No Exceptions: Jesus Was Talking to You

[Aunty Jane]

The deity of Christ is in the Bible, but not in the version you use, which has been deliberately altered by men to fit their false doctrine. Your translation removes or distorts key verses that clearly declare who Jesus is (John 1:1, Colossians 2:9, Titus 2:13, among many others). So no, the problem isn't with the Bible, it’s with your version of it.

You can stop directing your rants at me because I know you're a false teacher. I don’t read them anymore because it’s clear you're not here to honestly search the Scriptures, you’re here to argue. You've already hardened your heart to the truth. You've made your decision, and no amount of biblical evidence will sway you because your mind is closed and your loyalty is to a religious system, not to God's Word.

You are a false teacher, and I won’t remain silent while you try to spread deception. I will answer to the one true God, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, for what I teach and how I respond to error. And so will you.

Ditto to all of the above….apply your words to yourself…..who told you that your version is correct?
There is a certain kind of “blindness” (2 Cor 4:3-4) and ignoring the hard questions, doesn’t make them go away.

JW’s are not the only ones here who question the validity of the trinity….no one has anything to fear from the truth.

You did not answer my question to you: Are you a Jehovah’s Witness?

I think I already mentioned that God doesn’t go by denominations….he judges by what we accept as truth.
If we love what is not truth, then he knows it.

What denomination do you claim? And should we analyze your group’s beliefs as thoroughly as you seem to want to analyze mine…that is only fair isn’t it? Who are your brotherhood?

 

[bdavidc]

he judges by what we accept as truth.

That statement is completely backward. God does not judge based on what we accept as truth, He judges based on what He declares to be true. Truth is not relative, and it’s not determined by personal belief, opinion, or organizational doctrine. God’s Word is truth (John 17:17), and He has already revealed what is right, holy, and necessary for salvation. Jesus said, “He who rejects Me and does not receive My words has one who judges him, the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day” (John 12:48). That means God will not ask what you accepted as truth, He will judge whether you believed and obeyed His truth.

You can claim sincerity all day long, but if what you’re holding to contradicts the Word of God, then you're sincerely deceived. Truth doesn’t change based on what someone is willing to accept. It stands forever, and on the Day of Judgment, God won’t weigh opinions, He will judge according to His Word.

I see clearly now where you're coming from, and it's obvious you're following the father of lies, not the true and living God revealed in Scripture. You continue to promote the doctrines of a man-made religion that denies the deity of Jesus Christ and twists the plain teaching of God’s Word. I have no interest in engaging with your repeated falsehoods. I follow Sola Scriptura, Scripture alone is my authority, not the Watchtower, not religious traditions, and certainly not doctrines built on altered translations and deceptive teachings.

There is only one way to be saved, and that is through Jesus Christ, who is fully God and fully man. He came to earth, lived a sinless life, and willingly died on the cross to pay the debt for our sin. On the third day, He rose from the dead, proving His victory over sin and death. Salvation is not earned by works, religion, or good intentions, it comes only by turning to Jesus in repentance and faith. If you recognize your sin, confess it to God, and truly believe in Jesus, trusting in His sacrifice and committing to follow Him, you will be saved. As Romans 10:9 says, “If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” True faith is marked by a changed life that seeks to follow Him. He is not a created being. He is the eternal Son, the second Person of the triune God (John 1:1–3, Colossians 1:16–17). Your rejection of that truth aligns you with the spirit of antichrist (1 John 2:22–23), and no amount of religious activity will cover that.

I’m done entertaining your distractions. I’ve given you Scripture, and you reject it. 2 Corinthians 4:3–4 applies perfectly, not to me, but to those like you who are blind because the god of this world has darkened their understanding. If you loved the truth, you would receive it, not twist it.

I won't continue in endless back-and-forth with someone who refuses correction and persists in error. Titus 3:10–11 says to reject a divisive person after the first and second warning. This is that warning. I will not be hounded by someone pushing false doctrine. Take it elsewhere, I follow Jesus Christ.

One thing is clear, you still haven’t answered the one question I asked. That silence speaks volumes. If you’re ashamed to openly name who you follow, that says a lot about the foundation of your beliefs. I’ve made it plain who I follow, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and I stand firmly on the Word of God. No hesitation, no shame, no compromise.

 

[TheHC]

The deity of Christ is in the Bible…

It is?

Then, who did Jesus worship?

 

[bdavidc]

It is?

Then, who did Jesus worship?

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is fully God and fully man, not merely a prophet or created being. John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Verse 14 makes it clear that the Word became flesh, Jesus. Thomas called Him, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), and Jesus accepted it. Colossians 2:9 says, “In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” and Hebrews 1:8 shows the Father calling the Son “God.” As for the question, “Who did Jesus worship?”, during His earthly ministry, Jesus willingly submitted to the Father as part of the redemptive plan (Philippians 2:6–8). His prayers were part of His role, not proof that He was less than God. This reflects the mystery of the one true God revealed in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

That said, I’ve seen your tactic before, repeating arguments already answered, not to seek truth, but to wear down those who stand on Scripture. I noticed your fellow JW “Aunty Jane” liked your post. I’ve already placed her on ignore for similar behavior, and I’ll be doing the same with you. I’m not here to be harassed by those using this forum to spread a false gospel that denies Christ’s divinity and twists the Word of God.

Titus 3:10–11 instructs us to reject divisive teachers after a first and second warning. I take that seriously. I can’t stop you from posting, but I can choose not to engage. If you're genuinely seeking truth, open the Bible without the Watchtower filter. But if your purpose is to promote error, I won’t be part of it. I’ll spend my time sharing the true gospel with those who actually want to hear it.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Then, who did Jesus worship?

I thought it was a reasonable question…..but the answer is nothing but poor Bible interpretation as a thorough study of the Bible amply demonstrates….
If we take the answer apart and see what the Bible really teaches, the holes in the web begin to appear…

Just using the Bible and a Greek Interlinear….

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is fully God and fully man, not merely a prophet or created being.

Not once does the Bible say that Jesus was 200% anything.
He had to be 100% human to pay the price of redemption. That is what “atonement” is….”at-one-ment” or “one for one”…... “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life”….was God’s stated law.

Sacrificing God for a human is not “one for one”. The scales of justice are hardly balanced.
That would be like using 100 trillion cans of bug spray to kill one mosquito.

Jesus had to be the exact equivalent of Adam to die in our place, (and why he is called “the last Adam”) buying back (redeeming) what he lost for all his children. In order to die, Jesus had to be mortal….Yahweh is immortal which means he cannot die.…which is why he “sent” his son. Yahweh did not “send“ himself.…and that’s the reason why we have to “know” them both. (John 17:3) We should ask why we do not need to “know” the other equal third party?

John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Verse 14 makes it clear that the Word became flesh, Jesus.

John 1:1 translated into English says that, but that is not what it says in Greek.
In Greek “ho theos” is always Yahweh/Jehovah…..but “theos” on its own can have several meanings.
According to Strongs, the primary definition of “theos” is…

1. “a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities

It can also mean…..

1. “refers to the things of God
2. his counsels, interests, things due to him
3. whatever can in any respect be likened unto God, or resemble him in any way
   1. God's representative or viceregent
      1. of magistrates and judges”

So it has a wide definition, not a narrow one as is implied in biased Bible translations.

So the word “theos” doesn’t just mean “God” with a capital “G” because Greek has no capital letters, so using them is at best a suggestion…..one geared to proposing a definition that really is not there.
But in other scripture, such as John 10:31-36, when we read that in Greek we can see the difference, and then compare John 1:1.

Look here at the use of capitals…..

“The Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you going to stone me?” The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.” (theos) Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’ (theos)? If he called them gods (theos) to whom the word of God (ho theos) came—and Scripture cannot be broken— do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’ (ho theos)?“ (ESV)
(Jesus was quoting Psalm 82)

The Jews were not accusing Jesus of claiming to be “God” (ho theos)…but claiming to be divine. (theos)

One little word (“ho”) that identifies the difference between divinity and deity is deliberately ignored to promote what the Bible does not teach.
Jesus was by his own admission, “the son of God” (ho theos)…. but judges appointed in Israel, who operated under God’s authority, were also called “gods” (theos)…same word, fitting in with Strongs definition…..

• God's representative or viceregent
  1. of magistrates and judges”

Now compare John 1:1….
”In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, (ho theos) and the Word was God. (theos)” (ESV)

Note the use of capitals….translated correctly in accord with Strongs definition, there are not two “gods” in that verse but the Word (Jesus) was “with ho theos” and the Word was “divine” (theos)….God’s viceregent.

Vs 14 says “the Word became flesh”…not that “ho theos” “became flesh”.
Original language word studies untainted by a bias that is seen in most English translations, gives us the real story, not the one painted centuries ago by God’s enemy. He has the majority breaking the First Commandment. (Exodus 20:3)

And people wonder why JW’s had to publish a Bible that translates the Greek correctly…..?

Thomas called Him, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), and Jesus accepted it.

Same error….note the use of the capital “G” again….when, as an apostle, did Thomas entertain a belief that was out of harmony with his fellow apostles?

1 Cor 8:5-6…
”For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”— yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.“ (ESV)

Paul is here speaking collectively for all the apostles. Who was their “one God”? Clearly it was “the Father”, and Jesus was their ”Lord” which is another term for Master...like calling someone “Sir”, out of respect….that is what Jesus accepted.…”obeisance”…not “worship”…..it’s the same word In Greek.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Colossians 2:9 says, “In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” and Hebrews 1:8 shows the Father calling the Son “God.”

Again we appeal to the Greek…… The word “godhead“ does not exist in Scripture….it was invented when the idea of a triune god had already been adopted, centuries before. There is no mention of a multi-dimensional god in the Hebrew Scriptures. (Deut 6:4) We have to remember that Jesus was Jewish, and taught from Jewish Scripture exclusively. Monotheism means one God….not a split personality.

The word used here is “theotēs” which occurs only once in all of Scripture. It relates to “theos” which as discussed above, does not mean only Yahweh. Another related word is “theiótes” used at Romans 1:20.

Liddell and Scott’s A Greek-English Lexicon, in its ninth edition, defines the two terms in the light of ancient usages apart from the Scriptures. “Theiótes” is defined as “divine nature, divinity” (page 788). “Theótes” is defined in exactly the same way, as “divinity, divine nature,” and then cites as an example, Colossians 2:9. In this connection it shows that the similar Greek expression, dia theóteta, means “for religious reasons” (page 792). So “divine nature” is more correct than “godhead”.

Appealing to English translations, without original language word studies, leads to error upon error.

As for the question, “Who did Jesus worship?”, during His earthly ministry, Jesus willingly submitted to the Father as part of the redemptive plan (Philippians 2:6–8).

I am so glad you raised Phil 2:6-8 because this scripture, when you take off the trinitarian lenses, says the exact opposite of what most translations try to infer.

Let’s take the whole passage in context….Phil 2:5-11…
”Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped“

What “form” does God have? John 4:24 says that “God is a spirit”, so Jesus existed in heaven with his God and Father in spirit form…..all who inhabit the spirit realm are spirits.
And it says he “did NOT count equality with God a thing to be grasped” or seized.
Not once in his entire ministry did Jesus say that he was God.
That was the first mistake….

“but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.“

Jesus was “obedient” to whom? Does one part of an equal godhead, obey his other equal self? And can an immortal God die? Important questions…….but ignored by the masses.

“Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name“

God highly exalted himself? And gave himself a name higher than what he already had? (Psalm 83:18)
God has no other name, yet Jesus has many, each one denoting a role he has played in the outworking of his Father’s purpose. But even in heaven the Father is still his God and he speaks of his new name. (Rev 3:12)

“so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (ESV)

So accepting Jesus as our Lord and savior should make us bow in submission to the one whom God appointed as our King. But all the glory goes to “God the Father” not the son, who is the “servant” of his God. (Acts 4:27-30) Until he was resurrected, Jesus had limited authority, but as he said in his final address to his apostles….
”All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.” (Matt 28:18) Why would God need to “give” his son “all authority” in heaven as well as on earth, if he already had it?

Error upon error, discovered only when the trinitarian lenses are removed to see the real truth.

His prayers were part of His role, not proof that He was less than God. This reflects the mystery of the one true God revealed in Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Does God talk to himself?.…teach himself ?….pray to himself?….be his own servant?….be his own High Priest?….know things that the other parts of him do not know?…..can be in three places at once….?

The “mystery” is how anyone can justify what the Bible does not teach, and what neither Yahweh nor his son ever stated. How do you build on a foundation that is so flawed?

I guess time will tell.

 

[TheHC]

Are you under the assumption that only Jehovah’s Witnesses disregard the trinity? There are many others, some on this very site…

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is fully God and fully man,…

Nope, never once. In fact, Jesus called His Father, “the only True God.” (John 17:3) He didn’t include Himself.
To include others as God, is to “go beyond the things which are written.” - 1 Corinthians 4:6, ASV.

The Apostle Paul also wrote at 1 Corinthians 8:5,6 (KJV)… “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.”

….not merely a prophet or created being.

There’s nothing “mere” about Jesus, I’ll agree with you there.
But Moses through inspiration (Deut. 18:15), referred to the Messiah as “a prophet from among your brothers, like me.” And Peter under inspiration applied Moses’ words, “a prophet like me”, to Jesus @ Acts 3:22. And four vss. later, vs.26, Peter refers to Jesus as God’s “Servant”. (As was Moses.)

As for Jesus being created, the Bible certainly does suggest such a view.

Jesus Himself said that He was “the beginning of the creation of God.” - Revelation 3:14, KJV

Et.al.

John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”

Ah yes, the trinitarian version…

Do all trinitarians agree on this rendering? You’d think so. Fortunately, no…

Highly acclaimed trinitarian scholar John L. 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. Bold type is mine. Published with nihil obstat and imprimatur.) (New York, 1965), p. 317.


In harmony with the above, An American Translation by Goodspeed reads:
“the Word was divine”;

Moffat, “the Logos was divine”;

NTIV, “the word was a god.”

In his German translation Ludwig Thinme expresses it in this way: “God of a sort the Word was.”

Referring to the Word (who became Jesus Christ) as “a god” is consistent with the use of that term in the rest of the Scriptures. For example, at Psalm 82:1-6, human judges in Israel were referred to as “gods” (Hebrew, ’elo·himʹ; Greek, the·oiʹ, at John 10:34) because they were representatives of Jehovah and were to speak his law.

Verse 14 makes it clear that the Word became flesh, Jesus.

Yes, it does. And 4 verses later (vs.18), John writes, “No one has ever seen God.”
Thousands saw Jesus.

Therefore, Jesus couldn’t have been God.

Thomas called Him, “My Lord and my God” (John 20:28), and Jesus accepted it.

You’ve never said, “my God” out of surprise? Were you calling somebody God?

Colossians 2:9 says, “In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily,” and Hebrews 1:8 shows the Father calling the Son “God.”

Only with creative twisting of the words. Since Jesus called His Father “the only True God”, such renderings subvert the meaning of other Scriptures.

As for the question, “Who did Jesus worship?”, during His earthly ministry, Jesus willingly submitted to the Father as part of the redemptive plan (Philippians 2:6–8)

Thank you for answering my question. Sincerely.

Yes, Jesus worshipped His God & Father. - John 4:23,24; 20:17.

He always gave credit to His Father for His works, as Peter rightfully attributed at Acts 2:22.

As Peter wrote under inspiration, Jesus left us a ‘model, for us to follow His steps closely.’

His prayers were part of His role, not proof that He was less than God.

“Part of a role”?

Was it a role when He cried out before He died, “My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?”

That said, I’ve seen your tactic before, repeating arguments already answered, not to seek truth, but to wear down those who stand on Scripture. I noticed your fellow JW “Aunty Jane” liked your post. I’ve already placed her on ignore for similar behavior, and I’ll be doing the same with you. I’m not here to be harassed by those using this forum to spread a false gospel that denies Christ’s divinity and twists the Word of God.

Titus 3:10–11 instructs us to reject divisive teachers after a first and second warning. I take that seriously. I can’t stop you from posting, but I can choose not to engage. If you're genuinely seeking truth, open the Bible without the Watchtower filter. But if your purpose is to promote error, I won’t be part of it. I’ll spend my time sharing the true gospel with those who actually want to hear it.

I have no tactics. Only in teaching.

I like to get people to think & reason deeply on spiritual topics.

“This means everlasting life,” taking in knowledge of both God and His Son. John 17:3

Have a good day.

 

[Rita]

Thread 'Christianity Board Statement of Faith'
Christianity Board Statement of Faith

Please get back on topic otherwise the thread will be locked. Debating against the Trinity is no longer permitted

 

[TheHC]

Thread 'Christianity Board Statement of Faith'
Christianity Board Statement of Faith

Please get back on topic otherwise the thread will be locked. Debating against the Trinity is no longer permitted

I did not realize. I’m sorry.

 

[Berean]

The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is fully God and fully man, not merely a prophet or created being. John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Verse 14 makes it clear that the Word became flesh, Jesus.

JOHN 1:1 serves as a key reference for Trinitarians. However, to support the non-Trinitarian interpretation of this verse by Bible Students, we refer to The Bible Translator, a publication aimed at Trinitarian scholars:

“If the translation were a matter of substituting words, a possible translation . . . would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word for-word translation it cannot be faulted, and to pagan Greeks who heard early Christian language, Theos en o Logos, might have seemed a perfectly sensible statement. . . . The reason why it is unacceptable is that it runs counter to the current of Johannine thought, and indeed of Christian thought as a whole.” (The Bible Translator, Vol. 28, No. 1, Jan. 1977).​

Take note of their remark that, as a literal translation, "it cannot be faulted." In reality, in Acts 12:22 (where Herod's voice is described as a god's voice) and Acts 28:6 (where Paul is referred to as a god), the translators added the article "a" before the word theos in both cases. They believe this contradicts John's message in John 1:1. This conclusion is quite subjective.

John 1:1-2 states: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This Word was present at the beginning with God." A direct translation from Greek would be: "In a beginning was the Word, and the Word was with the God, and a God was the Word. This was in a beginning with the God." Trinitarians have attempted to create balance by omitting the article "the." In the King James Version, as well as in many other translations, all mentions of God appear equal to English readers. This approach obscures the distinction between the emphasized God mentioned twice and the less emphasized God referring to the Logos.

However, later in this chapter (John 1:18), a distinct difference is made between these Gods beyond just grammatical emphasis: “No one has ever seen God; the only begotten God, who is close to the Father, has made Him known.” (New American Standard Bible, Marshall Interlinear, etc.) This indicates the existence of a "begotten God" and a "begetter God." Therefore, John 1:1 should be interpreted in a way that aligns with this verse.

To effectively argue their point, a Trinitarian must demonstrate that the term "God" in John 1:1 holds significant meaning in all three instances it appears. Dr. G. C. Knapp, an established Trinitarian, states: “The term Logos, translated as Word, signifies, among Jews and other ancient cultures, everything through which God reveals Himself to humanity and communicates His will. In this context, the main evidence does not rest on the term Logos ('revealer of God') or even on the term theos ('God'), which can also refer to kings and earthly rulers in a broader sense, but rather on what is attributed to the Logos.” (Beach vs. Hickey on the Trinity, W. B. Beach and Y. Hickey, quoting G. C. Knapp, pp. 60, 61)

Can we use this reasoning to demonstrate that Jesus is the supreme God based on this passage? Does it indicate that the Logos is equal to God? Without equality, he cannot be considered God, nor can he be one-third of God. What does John mean by "beginning"? God is eternal, having no start or end, as stated in Psalm 90:2, "from everlasting to everlasting." So, what "beginning" is associated with the Logos? Revelation 3:14 provides clarity: "The Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning [arche] of the creation of God."

Some people argue that the term "beginning" (arche) can be interpreted as "principality, magistrates, first, first estate, corners," and that this alters the meaning of Revelation 3:14. Regardless of whether our Lord is referred to as the beginning, first, or principal "creation of God," it does not change the fact that he is a created being before all others. In the King James Version, the Apostle John consistently translates the word arche as "beginning." In the Appendix, we provide a comprehensive list of every instance of arche in the New Testament, as noted in The Englishman’s Concordance. We encourage you to examine these instances and see how "beginning" is a fitting translation. It seems that translators have attempted to modify the meaning of this word in this verse due to concerns about its implications for the Trinity.

Let’s consider the possibility that the Trinitarians are right about John 1:1. If we accept that the Logos represents Jehovah (or Yahweh), what message is John conveying? If John viewed the Logos as the God of Moses, why would he state that the “Logos was with God, and the Logos was God”? Which God was the Logos with? Why does he reference a point in eternity as the beginning and claim the Logos was present then? If his intention was to demonstrate that the Logos is God, he should have stated, “Look at this point. It marks the beginning. The Logos existed before this beginning as God, for He is God.” By placing the Logos at the point called the beginning rather than before it, their argument becomes significantly weaker.

The texts below clarify this truth: God has always existed, and the concept of a beginning in time is linked solely to the Logos.

God “from everlasting to everlasting.” Ps. 90:2​

Christ Jesus “in the beginning was the Word . . .” John 1:1​

“The Lord created me at the beginning of his work.” Prov. 8:22, RSV​

The Lord made me at the start of His creation. (Prov. 8:22, RSV) Additionally, John 1:1 cannot serve as evidence for the Trinity since it does not mention the Holy Spirit. This is quite problematic, as a key scripture supporting the Trinity overlooks one-third of it. Thus, whatever John 1:1 may indicate, it does not reference the Holy Spirit, failing to include the essential component needed to validate the Trinity. Trinitarians have searched the Bible for every possible verse to support their view. In most of the verses they cite, they employ similar reasoning as in John 1:1, arguing that God and Jesus are one, while hoping we overlook the absence of the Holy Spirit in their evidence. The strategy seems to be to engage people in the debate so they forget that the Holy Spirit is not mentioned. Consequently, the discussion lacks the necessary element for logical proof. To substantiate the Trinity doctrine, it is crucial to find Biblical references that affirm the unity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Even if we could demonstrate that the Father and Son are one being, would that truly establish a Trinity?

Referring to God as “Christ” gives Him a title but does not make Him the Anointed One. We ask again, “What have you done with Christ?” Where is He? You cannot have three absolute Gods and still claim there is one absolute God. If you do, you must change the definition of absolute. Defining God as Christ effectively replaces Christ. God can never be anything less than God!

 

[Berean]

Titus 3:10–11 instructs us to reject divisive teachers after a first and second warning. I take that seriously. I can’t stop you from posting, but I can choose not to engage. If you're genuinely seeking truth, open the Bible without the Watchtower filter. But if your purpose is to promote error, I won’t be part of it. I’ll spend my time sharing the true gospel with those who actually want to hear it.

"Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned."​

​

 

[bdavidc]

JOHN 1:1 serves as a key reference for Trinitarians. However, to support the non-Trinitarian interpretation of this verse by Bible Students, we refer to The Bible Translator, a publication aimed at Trinitarian scholars:

“If the translation were a matter of substituting words, a possible translation . . . would be, ‘The Word was a god.’ As a word for-word translation it cannot be faulted, and to pagan Greeks who heard early Christian language, Theos en o Logos, might have seemed a perfectly sensible statement. . . . The reason why it is unacceptable is that it runs counter to the current of Johannine thought, and indeed of Christian thought as a whole.” (The Bible Translator, Vol. 28, No. 1, Jan. 1977).​

JOHN 1:1 serves as a key reference for Trinitarians because it plainly declares the full deity of Jesus Christ. The claim that “the Word was a god” is a serious distortion of the text and ignores both the grammar and the theology of the passage. While The Bible Translator journal may speculate that such a phrase might make sense to pagan Greeks, even they admit it cannot be accepted because it runs counter to Johannine thought, and that’s the issue. The entire Gospel of John testifies that Jesus is not just a lesser god or a created being, but the eternal God in flesh (see John 1:14, John 8:58, John 10:30). The Greek construction in John 1:1, “kai Theos ēn ho Logos”, places the word “God” (Theos) in a qualitative position. That means the nature or essence of the Word is divine. It does not mean “a god” or “god-like.” Greek grammar expert Daniel Wallace notes this construction emphasizes what the Word was, not who the Word was. The Word was fully divine in essence, God in nature, distinct in person.

Attempts to use verses like Acts 12:22 or Acts 28:6 to justify inserting “a god” in John 1:1 completely miss the context. Those verses refer to humans mistakenly called gods by pagans. In John 1, however, we’re dealing with pre-existent deity, not idolized men. The passage says, “In the beginning was the Word,” not that the Word came into being at the beginning. The Word already was. This parallels Genesis 1:1 and identifies the Logos with the Creator Himself, not a creature. The use of “beginning” doesn’t indicate the Logos had a starting point, it marks when time began. God is eternal (Psalm 90:2), and so is the Word.

Revelation 3:14 does not teach that Jesus was created. The Greek word “arche” can mean “origin” or “source,” and the context points to Jesus as the originator of creation (see also Colossians 1:16–17). The idea that arche always means “first created” is false. In fact, calling Christ “the beginning of creation” in the sense of being the Creator fits perfectly with other scriptures that identify Him as the One through whom all things were made (John 1:3).

John 1:18 clarifies that the Son, called “the only begotten God,” has made the Father known. This affirms both His deity and His distinction from the Father, consistent with the doctrine that the Son is eternally begotten, not created, from the Father. That’s why He can fully reveal God: because He is God.

The argument that John 1:1 fails to support the Trinity because it doesn’t mention the Holy Spirit is also deeply flawed. The doctrine of the Trinity is not built on a single verse, but on the full counsel of Scripture. The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are each revealed as fully divine and yet distinct throughout Scripture (Matthew 3:16–17, Matthew 28:19, John 14:26, Acts 5:3–4). Just because a verse highlights the Father and the Son doesn’t mean the Spirit is excluded from the divine nature. The Holy Spirit is revealed throughout the New Testament as a person who teaches, guides, can be grieved, and who is eternal and holy. That’s not an optional doctrine, it’s biblical truth.

Lastly, the idea that calling Jesus “God” erases His identity as the Christ is backward. Scripture teaches that Jesus is both fully God and fully the Christ (Messiah). These are not opposing titles, they go hand-in-hand. John wrote his Gospel “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:31). To deny either His deity or His Messiahship is to reject the biblical Jesus altogether.

The bottom line is this: the Word was God. Not “a god,” not a lesser being, not a created spirit, but God Himself. Any teaching that denies this is false and should be rejected for what it is, an attack on the truth of who Jesus is.

 

[Aunty Jane]

The bottom line is this: the Word was God. Not “a god,” not a lesser being, not a created spirit, but God Himself. Any teaching that denies this is false and should be rejected for what it is, an attack on the truth of who Jesus is.

Then please explain how an immortal God can be atonement for a mortal human….?
How are the scales of God’s perfect justice balanced?
An immortal cannot die.
If Jesus was not “the last Adam”, paying the debt incurred by the first Adam, then the human race are still doomed….because it is Christ’s death that saves mankind….he had to die the exact same death as the first Adam inflicted on his children, because that is what redemption is…..a set price, which was “a life for a life”….What Adam lost for us was perfect sinless life, so a perfect sinless life had to come from outside of the now defective human race, in order to cancel that debt.

If Jesus never once said he was “deity” but claimed only to be “the divine son of God”, as John 10:31-36 says, then what he was offered was “obeisance” by the angels and the magi, not “worship”.
And Thomas also knew who Jesus really was, because he was in full agreement with the other apostles. (1 Cor 8:5-6)

Two Greek words are at issue on this subject…..”theos” (“god”….or any divine being, where only Jehovah is identified by the use of the definite article) and “pro·sky·neʹo” (worship/ obeisance)…..their meanings in Greek challenge the way they are rendered in English.

The attack on “who Jesus is“, was, and always will be, was made by an apostate church so long ago, that no one bothers to see what the entirety of Scripture teaches…and what Christ himself taught…..he used the Hebrew Scriptures exclusively….because he was Jewish. There is no triune God in Jewish Scripture.