[Morganite]

The Bible is not, was not and cannot be the final authority. The Finakl Authority is God Himself.

The early Church had, we presume, copies of most of the Bible rolls used by the Jews. When it came time to choose a replacement for Judas Iscariot, why didn't the eleven consult the Bible for who to choose? If the Bible is the final authority, you would expect to find the solution there.

But they didn't look in the scripture. They prayed and cast lots, believing that the hand of God would make sure that the result of the lottery was his will.

What part did the Bible play in this selection? None!

What did play a part in the selection?

Authorised servants of God sought from Him a revelation that was not to be found in the Bible they had, and God responded as he had promised to do. There is no Final Authority in the Bible. The very idea is ludicrous.

God is either the Final Authority or else he is not God.

Making the Bible greater than God is a folly that has cost the Christian world, including the Watch Tower, dearer than they know.

Looking into an old book to find the will of God while ignoring God is too ludicrous for words.


MORGANITE


:)

[arcura]

Jesus Christ is God!
The Bible Proves it.
John 14:28 - Jesus says, "The Father is greater than I."
The Father is "greater" than the incarnate Christ in terms of position because Christ's humanity is a creation, though in His divinity He is equal to the Father.
Hebrews 2:9 says that Jesus was made for a while "lower than the angels" at the Incarnation.
Matthew 11:11 says there has never been a man "greater than John the Baptist: yet he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." Does this mean John does not have a human nature? Does this mean those in heaven, who are greater than John, have a different nature?
If John the Baptist is the greatest man to ever live, and if Jesus was just a man, does that mean John the Baptist was greater than Jesus, superior to Him by nature? Does that mean Jesus and John could not have both had a human nature?
John 17:3 - "And this is eternal life, that they know You the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent." The argument is that Jesus can't be God if the Father is the "only true God," and was praying to God here.
God the Father is "the only true God." This statement is completely in harmony with the doctrine of the Trinity: One God in three Persons. Christ's statement does not entail a denial that He too is God.
Christ was affirming the monotheism of the Jews, that there is only one God. This monotheism is the basis of the Trinity.
Christ is true God and true man (John 1:1, 14; Col. 2:9; John 8:58 & Ex. 3:14), and as a man, He prayed to the Father.
John 20:17 - "I ascend to My Father and to your Father, to My God and to your God." How can the Father be His 'God' if Christ is God? How can God have a God?"
"I believe that Jesus is both God and man. Here, he speaks in reference to His human nature. As a man the Father is His God - just as He is ours. He calls the Father His God because He is His God whom He worships, prays to and needs in His life just as we do."
This verse is a clear reference to the Hypostatic Union of Christ (He was fully God and man).
Rev. 3:14 - "These are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the source of God's creation."
Notice the text does not say Christ was created. The Greek word translated as "source" or "origin" is arche. It connotes "the eternal source of all that is."
In Revelation 21:6 Jehovah is called the "Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.. . I shall be His God and He shall be My Son." But Jesus is called the "Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end" in Revelation 22:13. How Jesus and Jehovah can both be the "Alpha and the Omega." Does this mean that Jehovah God had a "beginning," because arche is used to describe Him? Here arche means "the source of all being." Jesus is the source of the creation of God because he is the creator of all things. John 1:1-3 says Jesus (the Word) created "all things.. . And without Him was made nothing that was made."
If Christ was created, He would have had to have created Himself, which is impossible.
Colossians 1:15-17 - Jesus is called the "first-born of all creation. For in Him were all things created.. . He is before all and by Him all things were created." Some think this means Jesus is the first created being.
"First-born" here does not refer to time, but to preeminence. It is a title given by a father to his son. Isaac, Jacob and Ephraim received the blessing of the "first-born," though they were not biologically the first sons born to their parents.
The text doesn't say Jesus was created. If so, St. Paul would have said Jesus created all other things, but he did not. Jesus is the Creator of all things. He is God. He is given the title "first-born" as the title of His preeminence and because He is eternally begotten by the Father.
Colossians 1:15-17 means that Christ created everything.
Now let’s take a look at Isaiah 44:24: "This is what the Lord says, your Redeemer who formed you in the womb: 'I am the Lord, who has made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself.'" If Christ created "all things," it says that the Lord God - the Hebrew word used here is Yahweh (Jehovah) - did it by Himself.
I believe God is not a God of confusion, but of order and truth. Since He inspired Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16), Scripture cannot contradict itself.
Look at John 1:1-3 - "In the beginning was the Word, the Word was with God, and the Word was God.. . All things were made by Him: and without Him was made nothing that was made."
The Jehovah’s Witnesses Bible changes John 1:1 the passage to read, "the Word was a god" . Then is Christ the "true" God or a "false" God. They will say a "true" god, but that He is not the One True Almighty God. Then please explain that Jehovah God commands us to have no other God besides Him (Ex. 20:3). Christ is either the One True God, or He is a false god (cf. Isa. 43:10; 44:6-8; John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:4; 1 Tim. 2:5; James 2:19).
Christ is here clearly identified as God, the Creator of all things. Notice that Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created" everything in the universe. This means Christ is God.
"Thomas answered, and said to [Jesus]: 'My Lord and My God'" (John 20:28). The Greek reads: ho kurios mou kai ho theos mou ("the Lord of me and the God of me"). If the Witnesses argue that in John 20:28 Thomas was exaggerating about Jesus, point out that if Jesus was not God, Thomas would have been blaspheming and Jesus would have rebuked him, but He didn't - He clearly approves of what Thomas said.
The JWs argue that Thomas referred to Jesus as "Lord" and then to the Father as "God," respond that there is no evidence for this in the text and Thomas was directly addressing Jesus, not the Father.
Revelation 22:6 - "And the Lord God of the spirits of the prophets (ho kurios ho theos) sent His angel to show His servants the things which must be done shortly."
Who is the Lord God who sent His angel? Witnesses say it is Jehovah, but Revelation 22:16 (just ten verses later) says: "I Jesus have sent my angel, to testify to you these things in the Churches." Jesus is "the Lord God of the spirits of the prophets" spoken of in verse 6.
Luke 12:8-9 - "And I tell you, every one who acknowledges Me before men, the Son of man also will acknowledge before the angels of God; but he who denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God."
Matthew 13:41 says, "The Son of man will send His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all causes of sin and all evildoers." Jesus and God are synonymous.
Genesis 18:25 and Joel 3:12 - Jehovah is the Judge of the world.
Matthew 25:31-46, John 5:27, 9:39; Romans 14:10; 2 Corinthians 5:10; and 2 Timothy 4:1 say that Jesus Christ is the Judge of the world. How can Jesus and Jehovah both be the supreme Judge?
Exodus 3:15-18 - "Then Moses said to God, 'If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, "The God of your fathers has sent me to you," and they ask me, "What is His Name?" what shall I say to them?' God said to Moses, 'I AM WHO I AM.'.. . 'Say this to the people of Israel, "I AM has sent me to you. . . The Lord, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you." This is My Name for ever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.'"
The Hebrew consonants for the divine name, I AM, are YHWH. By inserting the first three vowels for the Hebrew title for God, Adonai, and corrupting the pronunciation, the term JEHOVAH is made. Ask the JWs if "Jehovah" (I AM) is the Name of the one true God.
In John 8:21-59 Jesus repeatedly claims the divine name "I AM" for Himself. The Jews understood that He was calling Himself God and wanted to stone Him for blasphemy (cf. John 5:18, 8:59, 10:30-36). Why would the Jews would seek to stone Jesus if He wasn't claiming to be God, especially since execution by stoning was reserved by Jewish Law for only a few crimes.
Exodus 20:10 - "But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God."
Jesus calls himself "The Lord of the Sabbath" in Mark 2:28, thus identifying Himself as God. Cf., Isaiah 8:13 (referred to in 1 Peter 3:15) and Joel 2:31-32 (quoted in Acts 2:20-21 and Romans 10:13).
Acts 20:28 - "Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God which he obtained with His own Blood."
When did Jehovah ever shed His own Blood. Christ shed His own Blood for the Church. If you argue that this passage should read "by the Blood of His own Son," Greek word son (huios) does not appear. It reads: periepoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou.
There are many references where Christ is said to have been slain and shed His Blood for the Church (cf. Matt. 28:27-28; Mark 14:24; Luke 20:20; Rev. 5:6). And finally Revelation 5:9: "Worthy art Thou to take the scroll and to open its seals, for Thou wast slain and by Thy Blood didst ransom men for God.. . " This clearly refers to Christ as God.
Note: The above is excerpted From ENVOY Magazine
Peace and Kindness,
Fred (arcura) :)

[Morganite]

I'd like to take time to pick the bones out of the arguments put forward b y Envoy magazine. They are flawed, but maybe some other time.

:)

[arcura]

Flawed? I think not, but I would like to see you bone picking when you have the time.
If you are going use the original Greek, I have the answers for that also.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura) :)

[STONY]

Matthew 3:17
And a voice from heaven said, "This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased."

NOW THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PROCLAMATION TO ME FROM GOD PERTAINING TO HIS SON.

[Morganite]

Hebrews 2:9 says that Jesus was made for a while "lower than the angels" at the Incarnation.

The quote in Hebrews is taken from Psalm 8:5

For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.


This is a poor translation, because the word rendered 'angels' is English is elohim in Hebrew, whose original meaning is 'the gods.'


MORGANITE



:)

[STONY]

There Are Numerous Instances Where Kjv Is Mistranslated. The One That Comes To Mind Most Quickly Is, "resist The Devil And He Will Flee From You." In Hebrew It Rerads More Like This, "resist The Devil And He Will Run In Holy Terror." If There Is One Thing I Never Want To Experience It It "holy Terror."

[Morganite]

There Are Numerous Instances Where Kjv Is Mistranslated. The One That Comes To Mind Most Quickly Is, "resist The Devil And He Will Flee From You." In Hebrew It Rerads More Like This, "resist The Devil And He Will Run In Holy Terror." If There Is One Thing I Never Want To Experience It It "holy Terror."

The text AV reads:

James 4:7 (New Testament)

Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you.

It is Koine Greek, not Hebrew, and there is no mention of terror, holy or otherwise.




Your translation is a mistranslation.


MORGANITE



:)

[Hope12]

In conclusion here is my final word on this matter:

Who Is Jesus Christ? The only-begotten Son of God, the only Son produced by Jehovah alone. This Son is the firstborn of all creation. By means of him all other things in heaven and on earth were created. He is the second-greatest personage in the universe. It is this Son whom Jehovah sent to the earth to give his life as a ransom for mankind, thus opening the way to eternal life for those of Adam's offspring who would exercise faith. This same Son, restored to heavenly glory, now rules as King, with authority to destroy all the wicked and to carry out his Father's original purpose for the earth. The Hebrew form of the name Jesus means “Jehovah Is Salvation”; Christ is the equivalent of the Hebrew Ma•shi´ach (Messiah), meaning “Anointed One.”
Is Jesus Christ actually God?
No Jesus Christ is not actually God!
John 17:3, RS: “[Jesus prayed to his Father:] This is eternal life, that they know thee the only true God [“who alone art truly God,” NE], and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” (Notice that Jesus referred not to himself but to his Father in heaven as “the only true God.”)
John 20:17, RS: “Jesus said to her [Mary Magdalene], 'Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'” (So to the resurrected Jesus, the Father was God, just as the Father was God to Mary Magdalene. Interestingly, not once in Scripture do we find the Father addressing the Son as “my God.”)
Does John 1:1 prove that Jesus is God?
John 1:1, RS: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God [also KJ, JB, Dy, Kx, NAB].” NE reads “what God was, the Word was.” Mo says “the Logos was divine.” AT and Sd tell us “the Word was divine.” The interlinear rendering of ED is “a god was the Word.” NW reads “the Word was a god”; NTIV uses the same wording.
What is it that these translators are seeing in the Greek text that moves some of them to refrain from saying “the Word was God”? The definite article (the) appears before the first occurrence of the•os´ (God) but not before the second. The articular (when the article appears) construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas a singular anarthrous (without the article) predicate noun before the verb (as the sentence is constructed in Greek) points to a quality about someone. So the text is not saying that the Word (Jesus) was the same as the God with whom he was but, rather, that the Word was godlike, divine, a god. (See 1984 Reference edition of NW, p. 1579.)
What did the apostle John mean when he wrote John 1:1? Did he mean that Jesus is himself God or perhaps that Jesus is one God with the Father? In the same chapter, verse 18, John wrote: “No one [“no man,” KJ, Dy] has ever seen God; the only Son [“the only-begotten god,” NW], who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.” (RS) Had any human seen Jesus Christ, the Son? Of course! So, then, was John saying that Jesus was God? Obviously not. Toward the end of his Gospel, John summarized matters, saying: “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, [not God, but] the Son of God.”—John 20:31, RS.
Does Thomas' exclamation at John 20:28 prove that Jesus is truly God?
John 20:28 (RS) reads: “Thomas answered him, 'My Lord and my God!'”
There is no objection to referring to Jesus as “God,” if this is what Thomas had in mind. Such would be in harmony with Jesus' own quotation from the Psalms in which powerful men, judges, were addressed as “gods.” (John 10:34, 35, RS; Ps. 82:1-6) Of course, Christ occupies a position far higher than such men. Because of the uniqueness of his position in relation to Jehovah, at John 1:18 (NW) Jesus is referred to as “the only-begotten god.” (See also Ro, By.) Isaiah 9:6 (RS) also prophetically describes Jesus as “Mighty God,” but not as the Almighty God. All of this is in harmony with Jesus' being described as “a god,” or “divine,” at John 1:1 (NW, AT).
The context helps us to draw the right conclusion from this. Shortly before Jesus' death, Thomas had heard Jesus' prayer in which he addressed his Father as “the only true God.” (John 17:3, RS) After Jesus' resurrection Jesus had sent a message to his apostles, including Thomas, in which he had said: “I am ascending.. . To my God and your God.” (John 20:17, RS) After recording what Thomas said when he actually saw and touched the resurrected Christ, the apostle John stated: “These are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” (John 20:31, RS) So, if anyone has concluded from Thomas' exclamation that Jesus is himself “the only true God” or that Jesus is a Trinitarian “God the Son,” he needs to look again at what Jesus himself said (vs. 17) and at the conclusion that is clearly stated by the apostle John (vs. 31).
Does Matthew 1:23 indicate that Jesus when on earth was God?
Matt. 1:23, RS: “'Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and his name shall be called Emman´u-el' (which means, God with us [“God is with us,” NE]).”
In announcing Jesus' coming birth, did Jehovah's angel say that the child would be God himself? No, the announcement was: “He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High.” (Luke 1:32, 35, RS; italics added.) And Jesus himself never claimed to be God but, rather, “the Son of God.” (John 10:36, RS; italics added.) Jesus was sent into the world by God; so by means of this only-begotten Son, God was with mankind.—John 3:17; 17:8.
It was not unusual for Hebrew names to include within them the word for God or even an abbreviated form of God's personal name. For example, Eli´athah means “God Has Come”; Jehu means “Jehovah Is He”; Elijah means “My God Is Jehovah.” But none of these names implied that the possessor was himself God.
What is the meaning of John 5:18?
John 5:18, RS: “This was why 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.”
It was the unbelieving Jews who reasoned that Jesus was attempting to make himself equal with God by claiming God as his Father. While properly referring to God as his Father, Jesus never claimed equality with God. He straightforwardly answered the Jews: “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing.” (John 5:19, RS; see also John 14:28; John 10:36.) It was those unbelieving Jews, too, who claimed that Jesus broke the Sabbath, but they were wrong also about that. Jesus kept the Law perfectly, and he declared: “It is lawful to do good on the sabbath.”—Matt. 12:10-12, RS.
Does the fact that worship is given to Jesus prove that he is God?
At Hebrews 1:6, the angels are instructed to “worship” Jesus, according to the rendering of RS, TEV, KJ, JB, and NAB. NW says “do obeisance to.” At Matthew 14:33, Jesus' disciples are said to have “worshiped” him, according to RS, TEV, KJ; other translations say that they “showed him reverence” (NAB), “bowed down before him” (JB), “fell at his feet” (NE), “did obeisance to him” (NW).
The Greek word rendered “worship” is pro•sky•ne´o, which A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature says was also “used to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before a person and kissing his feet, the hem of his garment, the ground.” (Chicago, 1979, Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker; second English edition; p. 716) This is the term used at Matthew 14:33 to express what the disciples did toward Jesus; at Hebrews 1:6 to indicate what the angels are to do toward Jesus; at Genesis 22:5 in the Greek Septuagint to describe what Abraham did toward Jehovah and at Genesis 23:7 to describe what Abraham did, in harmony with the custom of the time, toward people with whom he was doing business; at 1 Kings 1:23 in the Septuagint to describe the prophet Nathan's action on approaching King David.
At Matthew 4:10 (RS), Jesus said: “You shall worship [from pro•sky•ne´o] the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.” (At Deuteronomy 6:13, which Jesus is evidently here quoting, appears the personal name of God, the Tetragrammaton.) In harmony with that, we must understand that it is pro•sky•ne´o with a particular attitude of heart and mind that should be directed only toward God.
Do the miracles performed by Jesus prove that he is God?
Acts 10:34, 38, RS: “Peter opened his mouth and said: '.. . God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power;.. . He went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed by the devil, for God was with him.'” (So Peter did not conclude from the miracles that he observed that Jesus was God but, rather, that God was with Jesus. Compare Matthew 16:16, 17.)
John 20:30, 31, RS: “Now Jesus did many other signs [“miracles,” TEV, Kx] in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.” (So the conclusion we should properly draw from the miracles is that Jesus is “the Christ,” the Messiah, “the Son of God.” The expression “Son of God” is very different from “God the Son.”)
Pre-Christian prophets such as Elijah and Elisha performed miracles similar to those of Jesus. Yet that certainly is no proof that they were God.
Now if you all want to get into the trinity teaching that is also not biblical and can be disputed also.

Take care,
Hope12

[arcura]

Sorry to disappoint you Hope...
But you can dispute all you want to but it will not change the fact that Jesus is God the son of the one and only Triune God.
Believe as you like, but don't try to convince others that know better. It's a futile task.
Peace and kindness,
Aurcra (Fred)

[STONY]

Morganite, I Don't Know If I Know You. But, I Do Know The Teachers I Have Had In The Past And If My One Teachers Said He Received This Info From Old Manuscripts My Trust Is In Him.

Another One Is "spare The Rod And Spoil The Child." What Was Actually Spoken In Paraphrased Form Is This. "the Man Who Refuses To Bring His Child Up On God's Precepts Hates That Child." How Is That Derived From A Translation? If A Man Doesn't Bring His Child Up On God's Word, He Cares So Little About That Child That He Doesn't Even Care If The Child Grows Up And Splits The Gates Of Hell Wide Open Upon Entry. Can You See The Concept Here?

[arcura]

Stony,
I don't know about Morganite, but I can sure see it.
Thanks much.
Peace and kindness,
arcura (Fred)

[Morganite]

Morganite, I Don't Know If I Know You. But, I Do Know The Teachers I Have Had In The Past And If My One Teachers Said He Received This Info From Old Manuscripts My Trust Is In Him.

Another One Is "spare The Rod And Spoil The Child."

What Was Actually Spoken In Paraphrased Form Is This. "the Man Who Refuses To Bring His Child Up On God's Precepts Hates That Child."

How Is That Derived From A Translation?

If A Man Doesn't Bring His Child Up On God's Word, He Cares So Little About That Child That He Doesn't Even Care If The Child Grows Up And Splits The Gates Of Hell Wide Open Apon [sic] Entry. Can You See The Concept Here?

STONY.

First, "Old Manuscripts" could be anything, not even biblical documents. Which old manuscript did he say it was? It is well to be suspicious of people who say they have read things in "Old Manuscripts" unless they provide references for you to read it yourself. Will you ask him what and where it is?


Second, “Spare the rod and spoil the child,” is not found anywhere in the Bible, neither is it in any of the ancient manuscripts that are copies and edited versions of the original monographs.

The Proverbs (13-24) reads, “He that spareth his rod hateth his son.”

The phrase “spare the rod, spoil the child” is actually from a burlesque poem from the 1600s by Samuel Butler, and is actually about sex. The whole phrase reads:

“Love is a boy by poets styled
Then spare the rod and spoil the child.”

It is a bawdy poem about sex between a fat man and a widow: hardly a decent source of parenting advice. So why is it so often claimed to be a biblical quote? The answer to that is that it is only so claimed to be Biblical by those who are not familiar with the Bible. No Bible scholar or student would fall into such a basic error. Your ‘teacher’ is sermonising on what he mistakenly believes is part of the original text of the Bible. He is wrong.

The phrase does not appear in the Bible, and though I can see the what you are driving at in the long quote it is not correct to say that those words appear in that form, or anything close to it, in the Hebrew Bible text of Proverbs 13.24, which in literal translation is:


"He who holds back his rod is hating his son he, but loving him seeks him with correction."

Bible Hebrew is always terse, never explanisve, and some words must be supplied to make it make sense in English and to make it read elegantly.

Translation must always be done without introducing ideas that are not present in the original. When a translator introduces extended or amplified ideas based on a simple text, he has overstepped the bounds of his science and is 'adding to the scriptures' in an unacceptable way. In those circumstances, he is ”Wresting the scripture” and brings condemnation onto himself.

Peter denounces them with: “ … they that are unlearned and unstable wrest also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

When a sermoniser takes a simple text and amplifies it into something more extensive, then he has left hermeneutical exegesis far behind and is preaching his own ideas that he 'thinks' are based on what is written. In your example he is clearly shown to be wrong.

Paul gives some sound advice to those who hang onto the words of their teachers as if they are handed down on Sinai:

“Prove (test, examine, prove, scrutinise, to see whether a teaching is genuine or not) all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)


When a teacher quotes what he believes is a Bible verse, but it is not in the Bible but in a lewd song, the wise will ask themselves what other major mistakes he has made.



M:)RGANITE

[Hope12]

Jehovah is God Almighty and the father of Jesus Christ, Jehovah's son.

"Read your bible and you will see that this is the truth, when you learn the truth, it will set you free from false teachings.

Take care,
Hope12

[emmiedog9987]

Hello,


Is Jesus the son of God or is Jesus God? What does the Bible say?

Take care,
Hope12

He is both god and son the bible tells you so

[Moparbyfar]

HE IS BOTH GOD AND SON THE BIBLE TELLS YOU SO

We are not meant to kill people, the bible tells us so, yet look at all the "christians" and most other religions who support wars... :(

[Moparbyfar]

My point is that no matter what the bible says, many will twist God's sayings to suit themselves.