's deity in the Bible. It is clear, despite various theories to the contrary (see "Other views Considered," below), that Thomas was speaking directly to Jesus. The phrase rendered "answered and said to him" is a rather common construction in the New Testament, and always precedes a direct address to the person referred to ("him," in this case, who can only be Jesus). This verse occurs in the middle of a conversation between Thomas and Jesus, and suggestions that Thomas was addressing the Father, or crying out in surprise are not credible.
For a devout Jew in the first Century to address someone as "my God" could only mean one thing: The "God" being addressed occupied a unique position in the speaker's devotion. For a Jew, this could only be YHWH. The phrase "my God" occurs over 135 times in the Bible, and when spoken by a Jew, always refers to the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Thomas was disposed to believe in Jesus by his personal attachment to him, as he demonstrated previously by his resolute adherence in impending danger (11:16). Jesus may have felt that the faith of all the disciples was fragile, for he told them explicitly that the raising of Lazarus was designed to give them a solid basis for a continuing faith (11:15). Now, having been challenged to make a personal test of Jesus’ reality, Thomas expressed fullest faith in him. For a Jew to call another human associate "my Lord and my God" would be almost incredible. The Jewish law was strictly monotheistic; so the deification of any man would be regarded as blasphemy (10:33). Thomas, in the light of the Resurrection, applied to Jesus the titles of Lord (kyrios) and God (theos), both of which were titles of deity (EBC).

G R A M M A T I C A L A N A L Y S I S​

apekriqh QwmaV kai eipen autw,`O kurioV mou kai`o qeoV mou APEKRITHÊ THÔMAS KAI EIPEN AUTWi, hO KURIOS MOU KAI hO THEOS MOU Answered Thomas and said to him, the Lord of me and the God of me Nominative for vocative The nominative for vocative has exactly the same force and meaning as the vocative. This can be seen in numerous parallel passages in the Gospels, in which the vocative appears in one and the nominative in another (see, for example, Matt 27:46 [thee mou, thee mou] and Mark 15:34 [ho theos mou, ho theos mou]).

.................................................................

In spite of many trinitarians insisting that Thomas was addressing Jesus with these words using kurios (nominative) in place of vocative (kurie), it is certain that John always used kurie in address for "Lord."

In the writings of John, when using the term “Lord” in address to another person, a different form of the NT Greek word is always used instead of the form found at John 20:28 (ho kurios mou).

“The vocative is the case used in addressing a person .... κύριε [kurie] (O Lord), Θεέ (O God) ... are almost the only forms found in the N.T.” - pp. 14, 15, The New Testament Greek Primer, Rev. Alfred Marshall, Zondervan, 1978 printing.

This is especially true of “Lord” and “my Lord” in both the Septuagint and the New Testament. Kurie (κύριε), not kurios (κύριος), is the form used when addressing someone as “Lord” or “My Lord.” - See the KURIE study. (“God,” Θεέ, however, is not so certain.)

We can see a good example of this vocative form, which is used in addressing a person as “Lord,” at 3 Kings 1:20, 21 (1 Kings 1:20, 21 in modern English Bibles) in the ancient Greek of the Septuagint: “And you, my Lord [Κύριέ μου ], O King ...” - 3 Kings 1:20, Septuagint. Then at 3 Kings 1:21 we see the same person (King David) being spoken about (but not addressed) in the same terms as Jn 20:28: “And it shall come to pass, when my Lord [ὁ κύριος μου ] the king shall sleep with his fathers .... - 3 Kings 1:21, Septuagint.

We also find Thomas himself, at Jn 14:5, addressing Jesus as “Lord” by using κύριε.

And, when addressing the angel at Rev. 7:14, John himself says kurie mou (“My Lord”)!

There are 33 uses of kurie in the Gospel of John alone. Here are a few of them: John 9:38; 11:3, 12, 21, 27, 32, 34, 39; 13:6, 9, 25, 36, 37; 14:5. (Compare these with an actual identification of the lord: “it is the lord [kurios],” John 21:7 – Also, for Colwell’s Rule fans, note the use of the article and the word order of the clause in the two clauses identifying the Lord here.)

Therefore, it is safe to say that when John wrote down the incident with Thomas at Jn 20:28 and used the nominative form for “My Lord” [κύριος μου] he was not saying that Thomas was addressing Jesus as “My Lord and my God!”

 

[tigger 2]

.................................................................

In spite of many trinitarians insisting that Thomas was addressing Jesus with these words using kurios (nominative) in place of vocative (kurie), it is certain that John always used kurie in address for "Lord."

In the writings of John, when using the term “Lord” in address to another person, a different form of the NT Greek word is always used instead of the form found at John 20:28 (ho kurios mou).

“The vocative is the case used in addressing a person .... κύριε [kurie] (O Lord), Θεέ (O God) ... are almost the only forms found in the N.T.” - pp. 14, 15, The New Testament Greek Primer, Rev. Alfred Marshall, Zondervan, 1978 printing.

This is especially true of “Lord” and “my Lord” in both the Septuagint and the New Testament. Kurie (κύριε), not kurios (κύριος), is the form used when addressing someone as “Lord” or “My Lord.” - See the KURIE study. (“God,” Θεέ, however, is not so certain.)

We can see a good example of this vocative form, which is used in addressing a person as “Lord,” at 3 Kings 1:20, 21 (1 Kings 1:20, 21 in modern English Bibles) in the ancient Greek of the Septuagint: “And you, my Lord [Κύριέ μου ], O King ...” - 3 Kings 1:20, Septuagint. Then at 3 Kings 1:21 we see the same person (King David) being spoken about (but not addressed) in the same terms as Jn 20:28: “And it shall come to pass, when my Lord [ὁ κύριος μου ] the king shall sleep with his fathers .... - 3 Kings 1:21, Septuagint.

We also find Thomas himself, at Jn 14:5, addressing Jesus as “Lord” by using κύριε.

And, when addressing the angel at Rev. 7:14, John himself says kurie mou (“My Lord”)!

There are 33 uses of kurie in the Gospel of John alone. Here are a few of them: John 9:38; 11:3, 12, 21, 27, 32, 34, 39; 13:6, 9, 25, 36, 37; 14:5. (Compare these with an actual identification of the lord: “it is the lord [kurios],” John 21:7 – Also, for Colwell’s Rule fans, note the use of the article and the word order of the clause in the two clauses identifying the Lord here.)

Therefore, it is safe to say that when John wrote down the incident with Thomas at Jn 20:28 and used the nominative form for “My Lord” [κύριος μου] he was not saying that Thomas was addressing Jesus as “My Lord and my God!”

..................................................................

After searching through the NT (using an online search and the trinitarian New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible) to find all the places in the New Testament where kurios and kurie are clearly used as nouns of address, I found a total of 119 such instances (which include translations of “Lord,” ‘sir,” and “master”) in modern texts and 120 in the Received Text. All of them use kurie! The only places kurios is sometimes translated in a way that it appears it could be a noun of address are found at John 13:13 and Rev. 4:11. (See above for examination of John 13:13.)

We find that the Gospel of John itself uses kurie 33 times: every time “Lord” (or “sir”) is clearly meant as a noun of address (John 4:11, 15, 19, 49; 5:7; 6:34, 68; 8:11; 9:36, 38; 11:3, 12, 21, 27, 32, 34, 39; 12:21, 38; 13:6, 9, 25, 36, 37; 14:5, 8, 22; 20:15; 21:15, 16, 17, 20, 21) the only possible exception seems to be John 13:13 (examined above for use of “teacher”) which uses kurios.

The only other possible exception (Rev. 4:11) outside the all-important (for the purpose of this study) Gospel of John also does not clearly intend its use of kurios as a noun of address. It probably uses it, in fact, as an appositive (which in this case would have to be the nominative case kurios). - see RSV; NASB; ASV; AB; World English Bible; MLV, ERV, The Bible in Living English, and Rotherham’s translation for examples of appositive use.

[[Rev. 4:11 also uses kurie in the Received Text, and, therefore, is properly used as noun of address there and is so translated in KJV; NKJV; MKJV; Young’s; RVR; Interlinear Bible; Third Millennium Bible; Webster’s Bible Translation – also, apparently, the Living Bible.

It is also used as a predicate noun in a complete clause in the Jerusalem Bible (‘You are our Lord and our God,”) – which also seems an honest rendering).]]

The very best evidence, then, is that kurie was always used when “Lord” or “My Lord” was intended as a noun of address!

So, again, there is not even one valid, certain example in the entire New Testament to back up the trinitarian assertion that the nominative kurios in John 20:28 should be understood as a vocative. But there are many straightforward, indisputable examples (120 of them in the Received text; 119 in the newer texts) to show that kurios at John 20:28 was not intended as a noun of address signifying identification.

Again:

Out of 120 uses of Kurios/kurie clearly used in address in the entire NT, we find that 119 are kurie!

The only one that seems to use kurios in address is at Rev. 4:11. However, kurios at Rev. 4:11 can be interpreted in at least three ways: noun of address, appositive, or predicate noun (and the Received Text uses kurie here also - 120 out of 120!).