Jesus/God the same?

OK, Mr. Scott...you can beam me up, now. I suspect that you have had a background in the false teachings of the Jehovahs Witnesses. Why is the JW New World Translation so different? Either it is the best one, or, more likely, it is a translation made by an organiztion with a history of false prophecies who have a definite agenda. Many books have been written that challenge JW belief, yet JW people refuse to read them. The Trinity is no pretzel. God is God. Jesus is God in character as a man. He is all God and all Man. Why is this impossible? The Holy Spirit is no mere active force, rather He is Gods character in our presence without a body. Trinitarian = Monotheism. 1+1+1=1. While the term Trinity is not found in the Bible, the concept is clearly there. When Jesus came back from the dead and appeared to Thomas, note the exchange:John 20:21-28===>
21 Again Jesus said, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you." 22 And with that he breathed on them and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven." 24 Now Thomas (called Didymus), one of the Twelve, was not with the disciples when Jesus came. 25 So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it."
26 A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27 Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28 Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!" (Why would Thomas call Jesus God?)16 As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. 17 And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Matt 28:19-20(Why would three be mentioned? We know it is One God.)
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
2 Cor 13:14(Why not just in the name of God?)
14 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.
1 Peter 1:2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood:
Now, Mr. Scott..if you suggest that Jesus was created by God, I will know that you are in heresay. Notice, also, how the three aspects of the Godhead unite in Genesis:Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
(from New International Version)[This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-12-2004]

Hi, speaking of false teachings: Genesis is in the Hebrew Bible, Judaism does not have a trinity, you are falsely representing the Book of Genesis. The Tinity is found nowhere in the Old Testament.The verse you quote is a very well-known one, it uses the word 'Elohim' which means Gods, and is a generic term for God. For example, the God (El) of the Old Testament is called YWHW. Genesis 1:26 has also been interpreted as referring to a royal 'we'.The early Hebrews believed that there were many Gods, Baal and Ashterah for exaple, the monotheism was a later development.There are a few other interpretations, but the Trinity is found nowhere in the Old Testament. Christians invented the Trinity as a way out of their polytheistic beliefs.Brian.

Well, I can't argue with your logic and fact, Brian. I will say that our agreed upon concept of what is true and what is false is up in the air, right now. Orthodox Christian belief is best expressed in the Nicene Creed...to wit:We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.The Nicene Creed eloquently defines the Holy Trinity, yet proclaims One God!--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Br. Thomas Bushnell, BSG / tb@mit.edu[This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-12-2004]

Hi,This is the Nicene Creed that was finally adopted by the Church about 400 years after Jesus died?This is still the Christian take on parts of the Bible(although there are Christians who do not believe in the Trinity) it still has no foundation in the Hebrew Bible. However, I will concede that Christians think that there are references to the Trinity in the Old Testament, I am not in the slightest convinced of this, and a lot others aren't either.Anyway, why did it take nearly 400 years for this to be accepted if it was explicitly taught in the Bible?I must mention that I am in no way defending the JW's, in my opinion JW is an extremely ignorant faith (I have a very good personal reason for believing this). The fact that it is possible for JW parents to sit back and watch one of their children slowly dying, when a simple blood transfusion could save that child's life, is tantamount to manslaughter in my opinion.I recognise that people are entitled to believe in whatever they want to believe in, however, I do not need to agree with them or even repsect them, and as far as JW's go, I find their faith extremely backward.The JW base this blood transfusion teaching on verse such asGenesis 9:1-4 Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
4 "But you must not eat meat that has its lifeblood still in it. This ancient belief also 'supports' their stance:Leviticus 17:13-14 'Any Israelite or any alien living among you who hunts any animal or bird that may be eaten must drain out the blood and cover it with earth, 14 because the life of every creature is its blood. That is why I have said to the Israelites, "You must not eat the blood of any creature, because the life of every creature is its blood; anyone who eats it must be cut off." The life of every creature is in its blood, they believe that a creatures soul is in its blood, so very very sad.Also Acts 15:28-29 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. The JW interpret these verses against eating meat that has not been well drained of blood, with accepting blood through transfusion. This is a horrendous belief that has caused untold suffering, imagine watching your child die, when one word from you can save its life, yet you prefer to hold on to your ancient mythological fairytales rather than save your child, it is heartbreaking.Some people may actually admire a JW for holding to their beiefs, however I personally do not hold the same admiration for these people.Brian[This message has been edited by Brian, 01-11-2004 to remove a final comment that was from the heart rather than the head][This message has been edited by Brian, 01-11-2004]

Brian! My homie! In reference to the Nicene Creed, you ask the question, "why did it take nearly 400 years for this to be accepted if it was explicitly taught in the Bible"?
=========================================================
My opinion:
Even though much orthodox belief states that the Word always has existed,then becoming flesh at a set point in time through the Virgin birth, we know that the actual manuscripts took 70-100+ years to appear on the scene. Additionally, 90% of the population was illiterate anyway. Travel and exchange of information was slower. Add to this the fact that of the body of "official" church folks and assumed annointed believers, perhaps only the "annointed" believers within the church would be qualified to attend such a council. They only saw a need to clarify their theological position in writing once they realized the false teachings such as gnosticism, arianism, and other such thoughts which they collectively sensed to differ from their absolute revelation. Thus, 400 years later, they wrote down their collective belief.

Indeed. But your understanding of the term ‘Messiah’ is limited. From the Hebrew: mashiach, it literally means 'anointed' (smeared with the holy oil of public office). Being mashiach does not necessarily mean that one is king. Priests and saints were also given this title. Even buildings and furniture, and weapons were anointed with the holy oil!It is only natural that the Bible has a lot to say about mashiach. The word itself is integral to any discussion of Israeli politics. Anyone ‘anointed’ to public office might be characterized: mashiach. David uses this term to describe King Saul (1 Samuel 24:6). David himself is later called the mashiach (2 Samuel 22:51).In the King James Version, mashiach is translated 37 times as "anointed" and only twice, in the book of Daniel, is it transliterated: "Messiah." Talk about manipulation of scripture to support one's preconceived notions!'Anointing' was an official government ceremony performed by someone who was himself - an 'anointed' government official. We are not told whether Jesus was officially anointed. Given the circumstances, the Israeli government was in no position to be designating their own kings. But Jesus' followers liked to believe that he had been anointed by God. Many prophecies looked forward to a time when the 'seed of David' would return to his throne; and Jesus claimed that lineage. At any rate, despite what his followers wanted to believe, Jesus did not become king of Israel as they had expected. Calling him mashiach was at best: Wishful Thinking. It is both implausible and improbable. Their claims not withstanding, you are begging the question. Answer me this: Paul clearly took them to be inspired, utilizing them in his gospel ministry; quoting from them for every purpose stated at 2 Timothy 3:16. But they have, nonetheless, been purged from the anthology by men who disagree with Paul, and see those scriptures as ‘uninspired.’ Your organization appears to be among them. Why is this? Not this critic. Critics who believe that Daniel predicted the arrival of Jesus Christ? In other words ... Christian critics! Your insults are not an effective tool of persuasion.

Quote:"Does the Bible or does Christianity enumerate any "Creations" (other than the standard, New Testament miracles, attributed directly to God's Son, Jesus, or is "Creation" specifically an act reserved for YHVH? Please give chapter and verse for any evidences of Old Testament creations attributed to Jesus." AbshalomThe answer quite simply is yes. However, you must look back from the New Testament towards the Old Testament to understand Jesus as the creator.
John 1:1
The Word Became Flesh
1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.Christ on the cross said "I am THE WORD, the light and the way.This is just one example of Jesus identifying himself with God. There are more. But, what you need to realize first is that the Old Testament works on several levels such as historical, metaphorical, legalisms, devotions, etc. However, when you view the Old Testament as a whole, you can easily see an underlying theme. That is: The redemption of mankind. From the fall in Genesis to Christ's birth we see types and shadows of this theme over and over. For example, when Abraham was asked of God to sacrifice his only son, we see a parallel between this event and the events on the cross, or the flood of Noah as a cleansing of the old wicked earth to a reborn earth, an example of baptism and the baptism by blood for all mankinds sins. In a nut shell, God the father created us perfect. We strayed from his will which added sin to our nature which makes us imperfect. Since God can only tolerate that which is purely good (holy) then how can we as humankind ever hope to reunite with our creator. We can't. Therefore, a pure sinless sacrifice in our place would be the only sufficient way to atone for the sins of mankind. Since all men are born in sin, a mere human would be insufficient. Therefore, Christ was born of a virgin so as not to inherit the sins of mankind. Is Jesus God? He would have to be because God accepts only what is good and God is the ONLY thing that is. Which reminds me of another passage from the NT where a woman calls Jesus good and Jesus replies, "Why do you call me good? Have you not read only the father is good?" At first glance it may seem Jesus is denying his diety, however, he is really affirming it by saying in a sense "So, you recognize who I am." Now many people might say God went through a lot of trouble to bring us back to him. Why doesn't he just come down and straighten all of us out? He was a regular in the Garden of Eden and and it didn't work out that way. The short answer: FREE WILL! If we are to have free will we must have choices. We can choose to follow God or choose not to. For him to force us into a mold would violate our free will. This is also the reason for heaven and hell. What kind of a Loving God would he be if he forced those who chose not to follow him into heaven. It might be for their better good but it does not allow for free will. Now Christ as God: If you think about it in these terms perhaps you will see the point I am trying to make. Imagine you have created a little world of lets call them Yomans. You created an environment first for the Yomans, just as parents would get a nursery ready for an expected child, you stock it with supplies and intellectually engaging activities. Then you create the Yomans to be very much like you with the exception of physicality since you have none. You ask yourself, How shall they live? I can make them do whatever I want or I can give them a will to choose what they want. Which choice is more loving? Okay, all is good so far but, oh no, what choices are there? I know you put a big screen TV in the garden and several other 12 inch tvs and you give them one rule: not to watch the big screen TV. Then one day, the Superbowl comes on and there is this real temptation to watch it on the big screen so you make a choice and break the one and only rule. As a result of this transgression you learn that watching the game on the big screen was very pleasurable so now the Yomans begin to judge and be critical about what they have or don't have and it snowballs from there throughout history and your creation is getting further and further away from you. You know that when they die they can not be in your pure presence but, you so loved them that you wanted to find a way to bring them back to you if they will come. How do you do that? As God the father visiting your Yomans? It didn't work with Adam and Eve. Or do you visit them in the form of a fellow Yoman? What would be the benefit? First, you would be able to relate to them. Second, you would be given a chance to set up a system by which the lost among your creation can find a way back. (You may not go to the next step though which is the greatest expression of Gods love.)Finally, you give your perfect physical life in an agonizing death not for your own sake but for the sake of your Yomans so that they will never have to be seperated from you again. (If they choose.) Hope this helps.

Quote: "The life of every creature is in its blood, they believe that a creatures soul is in its blood, so very very sad." BrianOh, come on. It clearly says LIFE is in the blood not SOUL. By the way, you sound like you know where the soul resides. Could you tell me?[This message has been edited by ex libres, 01-14-2004]

quote:

---

I know that you have had a background in the false teachings of the Jehovahs Witnesses.

---

Just because another religion beliefs are different then your own does not automatically make them wrong. Take the time to do the biblical research and you may find that things are not as you thought they are, after all you believe in the Trinity.

quote:

---

why do no earthly kids do the will of their Daddys?

---

Ever hear of original sin? There is a reason why Christ died for us. Christ is without sin, perfect, like his father.

quote:

---

While the term Trinity is not found in the Bible, the concept is clearly there. When Jesus came back from the dead and appeared to Thomas, note the exchange:John 20:21-28 "Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!""

---

If John had used the divine name in this verse you would have a point, however only the term god is used. In the Bible the term god has more than one meaning, it can refer to almighty God, false man made gods (1 Corinthians 8:5 For even though there are those who are called "gods," whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many "gods" and many "lords,") and even men.( John 10:34-35 "Jesus answered them: "Is it not written in your Law, 'I said: "YOU are gods"? If he called 'gods' those against whom the word of God came, and yet the Scripture cannot be nullified,"") Thomas probably used god in the same sense of the word Lord, he was acknowledging Christ as his leader. Also to be considered is that John recorded Thomas' words and according to John 20:17 "'I am ascending to my Father and YOUR Father and to my God and YOUR God.'" Jesus' god was in heaven, not on earth. Since John didn't view Jesus as almighty God in John 20:17 it would be a conflict in scripture for him to do so in John 20:28.

quote:

---

a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Matt 28:19-20

---

Jehovah's voice is heard from heaven while Jesus is on earth, how does this verse support the Trinity when it shows that the two are in two different places?

quote:

---

Matt 28:19-20 in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,2 Cor 13:14
14 May the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all. 1 Peter 1:2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood:

---

The three being named in the same verse doesn't make them one, in fact these verses don't even hint at it. You are really reading the Trinity into these verses, look at it this way, here you have the few verses were the three are mentioned together and no Trinitarian wording is used, no "in one" or "these three are the same" etc, which clearly shows that the Trinity is non biblical.

quote:

---

Gen 1:26 Then God said, "Let us make man . . .

---

I see Brain has already pointed out that there is no way that anything in the Hebrew scriptures can be used to try to support the Trinity since the Jews never believed in such a thing, he is of course absolutely correct. What you do have in this verse is Jehovah God addressing his first born son Jesus Christ. If the two were one person, there would be no dialog, only if more than one being was involved would a discussion over a cooperative project be recorded.

quote:

---

if you suggest that Jesus was created by God, I will know that you are in heresay. (heresy?)

---

"Heresy: adherence to a religious opinion contrary to church dogma." Since the Trinity is also church dogma isn't your remark a bit late? I base my beliefs on the Bible rather than on church doctrines. The Bible clearly states that Jesus is the son of God, the first born of all creation (Col. 1:15,16), the beginning of God's creative works (Rev. 3:14), which all shows that he unlike his father, has a beginning. After all, to be a son, you have to be born. Jesus was God's son or off spring even before he came to earth as shown by 1 John 4:9 "God sent forth his only-begotten Son into the world" so his being first born is not a reference to his being born on earth by Mary. Are you going to start gathering up branches?But still your post was a good start for trying to defend the Trinity. There are still a number of other scriptures you can try to use, John 1:1 etc, but in the end it will fail because the Trinity is non biblical and in conflict with scripture. You also haven't answered the questions raised in my first post on the scriptures that are clearly in conflict with the Trinity. Trying to read it into a verse here or there does not good when there are quite a number of verses that are in direct conflict with the Trinity.I see that Brain has raised the issue of blood, which is a huge highly emotional issue all by itself. Happily it is largely a historical issue since medical practice has improved to the point where blood transfusions are now largely unnecessary. Medical attitudes have also changed, transfusions were once given to "put a little color in your cheeks" while today due to fears about things like AIDS it is now viewed as more of last choice. Most operations can now be done "bloodless" and you can thank Jehovah's Witnesses who due to their religious beliefs served as the guinea pigs in the development of bloodless medicine. Since it is such a big issue, I will refer those who want to know more about it to this link.
http://www.watchtower.org/medical_care_and_blood.htm

Where, exactly, is 'the divine name' used in the New Testament?

Hi,Sorry about the late reply, I managed to overlook your reply in my mailbox, sorry about that. I don't disagree with you, however I was simply expressing the JW belief that the soul is in the blood, I didn't make it up!From Here God himself explained the principle underlying those sacrifices: "The soul [or, life] of the flesh is in the blood . The JW often translate the word 'life' as 'soul', so I didn't manipulate anything, I just reported what they believe. I do? That's amazing since I don't believe in the concept of a soul. If I knew I would tell you, but since there is no such thing I am afraid I cannot help you. Ask some of the Christians here, they might be able to help.Brian.

ex libres,Your post 112 is excellent. I would have put just two TV's in the garden, and the forbidden one would have been the small one--the tree of life is so much grander than the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which is useless, actually without life. And I would have included the devil in the story, since it is possible that we only have a chance for redemption because our original choice for death was born in a deception, instigated by Satan. Also, the existence of the devil in the Genesis story is one of the main bits of evidence that there is some significant part of the creation story presented there that is missing. When the serpent appears, we are supposed to ask, "Where did HE come from? When was HE created? How did HE get to be evil? When did THAT happen?"Analogizing Jehovah as a TV is interesting. "Be still and know that I am God?"Keep on keeping those commandments!Stephen

Mr. Scott: I will concede that you are able to articulate scriptural evidence supporting your basic point=denial of a trinity. I may ask you then, do you ascribe to the JW position stating that Jesus is the first created rather than the Creator? I fail to see any proof of YOUR assertion based on the scriptures that you use. A Trinitarian concept of God does not negate His Monotheistic qualities. Jesus declaring that His Father is greater than He was in reference to the position that he was in. I have seen a greater amount of Orthodox literature that questions JW theology than I have cared to study. I will point out that JW belief is different from Orthodox Christian Belief concerning God and His Son. While I will admit that some JW teachers such as yourself profess a grand grasp of scriptural interpretation, I cannot believe it.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses wrongfully teach the Bible, according to many more people who profess Orthodox Belief. Now, as scientists are free to dispute the Bible as reliable, so too are people free to disagree on scriptural interpretation. It all boils down to what a person believes and why. I do not believe that Jesus is NOT God incarnate. I can see no proof that He was not.JW teaching says that Jesus was resurrected a wholly spiritual, invisible being.
Jehovah’s Witnesses have stated in their Watchtower that Jesus was resurrected an invisible spirit creature. Invisible? Not likely. Jesus appeared to Mary Magdalene after his resurrection. And she could see Him. Also, the two disciples on the road to Emmaus also could see the risen Christ, although it was some time before they recognized it was. Him. The Watchtower states; In his resurrection He was no more human. That is what the Jehovah’s Witnesses claim. Now, let us see what the scriptures tell us, Jesus’ own words even. Luke 24:39 records Jesus words, upon appearing to his apostles and disciples after his resurrection, See my hands and feet, that it I myself; touch me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have. NASV Also, later on the beach Jesus asked for something to eat. He was given a piece of broiled fish. Why would a spirit need material food, even having gotten hungry? Even in the Jehovah’s Witnesses New World Translation that text reads the same way.
But then again, we all have our Beliefs, do we not?

Phatboy<< The Watchtower states; In his resurrection He was no more human.>>I'm confused. You claim that Jesus is God and now you claim that Jesus was resurrected as a human. Are you saying God is human?

Yes. Jesus was and is all human and all divine.
God is not limited to a defineable image so in that sense, Jesus is not all of God. When Jesus was on earth, God was still in heaven.
When Jesus died, God did not die. God the Father, that is.
My point in the last post was to point out the differing theology between Jehovahs Witness and Orthodox Christian theology. Perhaps I should not be so rude as to assume my belief as the correct one. I will point out several facts to consider, however: This article is by
Brother John Raymond: [This message has been edited by Phatboy, 01-18-2004]