stumbled during a debate with a jehovahs witness

[bogeydogg]

It has happened to me because I grew up LDS and a few good Christians asked me questions I could not answer which helped me to the true Faith. That is what I meant. That is why I am no longer LDS.

God Bless

 

[ajcstr]

No, they don’t have an answer for everything. If they did, I wouldn’t have left that way of thinking and decided to become Catholic. JW’s are not that tough to deal with, IF you know what to throw at them. The problem is getting them to return or stick around when they get cornered. The truth is on the Church’s side and we know that. Getting them to see reason is no different than any other anti-Catholic sect. Establishing who has the authority given to them by Jesus Christ is key to any debate. All roads lead to Rome…

So, If I may, what would you say was the first “seed” that led you to doubt the JW, and what was the final straw that led you into the Church?

I engage the JW every time they visit. They may come back once or twice, but never after that. I have not been successful in verse to verse debates. And the last group that came told me that the Church strayed immediately after the death of the last apostle. I always thought they at least felt that Constantine dealt the “pagan” blow. That was my downfall last discussion.

 

[chazcheh]

Why is he using a Catholic book to define his 1872 founded belief? Strange.

A good article on this website, catholic.com/tracts/distinctive-beliefs-of-the-jehovahs-witnesses

Which has within it:

Is Christ God?

1. “Christ is God’s Son and is inferior to him.” Given in support of this position are these verses: “And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, ‘This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased’” (Matt. 3:17). “I proceeded and came forth from God” (John 8:42). “If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I” (John 14:28). “I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God” (John 20:17). “The head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Cor. 11:3). “When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one” (1 Cor. 15:28).

At first glance these citations seem imposing. It does seem that Christ is inferior to God the Father in some sense. But the New Testament also has verses which clearly show Christ and the Father to be equals. For example, there is John 10:30: “I and the Father are one.” Or, “He who has seen me has seen the Father” (John 14:9). Or, “All that the Father has is mine” (John 16:15). Or, “The Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God” (John 5:18). Or, “[Jesus], though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be gasped” (Phil. 2:6). These seem to contradict the other verses.

How do we make sense of all this? By keeping in mind that Jesus is both God and man. Some verses, such as these last five, refer exclusively to his Godhead. Others refer to his humanity. So far as he is God, Jesus is equal to the Father. Christ’s human nature, though, is created and is therefore inferior to the Father. But to focus on this aspect of Christ to the exclusion of his divine nature is a gross misunderstanding of who and what the Bible says Jesus Christ is. Other verses cited by the Witnesses, such as Matthew 3:17, show merely that Christ is God’s Son, not that he is inferior (in fact, John 5:18 shows that being God’s Son is being equal to God).

This supports the haydock commentary in the Douay Rheims translation:

“The Son also himself shall be subject unto him: That is, the Son will be subject to the Father, according to his human nature, even after the general resurrection; and also the whole mystical body of Christ will be entirely subject to God, obeying him in every thing.”

In brief, 1 Cor 15:28 is explained by explaining the Hypostatic Union.

See this is where I get confused. Why does Jesus in some parts of the bible refer to himself as the son of God and others refers to himself as being God.

Cant this be seen is being contradictory of Jesus? Why is one to believe one argument, Jesus as only son of God, or Jesus as being God? if there are contradictory responses from Jesus himself? Am I wrong by thinking like this? Explanation please…

 

[T_More]

So, If I may, what would you say was the first “seed” that led you to doubt the JW, and what was the final straw that led you into the Church?

I engage the JW every time they visit. They may come back once or twice, but never after that. I have not been successful in verse to verse debates. And the last group that came told me that the Church strayed immediately after the death of the last apostle. I always thought they at least felt that Constantine dealt the “pagan” blow. That was my downfall last discussion.

In a word, authority. Anyone can “claim” they have truth, and in essence, they are saying that they have authority. But the fact is, outside the Church, no one can claim for this for themselves, it must be given to them by Jesus Christ.

 

[ajcstr]

This just gets the back of my hair standing up - PLEASE - if anybody gets “visited” in the near future, address this gem that appears on page 8 of the December 2011 Awake magazine. The article deals with the attacks on the Bible through history (The title is kind of ironic though - "THEY TRIED TO KEEP GOD’S WORD FROM THE MASSES):

“The Catholic hierarchy certainly knew that
many of its teachings were based, not on
the Bible, but on church tradition. Doubtless,
this is one of the reasons for their reluctance
to allow their faithful to have access
to the Bible. By reading it, people would become
aware of the incompatibility between
their church doctrine and Scripture.”

They make it like the Church hid the fact that Sacred Tradition was a cornerstone of doctrine.

The article also refers to the burning of Bibles (which I believe BOTH the Catholics and Protestants did). How would the NWT have fared under Luther or Calvin I wonder?

 

[bogeydogg]

See this is where I get confused. Why does Jesus in some parts of the bible refer to himself as the son of God and others refers to himself as being God.

Cant this be seen is being contradictory of Jesus? Why is one to believe one argument, Jesus as only son of God, or Jesus as being God? if there are contradictory responses from Jesus himself? Am I wrong by thinking like this? Explanation please…

The thing is that God cannot begin to do anything. I know this is going to be philosophy speak but this is the answer I can best give to your question.

Aristotle taught that within contingent beings (us for example who rely on food water air and parents for our lives) being depends on two things; one potentiality (think potential energy like a rock sitting at the top of the hill) and actuality (the potential being now real).

The Bible teaches that God does not change.

Augustine taught that since God does not change we cannot really speak of God ever purposing to do anything. In other words if God intends to do something it is done.

Thomas taught that God has no potentiality, that is He cannot change because He is pure actuality.

The Bible says that the Son is the incarnate word of God.

So if God is eternal, and is pure actuality, then anything is of God (Spirit and Word) must also be eternal. That is God having existed for all eternity did suddenly speak one day and the Word came to be, the Word is real and present with God for as long as God has been.

So Christ, in taking on human flesh, becomes incarnate, but in fashion becomes any less God. So He is always the Word, always the Son, always God. So he is right when He speaks of Himself as the Son of God and as God Himself.

It is a mystery because we are not as God is, but if we allow ourselves to expand out thoughts to try an encompass, at least analogically, what the Bible says about God, it is not contradictory.

God Bless

 

[Sacred_Heart_1]

Ok guys so today I saw two JW’s walking in my in-laws neighborhood and I knew they would come knocking. So I answered and started to listen. Well I had been reading Jason Everts book “Answering Jehovah’s Witnesses” and was doing pretty good and even got about a confused look on their face. However when it came to Jesus being God I qouted that Jesus answered the pharisees by saying “I Am” and even made the connection to the old testament in which God called himself “I Am” as well. Well unfortunately he spoke Spanish and my Spanish is not the greatest so my answer was really weak. He threw 1 Corinthians 15:28 “when everything is subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all” Now he quoted it in Spanish and my translating is very weak. He asks “How can Jesus be God if he was subjected to God?” Any help is appreciated.

Jesus says, My Father is greater than I.

 

[Destined4more]

One question I have never figured out is why did Jesus say, “Father why have you forsaken me” Mark 15:34?

Also in Luke, he says, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”

Many other scriptures say that he went out to pray. In all these situations was he talking to himself and praying to himself?

 

[bmullins]

One question I have never figured out is why did Jesus say, “Father why have you forsaken me” Mark 15:34?

Also in Luke, he says, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”

Many other scriptures say that he went out to pray. In all these situations was he talking to himself and praying to himself?

No, he was talking to the Father. Maybe this will help.

 

[Destined4more]

Okay according to your chart

Father =/= Son
Father =/= Holy Spirt
Holy Spirt =/= Son

BUT God = Father + Son + Holy Spirit. Is this correct?

How come your chart doesn’t have scriptures in the middle similar to the sides?

 

[bmullins]

Okay according to your chart

Father =/= Son
Father =/= Holy Spirt
Holy Spirt =/= Son

BUT God = Father + Son + Holy Spirit. Is this correct?

How come your chart doesn’t have scriptures in the middle similar to the sides?

Correct. I didn’t make the chart, so I don’t know why they didn’t include them. If you’d like to start a separate thread on the subject, I would gladly supply those scriptures.

 

[DTrent]

That was a very good q. Why not reason on it?

 

[jcrichton]

They will tell you that they are being enlightened. This is a process according to them. I asked my friend about this enlightenment. I said that when a JW is enlightened they make a 180 deg turn as to their first interpretation to something different.

Enlightenment should be that a particular topic is expanded in explanation and understanding and not completely erased or changed. She had nothing to say about that. They have a scripture verse about this enlightenment but I can’t recall it right now.

They have an answer to everything.

If you don’t agree with them and they can’t indoctrinate you ,you are no longer welcome. Anyway if you reach that point you know they are not teaching truth so you would leave on you own.

…the Mormons too fall into that category: indoctrinate or reject!

…they only “seem” to have an answer to everything… in their indoctrination they spend years feeding their theology to their new members… and I suspect that they continue the same trend as when they reach out to new potential members: ‘here’s what the Bible say because our theologeans say so.’

…interesting that they fail to note simple Truth: Jesus is the only Way and the Name Given by which all can be saved is not the compound YHWH-Elohim but Jesus! (only a single point among many)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

We all know very well how the Watchtower has “translated” many verses relating to the Deity of Christ differently than most bibles preceding theirs. A predicament they find themselves in is that their is no consistency in their “translation” on who and what Jesus really is. Is Jesus God, or a god? He of course is one or the other, but not both.

Their NWT specifically without a doubt calls Jesus God (with a capital G) in Isaiah 9:6, Matthew 1:23, John 20:28.

Yet in other verses they call Jesus “a god” : John 1:1, John 1:18 (only begotten god,) John 10:33

I have not had a chance to actually ask a JW about this specific question with regards to their translation. As a previous poster mentioned, they do have very well thought out replies to points that are brought up to them that appear to contradict their belief. I wonder if they have a crafty answer for something that appears to be a glaring inconsistency with how they describe the Lord Jesus?

…that is a mayor problem that they do not accept: if Jesus is God then they are rejecting God by denying Jesus’ Divinity; on the other hand, if Jesus is a god then they are defying Yahweh God when Yahweh Himself Reveals that He is the Only God and that there Exists no God other than Him and that neither bebore Him nor after Him was there any god Created/came into Existence!

…another quite similar problem is having two Lords–even if one were to claim that the Father is LORD and that the Son is Lord, Scriptures state that there is only One Lord of lords and King of kings: Jesus!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

That is the verse thanks.

I find they are extremely good at twisting scripture to their way of thinking and that is frustrating to me. Compared to the person I talk to I am a babe in the woods. But I am learning S L O W L Y---------

…remember that one can have a great amount of human wisdom but to Yahweh God that person is but an insignificant finite being!

It is God’s Own Wisdom, given to us by the thrird Penson of God, the other Paraclete, that allows to understand both our finite being and the Word (Wisdom) of God.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Glad someone mentioned Jon 1:1, I guess I should have. I was going to cover this but it seemed long, but now its been broached well why not? We all swim in deep water here right?

If you understand the structure of the Greek there is actually no way to render the verse “…a god.”

First off John 1:1,2 is a poem. The structure is two couplets. The first and fourth lines begin and end with the same declaration while the last noun of the first line is the first of the second, the second the third. So the couplets are 1&4 which is an overall declaration and 2&3 which tell us something specific. It would look like this without verse markers.

Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος
καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν
καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος
οὗτος ἦν ἐν ἀρχῇ πρὸς τὸν θεόν

For those who can’t read Greek, which I admit I am still learning and started learning because I came out of the LDS group and have some JW friends, it reads thus…

In beginning was the word
and the word was with the God
and God was the word
he was in beginning with the God

Now if you have had this discussion with JW’s they have told you there is no indefinite article in the Greek (there is no ‘a car’ there is only ‘car’) and they are right, and if the third line of the poem read “and the word was God” they would have an argument right? Well, no.

The reason why is the word that John uses for “God”. The Greek word for God is Theos, as in theology, and John uses two different words in the poem.

θεόν-“Theon”; gender neutral word for God.

θεὸς-“Theos”; masculine word for God.

Now when theon is used and if there is no definite article in front of the word then we can, but not necessarily must, assume ‘a’ may be used. For example, the JW’s have no problem inserting “the” before ἀρχῇ-“archae”; beginning, even though it could be rendered “In a beginning” this would clearly be outside the author’s intent so no one reads it this way.

So “a god” might be appropriate? The problem is both times John uses theon he precedes it with this word, “τὸν”, and that word means, “the”, so there is no doubt which God John is talking about.

The one time “the” does not precede the word “God” in the poem John uses the masculine form θεὸς, and in Greek you can never assume the indefinite article, you must always assume the definite article precedes the masculine form of any noun. In other words it is not “a car” but “this car”. That is why the proper reading of the Lord’s Prayer is “deliver us from the Evil One” πονηρός-“ponaeros” rather than “deliver us from evil” πονηρόν-“ponaeron”.

So if we want to want to insert all of the articles into the third line of the poem, as the JW’s insist, then it will read thus…

καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος

and (the) God was the word

In other words, you actually can’t translate this verse the way the JW’s do and remain faithful to the text.

That is why the JW “translation” is actually a “interpretation” and is not valid in this or any time.

God Bless

…but in either rendering (“a” or “the”) we have the issue of either God (One and Only God: as One Name: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) or god–the latter would make that religious affiliation one that worships a God and a god; not a monotheistic religion which goes against God’s defintion of Who He is and what His worshipers must do!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

See this is where I get confused. Why does Jesus in some parts of the bible refer to himself as the son of God and others refers to himself as being God.

Cant this be seen is being contradictory of Jesus? Why is one to believe one argument, Jesus as only son of God, or Jesus as being God? if there are contradictory responses from Jesus himself? Am I wrong by thinking like this? Explanation please…

I think that you are missing the part that goes: and the Word became flesh!

Jesus as God is equal with the Father and the Holy Spirit… so much so that He claims everything that the Father Has and Gives it to the other Paraclete, the Holy Spirit (St. John 14, 15, 16); it is as the Incarnate Son of God that Jesus puts aside His Divinity to become one with us (Immanuel) and as an Israelite/Hebrew He must abide by the Law (which includes accepting the Baptism of John, not holding on to His Divinity, and allowing the Passion and Death to take place)… as the Son of Man, Jesus is the Perfect Son of the Father… the One Who does the Will of the Father and not His Own (Teaching Method: they shall be Taught by God); still, Jesus never ceased to be God–this is the duality that most people that have a problem with Jesus’ Divinity cannot understand… but Faith is not about human reason and understanding; Faith is about Trusting God’s Word that He Is Who He Says He Is and accepting everything that He Decided to Reveal to us… it is the reason why Abraham did not faulter when asked to sacrifice Isaac and why John the Baptist accepted that he had to deminish for Christ to increase… knowing God’s Word/Salvific Plan/Way is not necessary for Salvation–Trusting God’s Word is!

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

This just gets the back of my hair standing up - PLEASE - if anybody gets “visited” in the near future, address this gem that appears on page 8 of the December 2011 Awake magazine. The article deals with the attacks on the Bible through history (The title is kind of ironic though - "THEY TRIED TO KEEP GOD’S WORD FROM THE MASSES):

“The Catholic hierarchy certainly knew that
many of its teachings were based, not on
the Bible, but on church tradition. Doubtless,
this is one of the reasons for their reluctance
to allow their faithful to have access
to the Bible. By reading it, people would become
aware of the incompatibility between
their church doctrine and Scripture.”

They make it like the Church hid the fact that Sacred Tradition was a cornerstone of doctrine.

The article also refers to the burning of Bibles (which I believe BOTH the Catholics and Protestants did). How would the NWT have fared under Luther or Calvin I wonder?

…how expensive was it to have a Bible printed before the printing press was invented? …how many of the “masses” were wealthy and literate? …which was the first book ever printed? …what is the conventional manner in which 21st century Christians dispose of old or misprinted Bibles?

…finally, why have they changed not only the Biblical text from the known original copies of Scriptures in existence but also their theology to reflect the changes that their “scholars” have made to Scriptures?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

One question I have never figured out is why did Jesus say, “Father why have you forsaken me” Mark 15:34?

Also in Luke, he says, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.”

Many other scriptures say that he went out to pray. In all these situations was he talking to himself and praying to himself?

…there’s one particular passage when Jesus is Baptized, the Holy Spirit comes upon Him and the Father claims Him… why does God do this?

…Jesus speaks on His Authority/Divinity as being the Son and Owning everything that Belongs to the Father and then Giving it to the Holy Spirit (St. John 14, 15, 16)–how can that be?

…in the Old Testament Yahweh God Claims to be the Only God, the Only Lord, the Only Creator… but in the New Testament we find that the Holy Spirit is the Lord Giver of Life, and that Jesus is the Word Who Creates everything (seen and unseen) and that He Creates it by Himself and for Himself… and that He Keeps everything (the cosmos) in complete Existence… how can the Father take Credit for Creation, be the Only Creator, and not mind that Jesus takes possession of His Divinity…

…the best way to begin to understand this is revealed to us by the Visitation: Mary visits her relative, Elizabeth; Elizabeth, moved by the Holy Spirit, proclaims Jesus, merely a few days old fetus, her Lord (the Lord of Israel’s Remnant)–Jesus’ Divinity is proclaimed through the revelation of the Holy Spirit (St. Luke 1:39-45–see also 1 Corinthians 2:1-16).

…as for “forsaken me?” Consider that Christ had to take onto Himself the sin of man and that as insignificant a period of time as it may have required it Jesus would be separated from the Union with the Father and Holy Spirit… take into consideration too how we feel when we are separated from our relatives and friends… even when we lose something that we have become accustomed to have (a car, shoe, sports equiptment…)–imagine the immensity and depth of being separated from the Eternal I AM! (In star trek lingo: the q continuum.)

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[jcrichton]

Okay according to your chart

Father =/= Son
Father =/= Holy Spirt
Holy Spirt =/= Son

BUT God = Father + Son + Holy Spirit. Is this correct?

How come your chart doesn’t have scriptures in the middle similar to the sides?

…not + but “and” since the Father is fully God, the Son is fully God, and the Holy Spirit is fully God: “in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.” (not in the names of)

Maran atha!

Angel