JW's - Proving to JW's that Jesus is God

[Daniel_Marsh]

“I AM” are the same words that God used when he told Moses who he was in Exodus

here too,

Isaiah 41:4
Who has done this and carried it through, calling forth the generations from the beginning? I, the LORD -with the first of them and with the last—I am he."

Isaiah 43:10
“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

I can’t help but notice that all those who believe Jesus Christ is actually Jehovah God haven’t explained Psa 110:1-5 and Acts 3:13.

Truth is not complex. Where else in life can you have two individuals talking to each other or about each other and people will insist that one is the other? Can anyone provide any example?

Notice the scripture says nothing about “God the Father” talking to “God the Son”, it says Jehovah was talking with Jesus, and Jehovah was glorifying Jesus.

Thus, Jesus is not Jehovah.

Steve

Acts 2:32-36 (King James Version)

32This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.

33Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

34For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand,

35Until I make thy foes thy footstool.

36Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

We don’t see your problem, this text fits perfectly in our theology.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Wow,

At this point we have to give Steve some credit, he has been willing to come in here and defend himself, even when there are 10 different questions he has to deal with at a time.

It is cool that a JW has actually wanted to come in here and go head to head with us Catholics…I cant remember this happening before.

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

The argument that just because Jesus said “I am” thus he must be Jehovah God is very weak. Come on, have you ever looked at other translations, or looked through the Bible to see if anyone else ever said “I am”? Wouldn’t that be the logical thing to do before jumping to a conclusion?

The Apostle Paul said “I am”…

(1 Corinthians 15:10) But by God’s undeserved kindness I am what I am. And his undeserved kindness that was toward me did not prove to be in vain, but I labored in excess of them all, yet not I but the undeserved kindness of God that is with me.

Let’s see how other Bible Translators understand John 8:58

Professor E. J. Goodspeed was a member of the American Standard Bible Committee, and his translation renders John 8:58 as follows: “Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you, I existed before Abraham was born!’”

Note other translations:

Chas. Williams’ The New Testament: “Then Jesus said to them, ‘I most solemnly say to you, I existed before Abraham was born.’”

A. S. Lewis’ “The Four Gospels” According to the Sinaitic Palimpsest: “He said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I have been.”

The Twentieth Century New Testament: “‘Believe me,’ Jesus replied, ‘before Abraham was born I was already what I am.’”

G. M. Lamsa’s The Modern New Testament: “Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Before Abraham was born, I was.”

Jas. Murdock’s The Syriac New Testament: “Jesus said to them: Verily, verily, I say to you, That before Abraham existed, I was.”

F. Pfaefflin’s Das Neue Testament (German): “Jesus: ‘Before there was an Abraham, **I was already there **[war ich schon da]!’”

C. Stage’s Das Neue Testament (German): “Jesus said to them: ‘Truly, truly, I say to you: **Before Abraham was born, I was **[war ich].’”

Nácar Colunga’s Nuevo Testamento (Spanish): “Jesus answered: ‘In truth, in truth, I say to you: Before Abraham was born, I was [era yo].’”

It seems to me that Trinitarians have read far too much into John 8:58. trying to prove a belief that isn’t there.

Jesus was simply saying that he existed before Abraham. He wasn’t talking about being Jehovah. That is clearly seen by Psa 110:1-5 and Acts 3:13.

Steve

Steve language gains its meaning from its context, the Jews who knew the language that Jesus was speaking clearly understood him to be claiming to be God, that is why they picked up stones to kill him.

Matthew 26:62-66 (King James Version)
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain

62And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee?

63But Jesus held his peace, And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God.

64Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

65Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy.

66What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death.

Mark 14:61-64 (King James Version)

61But he held his peace, and answered nothing. Again the high priest asked him, and said unto him, Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?

62And Jesus said, I am: and ye shall see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

63Then the high priest rent his clothes, and saith, What need we any further witnesses?

64Ye have heard the blasphemy: what think ye? And they all condemned him to be guilty of death.

What was the “blasphemy” that Jesus spoke here?

stopped at post 56, wifeee is home, good night all.

Steve did you get my PM?

I would appriate a response. thanks

 

[BibleSteve]

Steve did you get my PM?
I would appriate a response. thanks

I don’t see anything in my PM que, and I apologize I’m running behind in the various threads. I’ve been working hard to keep up. “10 on 1” keeps me pretty busy

I appreciate each and every one of the posts and arguments people are putting out. I read each one, go to each link, and test my understandings against what others believe.

Looking forward to more good conversational points in a spirit of mutual respect.

If I haven’t responded to anyone’s point, please give me a little patience. I do have family and other responsibilities to attend to throughout the day.

 

[BibleSteve]

Wow,

At this point we have to give Steve some credit, he has been willing to come in here and defend himself, even when there are 10 different questions he has to deal with at a time.

It is cool that a JW has actually wanted to come in here and go head to head with us Catholics…I cant remember this happening before.

Well thank you very much!

I really enjoy reading each and every post offered to me and I look up every link provided.

I apologize I’m running a little behind in responding to everyone’s comments. I’ll spend sometime reviewing each thread to ensure I don’t miss an open question. If I’ve missed anyone’s point, please send me a quick PM reminder. I do have every intention of giving a comment to those who provide a content-rich, Scriptural comment or question to me.

Steve

 

[Ravyn_Guiliani]

Wow,

At this point we have to give Steve some credit, he has been willing to come in here and defend himself, even when there are 10 different questions he has to deal with at a time.

It is cool that a JW has actually wanted to come in here and go head to head with us Catholics…I cant remember this happening before.

Steve says he is not counting his time here, so I have to believe him. But usually a JW would be counting every minute they spend on this forum as field service time and it would be recorded on their time slips. Also if the JW has already spoken to you once then the next time it is counted as a ‘return visit’. after three return visits you might even be able to stretch it into being counted as a Bible Study. So an average thread like this could be very productive (on paper) for a JW. How do I know? I did it.
Ravyn

 

[Claude_Kenneson]

Yes, I agree with you. There is no 100% concrete proof text that Jesus is Michael. The WT also says this. They look at various scriptures and descriptions of Michael and conclude "The scriptures point to Jesus being Michael’. Personally, I don’t argue this point because I fully realize this is a subjective, interpretive conclusion that can’t be 100% proved in Scripture. I think it an interesting idea, but since it’s not objectively proved in Scripture, I don’t argue its position.

I agree with you the Trinity idea is similar. Proponents take various descriptions of Jesus and note they are similar to Jehovah and conclude Jesus must be Jehovah. I am actually surprised at how many of the Trinity proofs fall apart so easily." They are weak and flimsy, they are based on faulty logic.

If Jesus really was a Son of God as JWs believe, it would be completely logical for him to be referring to himself having a God (Rev 3:12), sitting at Jehovah’s side (Psa 110:1-5), and being glorified by means of Jehovah (Acts 3:12). He would be calling himself “Son of God” as he always does. He would never call himself God, and he never does. If he was a Son of God, we would never find a reference to the phrase “God the Son” and we don’t.

I often read the Bible, with the idea that Jesus is God and I find I have to invent all sorts of complex explainations to hold the doctrine in place. However, if I read the Bible with the idea that Jesus really is a Son… the Son of Jehovah God of the OT, things lay out very easily. For example, each of these questions is easily answered with the understanding that Jesus is simply a Son of God, but it’s complex in trying to understand these in line with thinking that Jesus is Jehovah.

1. Why did he say that he did not come of his “own initiative” but was sent?
   John 8:42, 1 John 4:9
2. Why did Jesus not know the “day and the hour” of the Great Tribulation
   but God did? Matt. 24:36
3. Who did Jesus speak to in prayer?
4. How did he “appear before the person of God for us”? Heb. 9:24
5. Why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I am”? John 14:28,
   Php. 2:5, 6
6. Who spoke to Jesus at the time of his baptism saying “this is my son”?
   Matt. 3:17
7. How could he be exalted to a superior position? Php. 2:9, 10
8. How can he be the “mediator between God and man”? 1Tim. 2:5
9. Why did Paul say the “the head of Christ is God”? 1Cor. 11:30
10. Why did Jesus “hand over the Kingdom to his God” and “subject
    himself to God”? 1Cor. 15:24, 28
11. Who does he refer to as “my God and your God”? John 20:17
12. How does he sit at God’s right hand? Ps. 110:1, Heb. 10:12, 13
13. Why does John say “no man has seen God at any time”? John 1:18
14. Why did not people die when they saw Jesus? Ex. 30:20
15. How was Jesus dead and God alive at the same time? Acts 2:24
16. Why did he need someone to save him? Heb. 5:7
17. Who is reffered to prophetically at Prov. 8:22-31?
18. Why did Jesus say “that all authority has been GIVEN to me in heaven
    and on earth”? Matt. 28:18, Dan. 7:13, 14 (similar)
19. Why did he have godly fear? Heb. 5:7
20. How could he learn obedience and be made perfect? Heb. 5:8-9
21. Why would an angel be able to strengthen him or angels minister to him?
    Luke 22:43, Matt. 4:11
22. Why would Satan try to tempt him if he KNEW that he was GOD?
    Matt. 4:1-11
23. Jesus when sent to the earth was made to “be Lower” than the angels.
    Heb. 2:7. How could any part of a God Head EVER be lower than the
    angels?
24. Then if Jesus was the sameas God, who was he being tempted to rebel
    against? Could God be tempted to rebel against himself? Matt. 4:1
25. Near the end of his earthly life, Jesus cried out “My God, why have you forsaken me?” Matt. 27:46 Can God desert or forsake himself?
26. Heb. 5:8 says that Jesus learned obedience! To whom would he obey if he was GOD? And Does God need to LEARN anything?

Too many to consider all at once, but a few jumped at me. Jesus spoke to his Father in prayer. At his baptism the Father spoke saying ‘This is my beloved son.’ Several of your questions can be answered by looking at Phil. 2:6-8 Although he was in very nature God, he chose to limit himself as a man. He didn’t depend on his own powers, but looked to the Father instead. Jesus is not yet subject to his Father. This is something future, as all things have not yet been subject to Jesus. Nor does subjection imply a different nature. A wife is subject to her husband, but she is still human. Jesus is subject to the Father, but by nature he is still God. Prov. 8 is not a prophecy. If Jesus was the chief archangel Michael, then, how indeed were lesser angels able to minister to him? Did he leave his angelness in heaven when he came to earth?

If Jesus was lower than the angels, than how indeed could he be the superior chief archangel Michael?

 

[Bishopite]

[BibleSteve;2323244]Yes, I agree with you. There is no 100% concrete proof text that Jesus is Michael. The WT also says this. They look at various scriptures and descriptions of Michael and conclude "The scriptures point to Jesus being Michael’. Personally, I don’t argue this point because I fully realize this is a subjective, interpretive conclusion that can’t be 100% proved in Scripture. I think it an interesting idea, but since it’s not objectively proved in Scripture, I don’t argue its position**

But you still submit to their authority even though they are the new guys on the block, that’s what I don’t understand.

If Jesus really was a Son of God as JWs believe, it would be completely logical for him to be referring to himself having a God (Rev 3:12), sitting at Jehovah’s side (Psa 110:1-5), and being glorified by means of Jehovah (Acts 3:12). He would be calling himself “Son of God” as he always does. He would never call himself God, and he never does. If he was a Son of God, we would never find a reference to the phrase “God the Son” and we don’t.

I believe the JW’s take an over literal view of Scripture and misunderstand what “Son of God” means. Also, that Jesus is a “god” means He would be another god which violates Is 44:6.

“Jesus is not God’s Son in the sense of how we think of a father and a son. God did not get married and have a son. Jesus is God’s Son in the sense that He is God made manifest in human form (John 1:1,14). Jesus is God’s Son in that He was conceived by the Holy Spirit. Luke 1:35 declares, “The angel answered, ‘The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called the Son of God.’” In Bible times, the phrase “son of man” was used to describe a human being. The son of a man is a man.
During His trial before the Jewish leaders, the High Priest demanded of Jesus, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God” (Matthew 26:63). Jesus responded, “Yes, it is as you say, ‘but I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven” (Matthew 26:64). The Jewish leaders responded by accusing Jesus of blasphemy (Matthew 26:65-66). Later, before Pontius Pilate, “The Jews insisted, ‘We have a law, and according to that law He must die, because He claimed to be the Son of God’” (John 19:7). Why would claiming to be the “Son of God” be considered blasphemy and be worthy of a death sentence? The Jewish leaders understood exactly what Jesus meant by the phrase “Son of God.” To be the “Son of God” is to be of the same nature as God. The “Son of God” is “of God.” The claim to be of the same nature as God, to in fact “be God,” was blasphemy to the Jewish leaders; therefore, they demanded Jesus’ death. Hebrews 1:3 expresses this very clearly, “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of His being…”
gotquestions.org/Jesus-Son-of-God.html

I often read the Bible, with the idea that Jesus is God and I find I have to invent all sorts of complex explainations to hold the doctrine in place. However, if I read the Bible with the idea that Jesus really is a Son… the Son of Jehovah God of the OT, things lay out very easily. For example, each of these questions is easily answered with the understanding that Jesus is simply a Son of God, but it’s complex in trying to understand these in line with thinking that Jesus is Jehovah.

I often read the Bible too, however, if you and I simply pick up and read the Bible and try to understand it without any direction, we can get a whole host of beliefs within it; this is why we have so many Protestant denominations with everything from Saturday worship, to padeobaptism, to once saved always saved, to the lose of salvation, Jesus is everything in God (modalism) et al.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses are a group who’s past only goes back 150 or so years where Charles Taze Russell somehow understood Scripture better than 1800 years of deep Scriptural theology? That’s very difficult to grasp rationally.
That’s why Mt 18:15-18 explains disputes go to the “church” but which one? To which “church” is 1 Tim 3:15 speaking? All of the “johnny come lately” churches that sprang up centuries after the Catholic church don’t have a leg to stand on when it comes to providing objective evidence of their authority, nor the ability to pronounce to all humanity true doctrine.
Many of the modern heterodox teachings actually are resurected returns from the past when the Catholic church truimphed over these heterodoxies to boldly proclaim and hold fast to Christian orthodoxy.

You have posted many questions which I hope to be able to respond to soon.

 

[BibleSteve]

Steve says he is not counting his time here, so I have to believe him. But usually a JW would be counting every minute they spend on this forum as field service time and it would be recorded on their time slips. Also if the JW has already spoken to you once then the next time it is counted as a ‘return visit’. after three return visits you might even be able to stretch it into being counted as a Bible Study. So an average thread like this could be very productive (on paper) for a JW. How do I know? I did it.
Ravyn

I’ve mentioned this several times publically and privately. I’m not counting time, not counting RV’s, not counting anything… I’m simply spending time learning from others and sharing what I’ve learned along the way.

No evil ulterior motive.

Steve

 

[trucho]

Hi Everyone!!

Please don’t forget about our first fathers and what they believed in. Saint Justin Martyr believed that the one that spoke to Moses was Jesus, The Word of God. Therefore Jehovah was not the Father, but the Son.

Please check it out at: www.earlychristianwritings.com
Go to Justin Martyr (first apology) Chapter LXIII – How God Appeared to Moses.
“The Jews, accordingly, being throughout the of opinion that it was the Father of the universe who spake to Moses, though He who spoke to him was indeed the Son of God, who is called both Angel and Apostle, are justly charged, both by the Spirit of prophecy and by Christ Himself, with knowing neither the Father nor the Son. For they who affirm that the Son is the Father, are proved neither to have become acquainted with the Father, nor to know that the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God.”

 

[BibleSteve]

… some statements are absolute. When Jehovah says in Isaiah that he ALONE created all things with his own hands, and then asks the very emphatic negative question, WHO WAS WITH ME? which is a Hebraism which means in answer ABSOLUTELY NO ONE WAS, that statement is extremely strong.

Dear Jaypeeto4,

Yes, that is a very strong statement and so at first glance I too would think it would be correct in viewing that as an absolute. Similarly, I see the same sort of absolute statement here at Isa 43:11

(Isaiah 43:11) I—I am YHWH, and besides me there is no savior.”

And yet, I find other statements in the Bible that show when YHWH does some saving activity, he sends someone to do it for him and calls them a “savior”. How is this possible for someone else to be called “savior” when YHWH specifically and absolutely said “besides me there is no savior?” Read Judges 3:9 very carefully and note that YHWH is the one that “saves” them, but he does this by means of raising up a “savior”

(Judges 3:9) And the sons of Israel began to call to YHWH for aid. Then YHWH raised a savior up for the sons of Israel that he might save them, Oth´ni•el the son of Ke´naz, the younger brother of Ca´leb.

Wait! Didn’t YHWH specifically say “besides me there is no savior”? Wasn’t that an absolute statement? Apparently, when he makes statements like that, it does not prevent him from working through others and having them assume the same descriptive title.

At Judges 3:9, the same Hebrew word (moh•shi´a‛, rendered “savior” or “deliverer”) that is used at Isaiah 43:11 is applied to Othniel, a judge in Israel, but that certainly did not make Othniel Jehovah, did it? A reading of Isaiah 43:1-12 shows that verse 11 means that Jehovah alone was the One who provided salvation, or deliverance, for Israel; that salvation did not come from any of the gods of the surrounding nations.

So likewise, when YHWH makes an absolute statement about him doing all the creating, I would look for other Bible statements about him accomplishing this THROUGH someone else. And I notice he talks about doing it through or “by means of” his Son Jesus.

(Colossians 1:15-16) … All things have been created through him and for him.

Thank you for your comments and the opportunity to reason with you.

Steve

 

[BibleSteve]

He is not a creature.

To call someone the beginning of something doesn’t necessarily mean that he himself was created too. The beginning of the creation by God means the Source of all God’s creation, which harmonizes perfectly with the Apostle John’s statement in his gospel that “without Him (the Word), not one thing was made
THAT HAS BEEN MADE.” Jesus wasn’t made. He made all things.

Dear Jaypeeto4,

As always, you provide good and thoughtful ideas.

The phrase “the beginning of the creation by God” is slightly ambiguous. A non-Trinitarian will see this as saying Jesus the first part or beginning of God’s creation. Thus, a created being.

A Trinitarian will see it as saying Jesus is not a created being, but the source of the creation.

In order to bring better clarification on how we should understand it can look at this familiar scripture:

Col 1:15, 16 “He [Jesus] …. The first-born of all creation….”

Now, most people focus all of their debate on “first-born”. I want to focus on “first-born of”

Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals.

What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15?

Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof?

By simply looking how the Scripture use the phrase “first-born of”, I have concluded that holding to that consistency, Jesus would have to be part of the group, or part of “creation”.

Thank you for the opportunity to reason from the Scriptures with you.

 

[BibleSteve]

Dear Jaypeeto4,

Continuing along, examining the question of whether Jesus is a created being, or not, we come to Proverb 8:22

Is this scripture referring to Jesus?

The inspired description of wisdom found in the book of Proverbs reads: “**Jehovah himself produced me **as the beginning of his way, **the earliest of his achievements **of long ago. ... Before the mountains themselves had been settled down, ahead of the hills, **I was brought forth as with labor pains **... When he prepared the heavens I was there; ... then I came to be beside him as a master worker, and **I came to be the one he was specially fond of **day by day, I being glad before him all the time, ... and the things I was fond of were with the sons of men.”

This passage cannot be speaking merely about divine wisdom or wisdom in the abstract. Why not? Because the wisdom that is here described was “produced,” or created, as the beginning of Jehovah’s way. *Jehovah God has always existed and has always been wise. (Psalm 90:1,2) His wisdom had no beginning; it was neither created nor produced. It was not “brought forth as with labor pains.” Furthermore, this wisdom is said to speak and act, representing a person.—Proverbs 8:1.

The book of Proverbs says that long ago wisdom was beside Jehovah, the Creator, as “a master worker.” That certainly applies to Jesus. Long before he came to earth, Jesus worked so closely with Jehovah that God’s Word says: “He is before all other things and by means of him all other things were made to exist.”—Colossians 1:17; Revelation 3:14.

Depicting the Son of God as wisdom is appropriate, since he was the One who revealed Jehovah’s wise purposes and decrees. During his prehuman existence, Jesus was God’s Word, or Spokesman. (John 1:1) He is described as being “the power of God and the wisdom of God.” (1*Corinthians 1:24,*30) What a beautiful description of the Son of God, whose fondness for mankind moved him to give his life as a ransom in their behalf!—John 3:16.

Does this scripture refer to Jesus? If not, how was wisdom produced? Why is Wisdom Talking? What thoughts do the readers have on this?

 

[BibleSteve]

Biblesteve, if God created everthing through a creature named Jesus, then you are directly contradicting what God Himself has said about creation. He said he did it BY HIMSELF. He even asks “who was with me?”

Thank you Michael for this reasoning point.

It is the exact same situation with the word “savior”.

At Isaiah 43:11 God says: “Besides me there is no savior.

(Judges 3:9) And the sons of Israel began to call to Jehovah for aid. Then Jehovah raised a savior up for the sons of Israel that he might save them, Oth′ni·el the son of Ke′naz, the younger brother of Ca′leb.

I’m saying that Jehovah provided salvation THROUGH Othniel (who was also called savior). Would you agree with this statement?

At Judges 3:9, the same Hebrew word (moh·shi′a‛, rendered “savior” or “deliverer”) that is used at Isaiah 43:11 is applied to Othniel, a judge in Israel, but that certainly did not make Othniel Jehovah, did it? A reading of Isaiah 43:1-12 shows that verse 11 means that Jehovah alone was the One who provided salvation, or deliverance, for Israel; that salvation did not come from any of the gods of the surrounding nations.

Thank you for the opportunity to reason from the Scriptures with you.

 

[BibleSteve]

He is the firstborn of creation because it is through Him that all things were created, and hence he has preeminence over creation. By His death and ressurrection, he is also the “firstborn of the dead” and hence has preeminence over that as well.

Jesus is firstborn over creation because all things came to be through him and thus, by right, he is preeminent over all creation. The creator always has preeminence over his creation. He is firstborn over the dead because by His death and resurrection he has defeated the forces of sin and death and thus has preeminence over them.

I would argue that “firstborn of creation” shows Jesus is part of the creation and being called “firsborn from the dead” simply means he was dead. Here’s why…

Before Colossians 1:15, the expression “the firstborn of” occurs upwards of 30 times in the Bible, and in each instance that it is applied to living creatures the same meaning applies—the firstborn is part of the group. “The firstborn of Israel” is one of the sons of Israel; “the firstborn of Pharaoh” is one of Pharaoh’s family; “the firstborn of beast” are themselves animals.

This point is also made by Jesus being called “firstborn of the dead”. He was part of the group being “dead”.

What, then, causes some to ascribe a different meaning to it at Colossians 1:15?

Is it Bible usage or is it a belief to which they already hold and for which they seek proof?

Now, specifically on the phrase “firstborn from the dead”. Obviously, Jesus was not the first resurrection in the Bible, so Trinitarians will see this as proof the word “firstborn” has another meaning, suggesting it means things like prime, most excellent, most distinguished. However, Jesus was “first” chronologically in a very special way. He was the first raised from the dead to endless life. Everyone else previously resurrected later died again.

 

[BibleSteve]

That being said, I agree with BibleSteve that Jesus forgiving sins does not necessarily make Him God. An argument could be made that the same authority given to priests to exercise God’s power was also given to Jesus.

Dear BostonCatholic,

Thank you for mentioning this. It’s nice to see confirmation from someone else that the argument about Jesus forgiving sins doesn’t PROVE he’s God. It does fit with the model that he was authorized to do so by YHWH, like the apostles were

 

[BibleSteve]

By the way, speaking of apostles… Here’s a little Trinity reasoning point:

Why was the word “apostle” appropriate to use for the group of men Jesus selected? What meaning did it have? Why was the same word used for Jesus?

Here’s why:

The Greek word a·po′sto·los is derived from the common verb a·po·stel′lo, meaning simply “send forth (or off).” (Mt 10:5; Mr 11:3) Its basic sense is clearly illustrated in Jesus’ statement: “A slave is not greater than his master, nor is one that is sent forth [a·po′sto·los] greater than the one that sent him.” (Joh 13:16) In this sense the word also applies to Christ Jesus as “the apostle and high priest whom we confess.” (Heb 3:1; compare Mt 10:40; 15:24; Lu 4:18,*43; 9:48; 10:16; Joh 3:17; 5:36,*38; 6:29,*57; 7:29; 8:42; 10:36; 11:42; 17:3, 8, 18, 21-25; 20:21.) Jesus was sent forth by God as his appointed and commissioned representative.

Jesus sent forth these men and called them apostles. We are not confused about Jesus and the apostles being part of a Trinity.

However,Jehovah sent forth Jesus and called him an apostle, but Trinitarians want to believe that Jesus is Jehovah.

The logic seems inconsistent.

 

[b_justb]

BibleSteve:

Trinitarians want to believe that Jesus is Jehovah.

The logic seems inconsistent.

You do not understand the Trinity. It is your logic that is flawed because you assign to the Trinity what is not there and then speak against it.

No Christian thinks the Son is the Father. The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit are not confused. You really need to know what you’re talking about before attempting to antagonise. You just look like a dolt when you do this. You deny the Trinity, so be it. But under no circumstances are you to attempt to mock anyone who believes in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.

Suggested readings:
Saint Pope Leo the Great’s (famous) Tome to Flavian (See item 3 in the link)

Tertullian’s Apology

 

[Bishopite]

1. Why did he say that he did not come of his “own initiative” but was sent?
   John 8:42, 1 John 4:9

Because the Trinity is three persons one God.

1. Why did Jesus not know the “day and the hour” of the Great Tribulation
   but God did? Matt. 24:36

Because Jesus emptied Himself willingly taking on human flesh.
Phil 2:6-7 “Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality with God something to be grasped. Rather, he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, coming in human likeness; and found human in appearance,”

1. Who did Jesus speak to in prayer?

God the Father three persons one God.

1. How did he “appear before the person of God for us”? Heb. 9:24

Read the next verse “Not that he might offer himself repeatedly, as the high priest enters each year into the sanctuary with blood that is not his own;” Jesus offers to the Father His perpetual sacrifice on the cross on our behalf; it transends time.

1. Why did Jesus say “the Father is greater than I am”? John 14:28,
   Php. 2:5, 6

Greater means positionally NOT in substance like the President is greater positionally than I am but we both are equal in our human natures.

1. Who spoke to Jesus at the time of his baptism saying “this is my son”?
   Matt. 3:17 8.

Redundant, God the Father.

1. How could he be exalted to a superior position? Php. 2:9, 10

Again, it goes along with a correct understanding of John 14:28 superior position doesn’t always mean superior in nature. Jesus is simply saying God is positionally superior like the man is positionally superior as the head of the houshold but is NOT superior in nature above the woman.

1. How can he be the “mediator between God and man”? 1Tim. 2:5

You answered that one in Heb 9:24. Jesus offers a perpetual sacrifice to the Father for His oblation on the cross was/is eternal.

1. Why did Paul say the “the head of Christ is God”? 1Cor. 11:30

Positionally not in their nature.

1. Why did Jesus “hand over the Kingdom to his God” and “subject
   himself to God”? 1Cor. 15:24, 28

Three persons differing role in the salvation process as the husband and wife share differing responsibilities, yet both are equal in their “nature” or “substance.”

1. Who does he refer to as “my God and your God”? John 20:17

"My Lord and my God: this forms a literary inclusion with the first verse of the gospel: “and the Word was God.” (usccb.org)

1. How does he sit at God’s right hand? Ps. 110:1, Heb. 10:12,

This is one of the verses that JW’s take literalistically. Jesus in heaven isn’t actually sitting down since gravity doesn’t any longer affect Him, so Scripture here is using human language in order to explain this heavenly reality. Jesus is at the right hand of God means He is as important as God in authority, which shows He is God.

1. Why does John say “no man has seen God at any time”? John 1:18

He means no [sinful] man because of Rom 3:23. The fall of Adam and Eve kinda messed up our relationship with God; we are born with original sin, Rom 5:12.

1. Why did not people die when they saw Jesus? Ex. 30:20

Because He emptied Himself taking on the form and likeness of man and He has a human nature which allows Him to live among us. He also has a divine nature called the hypostatic union.

1. How was Jesus dead and God alive at the same time? Acts 2:24

His phyiscal body died as ours do so in one sense God (the Son) did die, but in another sense, He is always eternal. When we die our souls are always alive and go to heaven or hell forever.

1. Why did he need someone to save him? Heb. 5:7

He didn’t but willingly offered Himself up to the Father, Phil 2:5-7

1. Who is reffered to prophetically at Prov. 8:22-31?

Notice it says He was “begotten” not made as the earliest creeds Apostles/Nicean affirm. Begotten not made, one is being with the Father…