Talked to JW's today

[Crusader13]

Even then, Christ was in the presence [alongside] God. They are different beings.

“I do nothing of my own initiative; but just as the Father taught me, I speak these things” (John 8:28)
“I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God” (John 20:17)
“the Father is greater than I am” (John 14:28)

The passage you referenced in John 20:17, when read in the proper context doesn’t pose an issue for those who believe in the Trinity.

Jesus is merely continuing what he has been doing since the beginning of his ministry. All throughout the gospels He has made veiled references as to exactly who He is, that is why on several occasions we read “to those who have ears to hear, let them hear “. Well, not everybody understood what He was saying, that is why He performed miracles in conjunction with many of his statements. However the Pharisees and the Sadducees knew exactly what He was saying. That is why He was charged with blasphemy, during his trial.

We read this clearly in Mark 14: 61-64. “But he remained silent and made no answer. Again the high priest asked him, “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed?” And Jesus said, “I am, and you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.” And the high priest tore his garments and said, “What further witnesses do we need? You have heard his blasphemy. What is your decision?” And they all condemned him as deserving death.”

Being seated at the right hand of power is to be God. He is sharing the same divine throne. And coming with the clouds of heaven is something that only God does, all throughout the Old Testament it is God who comes in the clouds.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

All throughout the gospels He has made veiled references as to exactly who He is,

Find a verse in which Jesus says “I am God”, with no symbolism nor need of interpretation. Just as expressed.

Then, I’ll give up on insisting for seeing Jesus state, not implying, hinting or even indicating because for all 3 interpretation is needed.

 

[OsculeturMeOsculo]

Osee 11:9 doesn’t fit.

 

[adf417]

Crusader13:

All throughout the gospels He has made veiled references as to exactly who He is,

Find a verse in which Jesus says “I am God”, with no symbolism nor need of interpretation. Just as expressed.

Then, I’ll give up on insisting for seeing Jesus state, not implying, hinting or even indicating because for all 3 interpretation is needed.

Its the vs directly following Jesus saying “I am not Michael the arch angel”.

Peace!!!

 

[Crusader13]

Find a verse in which Jesus says “I am God”, with no symbolism nor need of interpretation. Just as expressed.

Then, I’ll give up on insisting for seeing Jesus state, not implying, hinting or even indicating because for all 3 interpretation is needed.

I understand what you’re trying to get at, but we both know that such a verse doesn’t exist with those words. Also we both know that such an argument doesn’t lend itself to a correct understanding of Scripture to begin with. How would you respond if someone asked you to show them the verse which says Jesus is Michael the Archangel?

I believe that Jesus does in fact say that He is God more than once. How else do you explain His charge of blasphemy by the High Priest? He wasn’t condemned to death for claiming to be the Messiah.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Jesus state , not implying, hinting or even indicating because for all 3 interpretation is needed.

This would require interpretation by implying it is meant in such way:

Jesus is “the Holy One” all through scripture

we both know that such a verse doesn’t exist with those words

yet

I believe that Jesus does in fact say that He is God more than once.

But there is a verse in which he identifies himself: “do you say of the one whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world ‘You are blaspheming’ because I said ‘I am God’s son’?” (John 10:36)

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Its the vs directly following Jesus saying “I am not Michael the arch angel”.

Equally nonexistent.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

WTS theology generally does not utilize OT text in discussing Jesus as LORD

That is because Jesus identifies himself in the NT.
Easy peasy

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

what Jesus utilized from the OT about Himself,

Oh yes. Here’s an example:
[Jesus]"He opened the scroll and found the place where it was written: “Jehovah’s spirit is upon me, because he anointed me to declare good news to the poor. He sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives and a recovery of sight to the blind, to send the crushed ones away free, to preach Jehovah’s acceptable year.” With that he rolled up the scroll, handed it back to the attendant, and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were intently fixed on him. Then he began to say to them: “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.” (Luke 4:18-21)
Want more clearer evidencerather than two very basic words of I am, into a full statement of who he says he really was?

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Being sent doesn’t negate His Deity. The Apostles sent one another, that doesn’t negate their equality in humanity.

What’s in question is not his divinity.
Apostles are nonetheless still separate persons, identities.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

To get straight to it, what indicates Jesus could be all three same persons at the same time?

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

The dispute is whether Jesus is also Deity, God, in His own person, by nature.

The problem is Jesus uses no other direct identification of himself.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

He uses terms which only Deity can make.

Well let’s analyze the phrase:
"Jesus said to them “Verily, verily I tell you, before there was an Abraham I am.”
He is undeniably speaking of time of existing since before Abraham.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

Joh 8:54 Jesus answered, If I honour myself, my honour is nothing : it is my Father that honoureth me; of whom ye say, that he is your God:

You ask a lot, how come Jesus doesn’t go around saying He is Deity (God, person of the Son) all the time, is because Jesus came to represent the Father, and seek not His own glory (John 8:50).

Jesus knows the Father:

Joh 8:55 Yet ye have not known him; but I know him: and if I should say, I know him not, I shall be a liar like unto you: but I know him, and keep his saying.

Abraham was actually shown, by the Son (JEHOVAH Immanuel), the future (refer back to OT):

Joh 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.

The Jews then question Jesus age, mocking Him for making such a statement as having known Abraham personally:

Joh 8:57 Then said the Jews unto him, Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast thou seen Abraham?

Jesus responds:

Joh 8:58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

They understood what was stated:

Joh 8:59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

And is again gone over in John 10.

New bold and italics mine ^
Jesus said he existed before Abraham and that his Father had sent him, of course the Pharisees would take it as blaspheme. That would mean he is God’s Son since before Abraham, as if he were a divine being but to them he was flesh.

 

[Crocus]

JW eschatology chart I have on my wall, peppered with references to their sources.

Would you be able to share this chart?

 

[adf417]

Equally nonexistent

And what whappens when you remove the “not”?

 

[adf417]

@ZeugenJehovas i havent seen a response to one of my previous posts. Sorry if i missed it. Can you address at least this part please?

Please stop deflecting and either answer the question directly or admit there actually were no JWs during these time periods prior to Russell.

Peace!!!

 

[Crusader13]

But there is a verse in which he identifies himself: “do you say of the one whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world ‘You are blaspheming’ because I said ‘I am God’s son’?” (John 10:36)

Because they knew what it meant to be God’s son the way that Jesus was using it. Whenever Jesus speaks of His Father He always makes a distinction between “Your Father” and “My father”, like the verse you used in John 20:17 “Your Father and My Father.” In fact, I believe the only time He uses Our Father is in Matthew 6, during His sermon on the Mount when He’s telling the people how THEY should pray.

I would say there is a distinction because we are made God’s children by adoption, but Jesus is His son by nature. The Jewish high council knew this and that is why He was charged with blasphemy. To be God’s son by nature, is to share in His divine nature. That is what Jesus was conveying throughout his ministry. Yet, you’ll also notice that Jesus never claimed to be the Father and He was never accused of being the Father, His claim was being God’s son, a separate person from the Father, but equally God. John 10:30 "The Father and I are one"

I would argue that this is why he makes the distinction in John 20:17. When He says “My God and your God.” He is telling Mary that there is only One God. But why make that distinction? Because He’s been telling people for the last few years, that He is God, but not the same person as the Father. So to prevent the same mistake that non-trinitarians make, He’s emphasizing that there is only ONE God and He’s going back to be with Him, where He’s always been. John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.”

When you start reading it in that context, you’ll see that Jesus was telling people from the beginning who He was, but specifically to THOSE WHO HAVE EARS TO HEAR, LET THEM HEAR. At times it’s important to remember who Jesus was speaking to. You can’t always take verses from the bible and apply them to the 21st century. Jesus was speaking to His contemporaries those were the people from whom he said “THIS GENERATION”. So all the euphemisms that He used, such as coming in the clouds, were clearly understood by Caiaphas and the Jewish council. To others who needed more proof, He would perform miracles to substantiate His claims. Most of His miracles were of healing and casting out demons and raising the dead, to show that by His nature He could also forgive sins, which they clearly knew was something only God could do. We read this clearly in Mark 2.

Again all this was done to show who He was, but only THOSE WHO HAVE EARS TO HEAR got it.

 

[pacloc]

I was not asking about JWs knowing things better. I was asking you personally whether you know everything about Christianity. And if you answer, “No I do not know everything about Christianity”, I was asking what kind of things do you have questions about. Examples could be, “I sometimes wonder why God would allow civilizations like the Native Americans to exist without knowing about Christianity.” or “I don’t understand how it is that God allowing the death of an Angel that became a man somehow brings life to people.” or “If what Christ did brings life to people from before Jesus becoming man, why is it only from people after His death that can be part of the 144,000 co rulers with Christ, weren’t Job and John the Baptist more holy than Rutherford?” or “Why does God have to prove that Satan cannot rule better than God, when it is apparent to all the holy angels that Satan is a liar and that only God created them?” etc.

As for your fixed truths, I was going to mention the same facts that someone else has already mentioned, that Jesus was worshipped explicitly by JWs until 1950. And also that you are wrong about Jesus denying worship, which He never did. If anything in Revelation the lamb is put side by side with “Him on the Throne”, God, and all creation worships.

Also, it is foolish to think that being close to God will eventually make you worthy of saying things like “you heard it said …, but I say …” The thing created will always be infinitely apart from its creator. We as human can only be called “gods” in a very limited way compared to God. Being able to forgive sins and change the law of God are not things that we would forget to say God is really doing, not me.

And further, you seem to have a very wrong view about what the Trinity really is. You keep making comments that are implying that Christians think Jesus is the Father. You should really study the faith you know is in error before deciding it is in error.

 

[ZeugenJehovas]

He always makes a distinction between “Your Father” and “My father”, like the verse you used in John 20:17 “Your Father and My Father.”

&

the only time He uses Our Father is in Matthew 6

On the contrary, Christ denotes a sharing of the Father because they are all united in faith. He does not make a distinction, rather he creates unity. ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.

Hence the understanding that they all have the same heavenly Father. Jehovah God.

He’s been telling people for the last few years, that He is God, but not the same person as the Father.

1 Corinthians 8:6 “for us [Christians] there is one God, the Father”
Jesus is not God for the Christians.

To be God’s son by nature, is to share in His divine nature.

His claim was being God’s son, a separate person from the Father, but equally God.

Supposed evidence: John 10:30 “The Father and I are one”.

Ok then, John 17:11 responds to your misunderstanding of the way Greeks spoke, “I am coming to you. Holy Father, watch over them” [the Apostles/disciples] "on account of your own name, which you have given me, so that they may be ONE JUST AS WE ARE ONE. Clearly it speaks of the unity not of divine equivalence.

He’s been telling people for the last few years, that He is God … To others who needed more proof, He would perform miracles to substantiate His claims.

&

which they clearly knew was something only God could do

Well they knew of Moses “Jehovah then said to Moses: “See, I have made you like God to Pharʹaoh … I will allow Pharʹaoh’s heart to become obstinate, and I will multiply my signs and my miracles in the land of Egypt.” (Exodus 7:1, 3)
Making miracles is not sufficient for someone to be declared God.

He could also forgive sins … Mark 2

Jesus said “In order for you to know that the Son of man has authority to forgive sins on earth…”
Matthew 28:18 He spoke of authority, “All authority has been given to me” so it makes us know he had limited authority which was afterwards unlimited. Not sufficient evidence for proving equality, on the other hand shows he had permission granted to him.