Dialog with Jehovas Witness

[rpwolfgang]

Wow! Thank you all for the responses. I will study all of it prior to him coming over to talk. I am a very elementary apologist but I’ve been listening to alot of the famous Catholic apologists over the past several years(Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, etc.). I really feel a calling to go out and defend the faith. The first time he was at my house we were all over the spectrum. He started with the 144,000 people go to heaven thing. I feel like I defended our faith farely well. I noted several scripture verses and emphasized that you have to look at all the books of the bible and read it in context. I kind of set him up on one of my responses. I asked if he thought St. Paul was in heaven. He said yes of course. My response was that if St. Paul says we need to seek out our salvation with fear and trembling and he wasn’t sure of his salvation how can a JH claim they’re one of the 144,000. That stumped him somewhat and then he changed the subject to something else. He was quite surprised of The Church’s claim that St. Peter was our first pope. He had never heard that before.

He honestly seems like a nice man with good intentions. I guess we’ll see as time progresses wether or not he truly wants to converse or if he just wants to push his agenda.

Also, another funny story. The other day when he called me he invited me to the kingdom hall this Friday. I said, “I’ll make a deal. I’ll come to the hall this Friday if you come to the Easter Saturday night Vigil mass with me.” He of course declined.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

rpwolfgang,

Here’s the thing: JWs are taught that “If a Catholic ever says something to you that makes sense, it’s the devil trying to lure you away from the Watchtower.”

So when dealing with JWs, you have to be very careful and take things very slowly, planting seeds only, not ever going in ‘for the win’.

The hinge of the JWs is that their central dogma teaches that the Church which Jesus established utterly failed. It flopped after less than 100 years after Jesus Ascended. They wont give any concrete dates for when Satan utterly overcame Jesus, because it would cause too many problems, but ironically they believe the Bible was never corrupted by the Apostate Church which preserved it all these centuries.

And it is the Bible, they say, that gives us prophecy for when Jesus would return: the year AD 1914. Notice that it has been 101 years now, and the End of the World still hasn’t happened. They say the year “1914” was calculated exactly taking the Bible literally, but suddenly they take the word a single “generation” to mean “over 100 years,” which is wrong.

Now, if you want your JW friend/cousin to forever respect you, you need a calm and concise testimony of why you choose to be Catholic. It can be brief, but make sure to say “I’m Catholic because of the Trinity and Biblical Prophecy,” because this will pull the rug from under him and he will forever respect you. In in head he will think “Wow, this Catholic knows the Bible, he’s not the dumb Catholic I’ve been taught about my whole life… but the Devil could be speaking through him to lure me away.” These two doctrines are so easy to prove to a JW that you only need official JW literature (just their 75 booklet they hand out to everyone) to do it! See my blog with the Jehovah’s Witnesses tags if you want to know more.

 

[tmcq]

Your going to hell nuf said.

 

[adf417]

Your going to hell nuf said.

While this is a response from a Catholic, it is in no was the Catholic response.

 

[ajcstr]

So I’m going to have a Jehovas Witness come over in a week or two. He’s already been over once and we didn’t make much headway with anything. He called me the other day and said he would like to come over and discuss the church. He wants to figure out from the bible, and the bible only what the one and true church is. What bible passages do you all recommend? Obviously Peter and the Rock.

I’m not sure about this. The Church preceded the Bible by about 300 years so technically I don’t know that this can be done. It always fascinates me how JW and others claim that the church went into apostasy after the death of the apostles. So why believe what Luke and Mark wrote? They leaned from the apostles and then taught others. They (JW) don’t believe anything Polycarp, Clement, or Irenaeus wrote because its not in the Bible but these are the next generations of Christians. And they were all dead by the time the councils defined (through the Holy Spirit of course) what the NT was. But they themselves are all heretics because they were dare I say … Catholic. UNTIL Martin Luther, John Calvin, Charles Russell…etc, etc opened a Bible and discovered what it REALLY says and reinvented the “true church”.

Jesus gave us the Church, the Church gave us the NT. Don’t know how you can go backwards.

 

[Waynec]

I’m not sure about this. The Church preceded the Bible by about 300 years so technically I don’t know that this can be done. It always fascinates me how JW and others claim that the church went into apostasy after the death of the apostles. So why believe what Luke and Mark wrote? They leaned from the apostles and then taught others. They (JW) don’t believe anything Polycarp, Clement, or Irenaeus wrote because its not in the Bible but these are the next generations of Christians. And they were all dead by the time the councils defined (through the Holy Spirit of course) what the NT was. But they themselves are all heretics because they were dare I say … Catholic. UNTIL Martin Luther, John Calvin, Charles Russell…etc, etc opened a Bible and discovered what it REALLY says and reinvented the “true church”.

Jesus gave us the Church, the Church gave us the NT. Don’t know how you can go backwards.

They believe every thing that the Watchtower produces in their writing department.

 

[Waynec]

rpwolfgang,

Here’s the thing: JWs are taught that “If a Catholic ever says something to you that makes sense, it’s the devil trying to lure you away from the Watchtower.”

So when dealing with JWs, you have to be very careful and take things very slowly, planting seeds only, not ever going in ‘for the win’.

The hinge of the JWs is that their central dogma teaches that the Church which Jesus established utterly failed. It flopped after less than 100 years after Jesus Ascended. They wont give any concrete dates for when Satan utterly overcame Jesus, because it would cause too many problems, but ironically they believe the Bible was never corrupted by the Apostate Church which preserved it all these centuries.

And it is the Bible, they say, that gives us prophecy for when Jesus would return: the year AD 1914. Notice that it has been 101 years now, and the End of the World still hasn’t happened. They say the year “1914” was calculated exactly taking the Bible literally, but suddenly they take the word a single “generation” to mean “over 100 years,” which is wrong.

Now, if you want your JW friend/cousin to forever respect you, you need a calm and concise testimony of why you choose to be Catholic. It can be brief, but make sure to say “I’m Catholic because of the Trinity and Biblical Prophecy,” because this will pull the rug from under him and he will forever respect you. In in head he will think “Wow, this Catholic knows the Bible, he’s not the dumb Catholic I’ve been taught about my whole life… but the Devil could be speaking through him to lure me away.” These two doctrines are so easy to prove to a JW that you only need official JW literature (just their 75 booklet they hand out to everyone) to do it! See my blog with the Jehovah’s Witnesses tags if you want to know more.

Jesus did come back in 1914!! Invisibility don’t you know

 

[Waynec]

Wow! Thank you all for the responses. I will study all of it prior to him coming over to talk. I am a very elementary apologist but I’ve been listening to alot of the famous Catholic apologists over the past several years(Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, etc.). I really feel a calling to go out and defend the faith. The first time he was at my house we were all over the spectrum. He started with the 144,000 people go to heaven thing. I feel like I defended our faith farely well. I noted several scripture verses and emphasized that you have to look at all the books of the bible and read it in context. I kind of set him up on one of my responses. I asked if he thought St. Paul was in heaven. He said yes of course. My response was that if St. Paul says we need to seek out our salvation with fear and trembling and he wasn’t sure of his salvation how can a JH claim they’re one of the 144,000. That stumped him somewhat and then he changed the subject to something else. He was quite surprised of The Church’s claim that St. Peter was our first pope. He had never heard that before.

He honestly seems like a nice man with good intentions. I guess we’ll see as time progresses wether or not he truly wants to converse or if he just wants to push his agenda.

Also, another funny story. The other day when he called me he invited me to the kingdom hall this Friday. I said, “I’ll make a deal. I’ll come to the hall this Friday if you come to the Easter Saturday night Vigil mass with me.” He of course declined.

The 144,000 who go to heaven decided for themselves if they want to go or not. Only the anointed go to heaven and Witnesses decided for themselves if they are anointed or not.The other Witnesses can tell from the fruits of the anointed if they are truly anointed

Now doesn’t this make perfect sense??? Unfortunately, it does to them.

Since their beginning in around the middle of the 1800’s I would think that the 144,000 places are all taken up!.

 

[Dorothy]

The 144,000 who go to heaven decided for themselves if they want to go or not. Only the anointed go to heaven and Witnesses decided for themselves if they are anointed or not.The other Witnesses can tell from the fruits of the anointed if they are truly anointed

Now doesn’t this make perfect sense??? Unfortunately, it does to them.

Since their beginning in around the middle of the 1800’s I would think that the 144,000 places are all taken up!.

The 144,000 is the number twelve squared, which symbolically represents a great many.

Sadly, some people have such a hunger for something meaningful in their lives, that they succumb to cults.

They need our prayers and calm gentle persuasion to want to know the truth.

 

[robertericleech]

Did he tell you he used to be Catholic? Every JW I’ve ever met has said that when I tell them I’m Catholic.

 

[Dorothy]

Did he tell you he used to be Catholic? Every JW I’ve ever met has said that when I tell them I’m Catholic.

It seems to me they had to be poorly catechized to want to leave the Church.

 

[ChosenOne7]

I didn’t want to get into this topic but okay… Help me understand then… Everyone always mentions John 1:1, all Trinitarians Catholic or not this is always the 1st verse they use to base there belief… But let’s look at it, and let’s look at a few verses in John… I saw someone say Catholics use the RSVCE Bible right, so let’s use that one…
1stly as Christians we all believe that Jesus is “The Word” spoken about in John 1:1, so if we replace “The Word” with “Jesus” then it would be the same thing…
Now let’s read it John 1:1 will then say: “In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God. Verse 2 then will read - Jesus was in the beginning with God. Verse 3 says all things was made through Jesus and without Jesus was not anything made that was made… It says Jesus is God and Jesus was with God, that would mean there’s 2 God’s, trinity is believed to be 3 in 1 where is the 3rd God spoken of here holy spirit… Read verse 2 again it says Jesus was in the beginning with God not Jesus is God, if I say you were with someone does it mean you are that person?
But read verse 14 of John 1, John says - “And Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.” did John believe Jesus is God or the Son of God? (only son from the father)… If he believe that why did he not call Jesus God?
John says in verse 34 again “And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”
verse 49 says - Nathan′a-el answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!
Read John 3:2 - This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.” he was saying that if God was not with Jesus then he wouldn’t be able to perform miracles, so if Jesus is God why did he need God to be with him to perform signs?
Makes me think of the verse in Acts where Peter was speaking quite a similar teaching to Johns… Acts 10:38 - “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.” if Jesus was God why did he have to be anointed 1st or why did God have to anoint him or did he anoint himself? And again another apostle saying that Jesus done all these things because God was with him, not because Jesus was God.
Matthew 16:15,16 Jesus asks 1 of his diciples - 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” help me understand that because the expression “Son of God” is very different from “God the Son.”

John 5:36-38,43,44 says - 36 “But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; 38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. 43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. 44 How can you believe, who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?” if Jesus was God who sent Jesus then like Jesus says? Or why did the Father have to grant Jesus the works? Who is this Father Jesus speaks about, is it Jesus himself granting himself?
Verse 33 Jesus says that he came in his father’s name, who’s his Father? Verse 44 Jesus speaks of the only true God again whos this only true God?
This links up with what Jesus himself says at John 7:16 - 16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me." again… Reading Jesus own words…taking everything into account, who is the one who sent the Word Jesus Christ to earth? If Jesus was God why did he have to be sent why couldn’t he just come on his own? Why did he have to be granted? What other verses is there that shows Jesus is God besides this John 1:1 everyone uses?

 

[robertericleech]

It seems to me they had to be poorly catechized to want to leave the Church.

Actually my theory is maybe they always say, “Oh, I used to be [Whatever religion you just told them you are].”

 

[Scears]

I dont think it matters which Bible you use… only reason we use the NWT is because it has Gods name in it, otherwise we could use any other Bible too doesnt really matter

Do these names prove the possibility of the first three letters of the tetragrammaton being pronounced as "Yehô? The answer is no for this reason. In every one of these cases, the third letter “vāv” (ו) is followed by one or more complete syllables, which are necessary to complete the word. In the case of YHVH, the third letter “vāv.” (ו) is only followed by one single letter “hē.” (ה). As a syllable in Hebrew must start with a consonant, and cannot begin with a vowel (JW p5), those who want the name to pronounce as Jehovah must force “vāv” to act like a “v”, and this is not done in any of the above examples; the letter “vāv” is used simply as a vowel. Therefore, these examples are certainly not proof that Jehovah is the correct pronunciation of God’s divine name YHWH (or YHVH).

I found that. Can you rebut it?

 

[Scears]

I dont think it matters which Bible you use… only reason we use the NWT is because it has Gods name in it, otherwise we could use any other Bible too doesnt really matter

I don’t believe God’s name is “Jehovah”.

Found this off the web:

Answer: In the Hebrew Scriptures, the name of God is recorded as YHWH. So, where did the name “Jehovah” come from? Ancient Hebrew did not use vowels in its written form. The vowels were pronounced in spoken Hebrew but were not recorded in written Hebrew. The appropriate vowel sounds of words were passed down orally. As a result, when ancient Hebrew is studied, scholars and linguists often do not know with absolute confidence how certain Hebrew words were pronounced.

This particularly becomes an issue when studying the Hebrew name of God, written in the Hebrew Scriptures as YHWH, also known as the tetragrammaton. Despite much study and debate, it is still not universally agreed upon how the Hebrew name for God YHWH was pronounced. Some prefer “Yahweh” (YAH-way); others prefer “Yehowah” or “Yahuweh”; still others argue for “Jehovah.”

As you can see, virtually everything is up for debate. Should YHWH be pronounced with three syllables or two? Should the vowels be borrowed from Elohim or Adonai? Should the W be pronounced with more of a W sound or more of a V sound? It is not the purpose of this article to settle the debate. Rather, it is the purpose of this article to discuss the use of “Jehovah.”

The vast majority of Jewish and Christian biblical scholars and linguists do not believe “Jehovah” to be the proper pronunciation of YHWH. There was no true J sound in ancient Hebrew. Even the Hebrew letter vav, which is transliterated as the W in YHWH is said to have originally had a pronunciation closer to W than the V of Jehovah. Jehovah is essentially a Germanic pronunciation of the Latinized transliteration of the Hebrew YHWH. It is the letters of the tetragrammaton, Latinized into JHVH, with vowels inserted. “Yahweh” or “Yehowah” is far more likely to be the correct pronunciation.

The form Jehovah, though, is very commonly used. It is used in the King James Version of the Bible (Genesis 22:14; Exodus 6:3; 17:15; Judges 6:24; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 12:2; 26:4). It is also used, and strenuously promoted by, the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Jehovah’s Witnesses emphasize the use of Jehovah to the extent that any other name or title for God is viewed as borderline idolatry or outright heresy.

With all of that said, it is not crucial to the Christian faith for the proper pronunciation of YHWH to be known. Both the Old and New Testaments, inspired by God, use generic terms for “God” and “Lord,” including El, Elohim, and Adonai (Hebrew); and Theos and Kurios (Greek). If the authors of Scripture, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, were allowed to use these terms, it is not wrong for us to refer to Him as “God” or “Lord,” either.

In conclusion, it is highly unlikely that “Jehovah” is the correct pronunciation of YHWH. Further, it is far more important to know God through faith in Jesus Christ, than it is to know the correct pronunciation of His name in Hebrew.

 

[JoeT777]

The Church is a body, a fact asserted in the Sacred Scriptures. “Christ,” the Apostle said, “is the Head of the Body of the Church.” Her members, the faithful, are indeed the member parts of the Church of which “He is the savior of His Body.” As the Church is a body, there must be an unbroken unity, it members cannot be strewn across the battle field of competing doctrine.

We find that embracing the Church of Jesus Christ, the Catholic Church, we are embracing the Bride of Christ. As there is only One God there is but One bride of Christ; there aren’t multiple Christ’s with a multitude of brides nor is Christ a polygamist with multiple brides. Hence, through the Apostle we hear an absolute truth having only one reality, His Church; not His ‘Churches’.

The bride is the Body of Christ persevering in the darkness of the night. The faithful in “the bride of the incarnate Word”, the Catholic Church remains assured in a divine faith “taught by the Holy Spirit” moving always to a fuller truth as one body in obedience, “as Christ also loved the church, and delivered himself up for it:” [Cf. Ephesians 5:22 sq].

The essence of the Divine Person defines His diminutive parts, the converse is not true, that is the arm of Christ does not define the essence of Christ’s Divinity nor His human nature. As the Catholic Church is mystically the Body of Christ there is a corresponding mystical and hypostatic union between the Person of Christ and the corporate Church. Therefore, ‘Church’ subsists in Christ and her members much the same as the Person Christ subsists in His Divine and human natures. And, as there is One Jesus Christ, there can be only One Mystical Body, the Catholic Church.

The Protestant mindset of multiple bodies adhered by some vague notion of ‘Christian’ creating a Frankenstein Church; an amalgamation of parts sown together forming ‘Christian Church’ with threads of doctrinal anarchy.

Catholics commune in the Real presence of Christ as One Body to which He promises never to abandon. The Church is like “a sign and instrument in her communion “with God and of the unity of the whole human race.” [Lumen Gentium, 1]. Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture, the Popes, the Councils of Bishops, along with the Early Church Fathers together speaks of the spiritual need of the Catholic Church. Sacred Scripture alone speaks only to the need to locate, and abide in, the One True Church, the Catholic Church. Yet we hear the second biggest non-Catholic denomination in the United States, the denomination of ‘former’ Catholics apostates who sanctimoniously proclaim themselves victims using a ubiquitous definition of Church.

The Kingdom of God is administered for the good of God. We serve in a Communion of faith, "the faith of the faithful is the faith of the Church, received from the apostles. Further, the ‘faithful’ commune in the Sacraments to become Church and the Church communes with the Saints.

The concept of ‘one size fits all’ religion leads to a dead faith. (Cf. Pope Benedict XVI, Principles of Catholic Theology: building stones for a fundamental theology, 1987) Thus, the Church is not a company of like minded believers joined together by some vagaries of Christ’s Divinity and Christ’s humanity. Consider that God’s word is immutable, never changing, and incorruptible; thus we find “God is Truth” (Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas). Objectivity is the basis of One Divine College that can teaches the disciplines of an irreformable Truth infallibly. Only the Divine can receive and bind others to immutable Truth with an authority that obliges discipline within the body faithful that isn’t rooted in hypocrisy. This Divinity is only One Church, the One Body of Christ; which is Catholic Church under one head, One God, One Christ.

Catholics have one faith in unity with Christ. God’s Truth is affirmed in our faith, as our faith affirms the Church; it is only within her that eternal life can be found. The Catholic Church becomes life in Christ. The Twelve Apostles were commissioned to baptize and teach God’s truth to all nations.

God and Truth are convertible; St. Thomas says, “Whence it follows not only that truth is in Him, but that He is truth itself, and the sovereign and first truth.“ [Summa Prima Q, 15 a5] Consequently there is only one absolute infallible truth. The Psalms also conclude that Truth and God are convertible, “I have chosen the way of truth: thy judgments I have not forgotten.” [Psalm 118:30]. The Church is a Divine institution that is commissioned to teach God’s Divine Truth. As Truth is absolute and immutable there can only be one confessed faith, one doctrine and logically one Church. Christ affirmed only one fold and one shepherd. [Cf. Matthew 12:25, John 10:16, John 17:21-22, Philippians 2:2, etc., etc.], not one fold for each self appointed shepherd. This is a Truth affirmed by the Church’s Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

There is but one Church, Scripture and history reveals that One Church to be the Catholic Church.

JoeT

 

[ChosenOne7]

I don’t believe God’s name is “Jehovah”.

That’s the problem with reading one source of information from the Internet… Because I could give you another source that says something different… You will have to really do alot of research if you want to know the truth don’t just read one thing and believe it… If you have time then read another source:
hope-of-israel.org/tetragram.html

That’s not even a Jw source… There was no true J sound in ancient Hebrew, that’s true but then why does Jesus name start with a J and his name in Hebrew is Yeshua, why don’t you say his name can’t be Jesus because there’s no J sound in Hebrew? If Jehovah in English is wrong then Jesus in English is also wrong because both there names start with J… Or how do you understand that?

 

[Goya]

@ Scears: Nice find.

Jehovah is essentially a Germanic pronunciation of the Latinized transliteration of the Hebrew YHWH. It is the letters of the tetragrammaton, Latinized into JHVH, with vowels inserted. “Yahweh” or “Yehowah” is far more likely to be the correct pronunciation.

The form Jehovah, though, is very commonly used. It is used in the King James Version of the Bible

That certainly sounds like the God of Abraham–Germanic via Latin via Hebrew…

 

[Waynec]

Did he tell you he used to be Catholic? Every JW I’ve ever met has said that when I tell them I’m Catholic.

Yes, my friend said that she was a Catholic and they used to say a family rosary every night.

 

[Waynec]

I didn’t want to get into this topic but okay… Help me understand then… Everyone always mentions John 1:1, all Trinitarians Catholic or not this is always the 1st verse they use to base there belief… But let’s look at it, and let’s look at a few verses in John… I saw someone say Catholics use the RSVCE Bible right, so let’s use that one…
1stly as Christians we all believe that Jesus is “The Word” spoken about in John 1:1, so if we replace “The Word” with “Jesus” then it would be the same thing…
Now let’s read it John 1:1 will then say: “In the beginning was Jesus, and Jesus was with God, and Jesus was God. Verse 2 then will read - Jesus was in the beginning with God. Verse 3 says all things was made through Jesus and without Jesus was not anything made that was made… It says Jesus is God and Jesus was with God, that would mean there’s 2 God’s, trinity is believed to be 3 in 1 where is the 3rd God spoken of here holy spirit… Read verse 2 again it says Jesus was in the beginning with God not Jesus is God, if I say you were with someone does it mean you are that person?
But read verse 14 of John 1, John says - “And Jesus became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth; we have beheld his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father.” did John believe Jesus is God or the Son of God? (only son from the father)… If he believe that why did he not call Jesus God?
John says in verse 34 again “And I have seen and have borne witness that this is the Son of God.”
verse 49 says - Nathan′a-el answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!
Read John 3:2 - This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that you do, unless God is with him.” he was saying that if God was not with Jesus then he wouldn’t be able to perform miracles, so if Jesus is God why did he need God to be with him to perform signs?
Makes me think of the verse in Acts where Peter was speaking quite a similar teaching to Johns… Acts 10:38 - “how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power; how he went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.” if Jesus was God why did he have to be anointed 1st or why did God have to anoint him or did he anoint himself? And again another apostle saying that Jesus done all these things because God was with him, not because Jesus was God.
Matthew 16:15,16 Jesus asks 1 of his diciples - 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” 16 Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” help me understand that because the expression “Son of God” is very different from “God the Son.”

John 5:36-38,43,44 says - 36 “But the testimony which I have is greater than that of John; for the works which the Father has granted me to accomplish, these very works which I am doing, bear me witness that the Father has sent me. 37 And the Father who sent me has himself borne witness to me. His voice you have never heard, his form you have never seen; 38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe him whom he has sent. 43 I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not receive me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. 44 How can you believe, who receive glory from one another and do not seek the glory that comes from the only God?” if Jesus was God who sent Jesus then like Jesus says? Or why did the Father have to grant Jesus the works? Who is this Father Jesus speaks about, is it Jesus himself granting himself?
Verse 33 Jesus says that he came in his father’s name, who’s his Father? Verse 44 Jesus speaks of the only true God again whos this only true God?
This links up with what Jesus himself says at John 7:16 - 16 So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me." again… Reading Jesus own words…taking everything into account, who is the one who sent the Word Jesus Christ to earth? If Jesus was God why did he have to be sent why couldn’t he just come on his own? Why did he have to be granted? What other verses is there that shows Jesus is God besides this John 1:1 everyone uses?

Catholics and most Protestants for that matter believe in the Trinity. God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit.
You believe in the Almighty God, (the Father) Mighty God, (the Son) and
God’s force that has been explained to me by a Witness as a streak of lightening.
So you believe in 2 gods whether you admit it or not. The Holy Spirit has been around since Genesis when God breathed into Adam.

Believing in the Trinity and believing in the Real Presence is by faith and not reason and Witnesses are not blessed with that kind of faith.

Back to John 6 Jesus couldn’t be any more plain when he says his flesh is real food and his blood is real drink. And Yes we do have to know what he has taught so don’t tell me that it is his words that are his flesh and blood.
this is all the time I have now.

Interesting discussion as it always is with Witnesses.