Jehovah's Witnesses

[yellowbird]

Jehovah God, the Sovereign Ruler, “the One who made the heaven and the earth and sea and fountains of waters.”—Rev. 14:7; 4:10, 11; 7:11, 12; 11:16, 17; compare 1 Chronicles 29:20; Revelation 5:13, 14.

.

But Jehovah God wasn’t the one who made the heaven and the earth… it was Jesus… according to Col 1: 16, 17. Scripture clearly states that ALL things were created by Jesus… all things in heaven and on earth… all things visable and invisable.

How do you reconcile that verse with God being the One who made the heaven and the Earth?? Unless Jesus is God…

Also - when Jehovah said to Jesus, “Let us make man in our image” … if Jesus were just an angel, are we to understand we were made in the image of God and the angels??? Human life is sacred because we are created in the image of God… not angels… and doesn’t it reduce God… to suggest that he and an angel (a created being) somehow have the same “image” ??? God is soooooo above the angels… so above humans… when he said Let us make man in our image in what was are He and the angels even similar???

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]Fidei;6232903]Mostly quoted from Tim Staples:

Mostly quoted from Tim Staples:

The insertion of [others] is not the only phrase the WTS mistranslates.

“a god” is also an issue here, in original Greek, they never used indefinite article-- “a” instead, directly referring to the word as God himself! even a 1st year ancient Greek student could say this is a fabrication. [/SIGN]

As I have stated many times we are not the only ones that use “a God” ALSO, we have no objection to calling Jesus a Divine Being

… Joseph Priestley, LL.D., F.R.S. (in A Familiar Illustration of Certain Passages of Scripture Relating to The Power of Man to do the Will of God, Original Sin, Election and Reprobation, The Divinity of Christ; And, Atonement for Sin by the Death of Christ [Philadelphia: Thomas Dobson, 1794], 37). “a God”
Lant Carpenter, LL.D (in Unitarianism in the Gospels [London: C. Stower, 1809], 156). “a God”
Andrews Norton, D.D. (in A Statement of Reasons For Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians [Cambridge: Brown, Shattuck, and Company, 1833], 74). “a god”
Paul Wernle, Professor Extraordinary of Modern Church History at the University of Basil (in The Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 1, The Rise of Religion [1903], 16). “a God”
“and the [Marshal] [Word] was a god.” 21st Century Literal
George William Horner, The Coptic Version of the New Testament, 1911, [A]nd (a) God was the word"
Ernest Findlay Scott, The Literature of the New Testament, New York, Columbia University Press, 1932, “[A]nd the Word was of divine nature”
James L. Tomanec, The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Anointed, 1958, [T]he Word was a God"
Philip Harner, JBL, Vol. 92, 1974, “The Word had the same nature as God”
Maximilian Zerwich S.J./Mary Grosvenor, 1974, “The Word was divine”
Siegfried Schulz, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 1975, “And a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word”
Translator’s NT, 1973, "The Word was with God and shared his nature
…with footnote, “There is a distinction in the Greek here between ‘with God’ and ‘God.’ In the forst instance, the article is used and this makes the reference specific. In the second instance there is not article, and it is difficult to believe that the omission is not significant. In effect **it gives an adjectival quality **to the second use of Theos (God) so that the phrae means ‘The Word was divine’.”
William Barclay’s The New Testament, 1976, “the nature of the Word was the same as the nature of God”
Johannes Schneider, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 1978, "and godlike sort was the Logos
Schonfield’s The Original New Testament, 1985, "the Word was divine
J. Madsen, New Testament A Rendering , 1994, “the Word was a divine Being”
Jurgen Becker, Das Evangelium nach Johannes, 1979, “a God/god was the Logos/logos”
Curt Stage, The New Testament, 1907, “The Word/word was itself a divine Being/being.”
Holzmann, 1926, “ein Gott war der Gedanke” [a God/god was the Thought/thought]
Friedriche Rittelmeyer, 1938, “itself a God/god was the Word/word”
Lyder Brun (Norw. professor of NT theology), 1945, “the Word was of divine kind”
Fredrich Pfaefflin, The New Testament, 1949, “was of divine Kind/kind”
Albrecht, 1957, “godlike Being/being had the Word/word”
Smit, 1960, “the word of the world was a divine being”
Johannes Schulz, 1987, “a God/god (or: God/god of Kind/kind) was the Word/word.” [As mentioned in William Loader’s The Christology of the Fourth Gospel, p. 155 cf. p.260]
William Temple, Archbishop of York, Readings in St. John’s Gospel, London, Macmillan & Co.,1933,
“And the Word was divine.”
John Crellius, Latin form of German, The 2 Books of John Crellius Fancus, Touching One God the Father, 1631, “The Word of Speech was a God”
Greek Orthodox /Arabic Calendar, incorporating portions of the 4 Gospels, Greek Orthodox Patriarchy or Beirut, May, 1983, “the word was with Allah[God] and the word was a god”
Ervin Edward Stringfellow (Prof. of NT Language and Literature/Drake University, 1943, “And the Word was Divine”
Robert Harvey, D.D., Professor of New Testament Language and Literature, Westminster College, Cambridge, in The Historic Jesus in the New Testament, London, Student Movement Christian Press1931
“and the Logos was divine (a divine being)”
Jesuit John L. McKenzie, 1965, wrote in his Dictionary of the Bible: "Jn 1:1 should rigorously be translated . . . 'the word was a divine being.’ (no doubt a trinitarian)

Next:* “I AM” (Yahweh’s name) which the JW’s translate as “before Abraham was I have been” is an absolute butchering of scripture.
They purposely changed this because Christ entitles himself as I AM–just as when Yahweh introduced himself to Moses, he refers to Himself as I AM*

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]

But Jehovah God wasn’t the one who made the heaven and the earth… it was Jesus… according to Col 1: 16, 17. Scripture clearly states that ALL things were created by Jesus… all things in heaven and on earth… all things visable and invisable.

How do you reconcile that verse with God being the One who made the heaven and the Earth?? Unless Jesus is God… [/SIGN]

(1 Corinthians 8:5-6) .. .just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out* of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ,** through **whom all things are, and we through him.

Jesus was used by Jehovah to make all things.“the beginning of the creation by God.” **(Re 3:14) **This one, “the firstborn of all creation,” was used by Jehovah in creating all other things, those in the heavens and those upon the earth, “the things visible and the things invisible.” (Col 1:15-17)

John’s testimony concerning this Son, the Word, is that “all things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence,” and the apostle identifies the Word as Jesus Christ, who had become flesh. (Joh 1:1-4, 10, 14, 17) As wisdom personified, this One is represented as saying, “Jehovah himself produced me as the beginning of his way,” and he tells of his association with God the Creator as Jehovah’s “master worker.” (Pr 8:12, 22-31) In view of the close association of Jehovah and his only-begotten Son in creative activity and because that Son is “the image of the invisible God” (Col 1:15; 2Co 4:4), it was evidently to His only-begotten Son and master worker that Jehovah spoke in saying, “Let us make man in our image.”—Ge 1:26.
"Make is not the same hebrew word as “create” just like molding clay into a vase is not the same a creating the clay.

[SIGN]Also - when Jehovah said to Jesus, “Let us make man in our image” … if Jesus were just an angel, are we to understand we were made in the image of God and the angels??? Human life is sacred because we are created in the image of God… not angels… and doesn’t it reduce God… to suggest that he and an angel (a created being) somehow have the same “image” ??? God is soooooo above the angels… so above humans… when he said Let us make man in our image in what was are He and the angels even similar???[/SIGN]

Compare “image” at Gen 9:6

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]Fidei;6232903]Mostly quoted from Tim Staples:

“I AM” (Yahweh’s name) which the JW’s translate as “before Abraham was I have been” is an absolute butchering of scripture.
They purposely changed this because Christ entitles himself as I AM–just as when Yahweh introduced himself to Moses, he refers to Himself as I AM[/SIGN]

web.archive.org/web/20031018075712/mysite.freeserve.com/newworldtranslation/john8.58.htm

“I SHALL PROVE TO BE WHAT I SHALL PROVE TO BE.” Heb., אהיה אׁשר אהיה (’Eh•yeh′ ’Asher′ ’Eh•yeh′), God’s own self-designation; Leeser, “I WILL BE THAT I WILL BE”; Rotherham, “I Will Become whatsoever I please.” Gr., E•go′ ei•mi ho on, “I am The Being,” or, “I am The Existing One”; Lat., e′go sum qui sum, “I am Who I am.” ’Eh•yeh′ comes from the Heb. verb ha•yah′, “become; prove to be.” Here ’Eh•yeh′ is in the imperfect state, first person sing., meaning “I shall become”; or, “I shall prove to be.” The reference here is not to God’s self-existence but to what he has in mind to become toward others. Compare Ge 2:4 ftn, “Jehovah,” where the kindred, but different, Heb. verb ha•wah′ appears in the divine name.

The action expressed in Joh 8:58 started “before Abraham came into existence” and is still in progress. In such situation εἰμί (ei•mi′), which is the first-person singular present indicative, is properly translated by the perfect indicative. Examples of the same syntax are found in Lu 2:48; 13:7; 15:29; Joh 5:6; 14:9; 15:27; Ac 15:21; 2Co 12:19; 1Jo 3:8.
Concerning this construction, A Grammar of the Idiom of the New Testament, by G. B. Winer, seventh edition, Andover, 1897, p. 267, says: “Sometimes the Present includes also a past tense (Mdv. 108), viz. when the verb expresses a state which commenced at an earlier period but still continues,—a state in its duration; as, Jno. xv. 27 ἀπ’ ἀρχη̃ς μετ’ ἐμου̃ ἐστέ [ap’ ar•khes′ met’ e•mou′ e•ste′], viii. 58 πρὶν ᾿Αβραὰμ γενέσθαι ἐγὼ εἰμι [prin A•bra•am′ ge•ne′sthai e•go′ ei•mi].”

Likewise, A Grammar of New Testament Greek, by J. H. Moulton, Vol. III, by Nigel Turner, Edinburgh, 1963, p. 62, says: “The Present which indicates the continuance of an action during the past and up to the moment of speaking is virtually the same as Perfective, the only difference being that the action is conceived as still in progress . . . It is frequent in the N[ew] T[estament]: Lk 248 137 . . . 1529 . . . Jn 56 858 . . . ”

Attempting to identify Jesus with Jehovah, some say that ἐγὼ εἰμί (e•go′ ei•mi′) is the equivalent of the Hebrew expression ’ani′ hu’, “I am he,” which is used by God. However, it is to be noted that this Hebrew expression is also used by man.—See 1Ch 21:17
Further attempting to identify Jesus with Jehovah, some try to use Ex 3:14 (LXX) which reads: ᾿Εγώ εἰμι ὁ ω̉́ν (E•go′ ei•mi ho on), which means “I am The Being,” or, “I am The Existing One.” This attempt cannot be sustained because the expression in Ex 3:14 is different from the expression in Joh 8:58. See Ex 3:14 “And is it not I.” Lit., “and I am he.” Heb., wa·’ani-hu’′; Gr., e·go′ ei·mi′. The expression ’ani′ hu’, “I am he,” is used here by a man, David. Elsewhere in M this expression is used by God. See De 32:39; Isa (41:4; 43:10, 13; 46:4; 48:12; 52:6).

 

[yellowbird]

Compare “image” at Gen 9:6

Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed,
For (B)in the image of God
He made man.

Not sure how this explains in what way we were created in the image of God? Isn’t the first part sort of an eye for an eye… and the second part explains why… because man was created in the image of God. That doesn’t answer the question how we could be created in the image of God and an angel? In fact, where does it ever say we were created in the image of an angel? It alwasy say in the image of God. Yet you’d have me believe that it was both in the image of God and of Jesus the Angel… (let us make man in OUR image…??)

On a different post you said JWs have no problem with Jesus being a “Divine being.” What does that mean? And if he deserves “honor and respect” rather than worship… why should anyone honor and respect a different god other than the One True God? In the Hindu and Buddist religions there are other “gods” … would you honor and respect them? No - of course not. When did he go from being an angel to being a god? In your translation of the Bible it states in the begining was the word … and the word was a god. Was this after he was an angel or was he both angel and a god?? It says in the begining… so he must’ve gone from being a god… then to Michael, now back to being a god again??? Seriously, does that even make sense???

 

[Vasian]

I see that you (DJDave) are hard at work cutting and pasting articles from WatchTower publications again
So, DJ… Are you in here doing this so you can count the time on your monthly field service report (rather than going door to door) that gets sent to the WatchTower headquarters, or are you doing all of this work in order to convince yourself that you are in “the truth” ?

 

[Rolltide]

Sooooooo… anyone wanna comment on my Jehovah’s Witness history a couple of pages ago? At least for me, the historical evidence is so damning that it makes even contemplating JW theology a non-starter.

 

[Fidei]

As I have stated many times we are not the only ones that use “a God” ALSO, we have no objection to calling Jesus a Divine Being

Dj, we dont care if others also add “a” to their translations. The point is, the JW’s (and whoever believes such) obviously tampered scripture. these people youv’e quoted are non-trinitarian.

you cannot allow all these words to harmonize–“the word was divine/godlike sort/A god” and “the word WAS GOD”. It does not personify who Christ is, but merely DESCRIBES his properties. John, in his gospel, certainly introduced Christ not for who or what are his qualities, but rather, WHO HE IS.

Adding an indefinite article even one or replacing it with a word that is something completely different changes the meaning.

the word was divine - implies that Christ is divine but not God
the word was of godlike sort - Christ is god-like but not Yahweh himself
the word was a god - Christ is A god not THE God.

NIV/NIVUK/TNIV-The word was God
NASB-The word was God
The Message-The word was God
Amplified Bible-The word was God Himself
New Living Translation-The word was God
KJV/21stKJV/NKJV-The word was God
ESV-The word was God
CEV-and was truly God.
NCV-The word was God
ASV-The word was God
YLT-The word was God
Darby-The word was God
HCSB-The word was God
NIRV-The word was God
Wycliffe-and God was the word
Worldwide English-The word was God

all from biblegateway.com

 

[yellowbird]

Sooooooo… anyone wanna comment on my Jehovah’s Witness history a couple of pages ago? At least for me, the historical evidence is so damning that it makes even contemplating JW theology a non-starter.

I thought your posts were excellent Rolltide. What I can’t wrap my brain around is how they could ever think that Russell was the faithful & discreet slave whom Jehovah appointed over all things when they believe practically NOTHING he believed… same with Rutherford who claimed to be Jehovah’s spokesman … he coined the famous, “Millions now living will never die” - and yet they did die… and that “generation will not pass away” has since been cast aside. The JW religion is built on slippery sand… their beliefs change over & over again… considering they have only been a relgious sect for a little over 100 years, their track record is riddled with errors, corrections, and in some cases, outright flip flops.

I said it before, I can trace my beliefs back 2,000 years… how sad they can’t even go back 20 years… and if a JW disagrees this is true, I invite him to pull out an AWAKE magazine from 1992 and read the inside cover…

 

[Fidei]

Just finished a bible study with the witnesses, i was astounded with their replies-- When I was trying to explain how Christ can be God – they said, Christ is sometimes called God in the bible because he reflects His qualities as being god-like.

Jehovah is merciful, Christ is also merciful
Jehovah’s message is also Christ’s message
etc…
they claim that these similarities does not mean they are one in nature and body – but implies that they are similar in quality and personality which gives Christ a title of god since he is Jehovah’s spokesperson.

when we say, as in John 1:1, The word was God, they claimed to add “a god” so that it will “harmonize” with scripture, they added— how can the Word be God if the Word was WITH God?
AND–When John the Baptist exclaimed that “Blessed is the Lord God of Israel, for he has come and redeemed his people”–they simply said, that someone of CLOSE resemblance to Jehovah will come.

1.) How do we prove that Christ LITERALLY is God and not some representation of some sort?

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]karoleck;6195501]"The name used by Abraham/Moses to speak to God is lost. Yahweh is the best version of the four Hebrew letters.
it has asked our members in respect for our Jewish people of the Old Dispensation(Gods chosen people) not to use even this word.[/SIGN]

Are you forgetting Jesus words? Early copies of the Septuagint contained, not Ky′ri·os, but the divine name in the form יהוה. Christ’s first-century followers knew and pronounced God’s name. Jesus himself said in prayer to his Father: “I have made your name known.” (John 17:26) And in his well-known model prayer, Jesus taught us to pray: “Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified.”—Matthew 6:9.

Also, why follow the Jews remember Jesus other words? "Matt. 23:37,*38: “*Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her,—how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks together under her wings! But you people did not want it. Look! Your **house *is abandoned to you
Gal. 3:27-29: “All of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor freeman, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one person in union with Christ Jesus. Moreover, if you belong to Christ, you are really Abraham’s seed, heirs with reference to a promise.” (So, from God’s standpoint, it is no longer natural descent from Abraham that determines who are Abraham’s seed.)

The jews are no longer God’s chosen people. So why would you want to remove the name that is mentioned more times than any other name in the Bible to honor a request of one’s whose “house” was abandoned by God?

Careful: (Jeremiah 23:27) …They are thinking of making my people forget my name by means of their dreams that they keep relating each one to the other, just as their fathers forgot my name by means of Ba′al..

Ps. 91:14 "Because on me he has set his affection,
I shall also provide him with escape.
I shall protect him because he has come to know my name.

Very soon now you will know this scripture as never before…

 

[dj_dave]

[SIGN]

Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed,
For (B)in the image of God
He made man.

Not sure how this explains in what way we were created in the image of God? Isn’t the first part sort of an eye for an eye… and the second part explains why… because man was created in the image of God. That doesn’t answer the question how we could be created in the image of God and an angel? In fact, where does it ever say we were created in the image of an angel? It alwasy say in the image of God. Yet you’d have me believe that it was both in the image of God and of Jesus the Angel… (let us make man in OUR image…??)

On a different post you said JWs have no problem with Jesus being a “Divine being.” What does that mean? And if he deserves “honor and respect” rather than worship… why should anyone honor and respect a different god other than the One True God? In the Hindu and Buddist religions there are other “gods” … would you honor and respect them? No - of course not. When did he go from being an angel to being a god? In your translation of the Bible it states in the begining was the word … and the word was a god. Was this after he was an angel or was he both angel and a god?? It says in the begining… so he must’ve gone from being a god… then to Michael, now back to being a god again??? Seriously, does that even make sense???

[/SIGN]

"In the Bible Moses is called god (Ex. 4:16; 7:1 [elohim]), angels are called gods (Ps. 97:7; 138:1; Ps. 8:6; Heb. 2:7 [elohim]), human judges are called gods (Ps. 82:1,6 [elohim]), and satan is called the god of this world (2Corn. 4:4 [theos]). Moses is called God to Pharaoh and Aaron because he was God’s representative, and because the miracles he would perform would attest to his having Jehovah’s spirit. Angels are called gods because to us humans they certainly are powerful godlike beings. Also, they too, like Moses, represent Jehovah. Human Judges are called gods because they have the power to judge, which gave them great authority over men’s lives. Jesus is called thoes because he is all of these things. He is Jehovah’s representative; he performed great miracles which testified to his having Jehovah’s spirit; he is a powerful spirit being; and he will ultimately act as the judge of mankind.

"The fact that Jesus is called God does not make him Jehovah, for Christ himself affirmed that Jehovah was HIS GOD not once but SEVEN times! Jesus confirmed that Jehovah is his God at Matt. 27:46; John 20:17, Rev. 3:2; and Rev. 3:12 (4 times).

Should we worship Joseph too?

1. Since Jesus is claiming to be the “first and the last” in Rev 22:12,13 and since Isa records Jehovah as saying, “I am the first and the last; apart from me there is no God”, Who is “the first and the last”?

Let us look at this reasoning:
We can look at it like this:
Jehovah is the first and the last
Jesus is the first and the last
Jesus is Jehovah
But then, with the same reasoning, we can say:
All dogs have four legs
My cat has four legs
My cat is a dog

When we look closely at the use of the term “first and the last,” we see that it has limitations when used of Jesus. When used of Jesus, it always in reference to his death and resurrection. We must remember that God cannot die (Hab 1:12 NJB). Jesus however is the “the firstborn from the dead.” Interestingly, the Codex Alexandrinus, uses the word “firstborn” instead of “first” at Rev 1:17 and 2:8, but at Rev 22:13, where it refers to the Alpha and Omega, this codex uses the word “first” instead of “firstborn.” Even this scribe recognized the difference.

I often get people who try to find similarities in what Jesus and Jehovah did, and the remarking that this should mean that they are the same being. But should this be the case? Let us take alook at Joseph. The NKJV MacArthur Study provides the following of similarities between Joseph and Jesus:

Both Joseph and Jesus were A SHEPHERD OF HIS FATHERS SHEEP (Gen
37:2/Jn 10:11,27-29)
Both Joseph and Jesus were LOVED DEARLY BY THEIR FATHER (Gen 37:3
Mt. 3:17
Both Joseph and Jesus were HATED BY THEIR BROTHERS (Gen 37:4/Jn 7:45)
Both Joseph and Jesus were SENT BY FATHER TO BROTHERS (Gen
37:13,14/Heb 2:11)
Both Joseph and Jesus had OTHERS TO HARM THEM (Gen 37:20/Jn 11:53)
Both Joseph and Jesus had ROBES TAKEN FROM THEM (Gen 37:23/Jn
19:23,24)
Both Joseph and Jesus were TAKEN TO EGYPT (Gen 37:26/Mt 2:14,15)
Both Joseph and Jesus were SOLD FOR A PRICE OF A SLAVE (Gen 37:28/Mt
26:15)
Both Joseph and Jesus were TEMPTED (GEN 39:7/mT 4:1)
Both Joseph and Jesus were FALSELY ACCUSED (Gen 39:16-18/Mt 26:59,60)
Both Joseph and Jesus were BOUND IN CHAINS (Gen 39:20/Mt 27:2)
Both Joseph and Jesus were PLACED WITH 2 OTHER PRISONERS, ONE
WHO WAS SAVED AND THE OTHER LOST (Gen 40:2,3/Lu 23:32)
Both Joseph and Jesus were EXALTED AFTER SUFFERING (Gen 41:41/Phil
2:9-11)
Both Joseph and Jesus were BOTH 30 YEARS OLD AT THE BEGINNING OF
PUBLIC RECOGNITION
(Gen 41:46/Lu 3:23)
Both Joseph and Jesus BOTH WEPT (Gen 42:24; 45:2, 14, 15; 46:29/Jn
11:35)
Both Joseph and Jesus FORGAVE THOSE WHO WRONGED THEM (Gen
45:1-15/Lu 23:34)
Both Joseph and Jesus SAVED THEIR NATION (Gen 45:7/Mt 1:21)
Both Joseph and Jesus had WHAT MEN DID TO HURT THEM, GOD TURNED
TO GOOD (Gen 50:20/ 1Cor 2:7,8
Does this mean Jesus must be Joseph?

 

[T_More]

dj dave, how many times has the WTS predicted the coming of Armageddon and failed?

Here let me help you out. I’m sorry I can’t make the picture bigger, but everyone can save this to their hard drive and enlarge the picture to see it more clearly.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

My next scans will be of the WTS 1969 Interlinear compared to their own NWT. Stay tuned…

 

[Regardless]

not a problem at all!

but your’e sure gonna have to face a serious headache when you return to a PC reading all your replies throughout your lost days

“Sir, I perceive you are a prophet.”

I haven’t logged on for nearly two weeks, and look what I missed!
Sorry anyone i didn’t reply to. I will try a few now, but you may have forgotten you asked!

I see T-More, and Yellowbird and Zach-dunn all replied to my posts with excellent points and I never got back to them! Sorry

 

[Regardless]

I’m very interested in this post. Do you no longer believe that Russel was the faithful & discreet slave whom God apppointed over all things? Or that Jehovah continues to direct the annointed today? Do you no longer believe that the Watchtower is Jehovah’s mouthpiece?

First: Was Russel the Faithful and discreet slave? I found a WT article that puts it better than I could: I’ve bolded some bits.
Quote: (WT 2007 November 1.)
"We accept the teaching that all of the anointed ones living on earth at any given time constitute “the faithful and discreet slave” that Jesus said would provide timely “food” for his domestics. (Matthew 24:45) …
13. God told the nation of Israel: “You are my witnesses . . . even my servant whom I have chosen.” (Isaiah 43:10) But on Nisan 11 of the year 33 C.E., Jesus told the leaders of Israel that God had rejected their nation from being His servant. He said: “The kingdom of God will be taken from you and be given to a nation producing its fruits.” … As Jehovah’s slave, the house of Israel was neither faithful nor discreet. (Isaiah 29:13, 14) Later that same day, when Jesus asked: “Who really is the faithful and discreet slave?” he was in effect asking, ‘What discreet nation will replace Israel to be God’s faithful slave?’ The apostle Peter gave the answer when he told the congregation of anointed Christians: “You are . . . ‘a holy nation, a people for special possession.’” (1 Peter 1:4; 2:9) That spiritual nation, “the Israel of God,” became Jehovah’s new slave. (Galatians 6:16) Just as all members of ancient Israel formed one “servant,” so also all anointed Christians on earth at any one time form one “faithful and discreet slave.”
End of quote

I agree with that. Don’t believe Russel was THE faithful slave, but was part of that class. All anointed Christians on earth are the faithful slave.

As for the WT not being inspired, another quote, (on an old favourite of wrong expectations) this time from Awake 1993 22 March:​

Jehovah’s Witnesses, in their eagerness for Jesus’ second coming, have suggested dates that turned out to be incorrect. Because of this, some have called them false prophets. Never in these instances, however, did they presume to originate predictions ‘in the name of Jehovah.’ Never did they say, ‘These are the words of Jehovah.’ The Watchtower, the official journal of Jehovah’s Witnesses, has said:“We have not the gift of prophecy.” (January 1883, page 425) “Nor would we have our writings reverenced or regarded as infallible.” (December 15, 1896, page 306) The Watchtower has also said that the fact **that some have Jehovah’s spirit “does not mean those now serving as Jehovah’s witnesses are inspired. It does not mean that the writings in this magazine The Watchtower are inspired and infallible and without mistakes.” (May 15, 1947, page 157) **“The Watchtower does not claim to be inspired in its utterances, nor is it dogmatic.” (August 15, 1950, page 263) “The brothers preparing these publications are not infallible. Their writings are not inspired as are those of Paul and the other Bible writers. (2 Tim. 3:16) And so, at times, it has been necessary, as understanding became clearer, to correct views. (Prov. 4:18)”—February 15, 1981, page 19.

I believe that. So i am not blown away when someone digs up an old understanding and shows we now teach something slightly different. Look at the chart our friend pasted a few posts back on the understanding of “the generation”. I don’t fall off my chair crying: “Oh oh! The WT is not infallible after all!” Haha.

Are you free to disagree with what’s written in the Watchtower publications? Since you’re free to disagree with what was written 100 years ago… how do you know 100 years from now the new batch of JWs won’t discount what you’re reading?
Why follow a religion that denounces what was written a mere 100 years ago?

You make it sound like we burn all WT’s more than 30 years old because they are totally different to what we believe now. We still quote and research old articles. Changes in understanding are rare, and usually minor.

We know the truth is clarified and better understood as time goes by. Look at the early apostles and their growth in understanding as the decades went by.

As Catholics we quote what was written by fellow Church members 1,000 years ago… our faith stands the test of time. You can’t say the same, can you?

Has the Catholic Church not had changes in understanding as the centuries went by? 1000 years ago exactly the same?

Yet very different from 1000 years earlier when Christ and his apostles were teaching.
Your own encyclopedia acknowledges the evolution of all sorts of doctrines and practices contrary to what the early disciples believed and did.

 

[T_More]

I believe that. So i am not blown away when someone digs up an old understanding and shows we now teach something slightly different. Look at the chart our friend pasted a few posts back on the understanding of “the generation”. I don’t fall off my chair crying: “Oh oh! The WT is not infallible after all!” Haha.

Of course you wouldn’t, the WTS has boiled down their entire theology to Proverbs 4:18 that has been taken (once again) out of context. That light sure changes alot. The truth is not relative, it’s constant.

You make it sound like we burn all WT’s more than 30 years old because they are totally different to what we believe now.

**No, you don’t burn. But the WTS “strongly discourages” the reading of the old pubs. **

**Please clairfy if these changes in teachings are “minor”. I copied and pasted this, so I’m sure you’ve seen this before.

The second presence of Christ started in 1874 (WT, 11/1/22, pgs 332-337; Prophecy, 1929, pg 65-66); Vaccinations never saved a human life, doesn’t prevent smallpox, and are condemned (Golden Age, Feb 4, 1931, pg 293-4); The great pyramid of Egypt is a witness of the Lord (WT May 15, 1925 pgs 148-9); God governs the universe from a star called Alcyone (Thy Kingdom Come, 1903 Ed, pg 327); Leviathan of the Bible is the steam locomotive (The Finished Mystery, pg 84-86); Tonsillectomy is condemned; better to commit suicide than have a tonsillectomy (GA, April 7, 1926, pg 438); In the new world, Abraham will rule New York City (GA, Oct 5, 1927, pg 26/29); The black race originated with Noah’s curse upon Canaan (GA, Jul 24, 1929, pg 702); Jews are no longer important to God (Vindication, Vol 2, pg 257-258); God wears clothes (GA, May 19, 1926, pg 534); The WTS stands for the principles of Nazi Germany (Yearbook 1934, pg 134-137); Aspirin is the menace of heart disease (GA, Feb 27, 1935, pg 343-4); Do not use X-rays (GA, Sept 23, 1936, pg 828); In 1938, people should not get married (Face the Facts, pg 46-50); Organ transplants were condemned as cannibalistic (WT, Nov 15, 1967, pg 702-4)?

In addition, care to address this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_Sarim**

 

[Regardless]

Regardless;6221292:

Regardless, I’ll be happy to answer, but first address the first part of my post above that you left out. Once again, how is it possible to address Jesus as “a god”/Mighty God when the NWT Bible (or any bible for that matter) says in Isaiah 44 what it says? …Thanks.

Excuse me. And very sorry for such a late reply! I have been away.
Back in post 74 (?) you said:-
… when inserting “a”, the WTS created a multi-god system. Big God, Jehovah, and little god, Jesus. How can this exist when Isaiah 44 clearly states:
you then quoted Isaiah 44:6-8. highlighting Jehovahs words: and besides me there is no God and Does there exist a God besides me?No

Very good question!

That scripture fits very well with Jesus own words in John 17:3 where Jesus calls his father “the only true God” and himself “the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.”
The apostles believed the same: After acknowledging there were ones “called gods” 1 Cor. 8:6 says (in part) “there is actually to us one God the father, … and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ.”

All good with Isaiah 44 so far. One God. Jesus separate individual sent by him.
God’s son. OK.
And we could quote a thousand others if we had space…
Father know day, son does not… (Matt 24:36)
“Father is greater than I” (John 14:28)
“The head of Christ is God” (1 Cor 11:3) and so on…

But… Isaiah 9:6 prophetically calls Jesus “Mighty God” !
What is going on? Is this a contradiction?
Some will reason “Jesus is Almighty God too” and apply the extra-biblical word Trinity to the mix.
But that understanding still contradicts the above scriptures that show Jesus is not the same or equal to “the only true God.”

Yet it does make sense if we consider John 10:34, 35. where Jesus quoted Ps 82:1-6.
There, powerful men, judges were addressed as “gods”. Similar to Moses in Ex 7:1?
(Remember 1 Cor 8:6. talked of ones “called gods” too.)

Jesus occupies a far higher position than such ones the inspired Bible, calls “gods.”
So it is quite fitting for him to be refered to as “Mighty God” in Isaiah. (Though never is he refered to as “Almighty” as Jehovah is)

It also fits with John 1:1 , "…the word was “God” “a god” or “divine” , .
John 1:18 says: “no man has seen God at any time, the only begotten god … has explained him.”
And Thomas at John 20:28 may be calling Jesus “my God”, - but then three verses later we are again told in conclusion: “Jesus is the son of God.”

So,
JW’s conclude:
There is One true God. The Almighty, Father, Jehovah / YHWH (as countless scriptures show.)
However, in the original languages in which the Bible was written, the term **“god” was also **used to describe **a mighty person **or an individual who is divine or closely associated with the Almighty God. (Jesus, Moses, human judges)
Or of course, false gods. (Baal, Satan, Zeus)

This is all in the reasoning from the scriptures book if you still have one. If not, try the WT.org site. It probably has one you can read.
I hope that answers. Sorry again for late reply.

 

[Regardless]

care to address this?

Re: post 136.

Oh for crying out loud. Is that the sort of stuff you let yourself get stumbled over?
No, I won’t waste my time.

 

[Regardless]

What are you talking about? You think that the Bible does not call God mighty? Here are some quotes from the OT — and the NWT — that call God mighty:

Hey, sorry I never replied to you! You made some good points.

I replied to another in #137 on a similar subject. One of your questions might be answered there.

I will have to look nto the other points you raised.

 

[Regardless]

I have not stated this anywhere in any of my posts. There is one word for God in Greek, that is theos, this word — like any other word in every language — can take different forms. That does not mean it is a different word; I’m not sure how you understood me in this manner.

Sorry. “Different forms” of the word god. Like “The God” and “a god”?

Sounds like you are a bit of a greek scholar!

Please. What is the difference between “ton theon” and “theos”?