Did you know Jesus is considered as a different god according to scripture?

[TiggerII]

SZ wrote: "I did scan it. It looked rather pathetic. Claims without any proper support."

So please give me a few "claims without any proper support" in my study. - John 1:1c Primer - For Grammatical Rules That Supposedly "Prove" the Trinity.

Here's my original study of John 1:1c - http://examiningthetrinity.blogspot.com/2009/09/definite-john-11c.html

 

[syo]

Jesus is a lesser god.

 

[Subduction Zone]

SZ wrote: "I did scan it. It looked rather pathetic. Claims without any proper support."

So please give me a few "claims without any proper support" in my study. - John 1:1c Primer - For Grammatical Rules That Supposedly "Prove" the Trinity.

Here's my original study of John 1:1c - DEFinite John 1:1c

Call it what it is and you would understand why it is not accepted. It is simply a personal blog. It does not count as a proper authority. You are merely using a "because I said so" argument by referring to yourself. You are not a linguist. You are depending upon the translations of others. Do those people make the same claims that you do? Why not link them if they do. They may be proper scholar, though the odds are that t you will use apologists rather than scholars.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

That's been my general observation. Southern Baptists may be very insular as a denomination, but the Bible learning is so heavily emphasised that I could still easily counter preach to JWs despite everything I've forgotten. But more than others, that group has been rather low on Biblical knowledge.

I think that when groups limit their membership to a narrow minded unregulated cult like learning curriculum, there is always the tendency to lower the intellectual training of said members. The JW's are one of the well known groups around the world who generally suffer from lower education across the board. One of the really sad things about this organisation is that they are actively discouraged from seeking higher education. That is a real shame and as a consequence of this, the following results soon appeared...

Pew Research shows that only 9 percent of Witnesses get undergraduate degrees. That's well below the national average of 30.4 percent and the lowest of any faith group. The likely reason for this trend is the religion's official warnings against college. NPR Feb 2019​

​

****MOD EDIT****, one can easily predict that such individuals are very easily convinced of the truth of false doctrine in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. They promote this on the idea that higher education is spritually dangerous...

A quote from JW.org

Higher education can lead to moral and spiritual dangers​

A Bible proverb says: “The shrewd one sees the danger and conceals himself.” (Proverbs 22:3) Jehovah’s Witnesses feel that the environment in some universities or similar centers of higher learning can pose moral and spiritual dangers. For that reason, many Witnesses choose not to immerse themselves or their children in such an environment. They feel that in centers of higher learning, mistaken ideas such as the following are often promoted:​

My answer to the above is this, if JW's are so worried about secular tertiary education, why not get your own accredited institutions and fix this problem the right way?

Many Christian organisations have invested in their own educational institutions. These are institutions that in many cases have become centers for very high levels of achievement and are at the forefront of academia. However, it appears JW's won't do the same. I believe the reason why is plainly obvious...even their own would turn against them should an investment in critical thinking and knowledge be forthcoming!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

My answer to the above is this, if JW's are so worried about secular tertiary education, why not get your own accredited institutions and fix this problem the right way?

Many Christian organisations have invested in their own educational institutions. These are institutions that in many cases have become centers for very high levels of achievement and are at the forefront of academia. However, it appears JW's won't do the same. I believe the reason why is plainly obvious...even their own would turn against them should an investment in critical thinking and knowledge be forthcoming!

You'd have to ask them. Even Southern Baptist education will do things like promoting a what they call a plain reading of the Bible, truck loads of Bible study amd how to counter claims from other sources, such as secularists and other denominations, from a Biblical perspective. And it's amazing this contradiction that exists between the belief in a simple, plain, face value reading of the Bible but also have classes amd entire universities serve to educate in understand tbe Bible to a great depth. As well, it's known and acknowledged certain words of the original language don't translate to English well, and the meaning of some words have changed since in the past few decades.
But when you are a true believer filled with the Spirit it doesn't matter and you don't really see it as a logical inconsistency. There's even a good bit on Egypt just to know who they were when reading that part of the Bible, but just read the Bible and take it fir what it says it what they claim to do.

 

[TiggerII]

Call it what it is and you would understand why it is not accepted. It is simply a personal blog. It does not count as a proper authority. You are merely using a "because I said so" argument by referring to yourself. You are not a linguist. You are depending upon the translations of others. Do those people make the same claims that you do? Why not link them if they do. They may be proper scholar, though the odds are that t you will use apologists rather than scholars.

Still refusing to answer, I see. Surely someone else here can see the dishonesty of your continued avoidance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Still refusing to answer, I see. Surely someone else here can see the dishonesty of your continued avoidance.

I answered. You did not like the answer. You may have noticed that no one is debating with your nonsense. If you want others to engage with you in a conversation you need to do a better job.

 

[TiggerII]

SZ wrote: "I did scan it. It looked rather pathetic. Claims without any proper support."

So please give me a few "claims without any proper support" in my study. - John 1:1c Primer - For Grammatical Rules That Supposedly "Prove" the Trinity.

Your words above. If you honestly believe them, when are you going to follow through with a few instances of "claims without any proper support"? Just a few will do.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your words above. If you honestly believe them, when are you going to follow through with a few instances of "claims without any proper support"? Just a few will do.

No, if you do not understand an easy explanation you will not understand a complicated one. If one wants to debate online one is never a proper resource. Your claim by referring to yourself amounts to only "Because I said so". If your claims are valid then you can make the arguments here. You can find proper authorities. An amateur scrabbling through an online dictionary is never a proper source in a specialized debate on any topic. That is why I do not claim to be a source. You are not a valid source either. I have not made any argument because there is no need for me or for anyone else to do so yet.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

oooh so you think that the Australian government Royal Comission report on how the JW church not only covered up the sexual assault, but also tried to destroy evidence, is a fallacy?

Knowing that you are JW and are not allowed to actually read outside of watchtowers publications, (we all know for a fact that your denomination actively discourages all of its members from using external resources other than those of Watchtower) more than likely you didnt even read the Australian Royal Comission report before commenting. As evidence of my claim, let me state that if you had of read the report, instead of using the usual non reading standard type of JW answer such as the "you are criticizing others" one would have thought that you would present at least some rational and supported evidence to the contrary...but as is usual with your denomination, you have not!


I suggest that anyone who believes that report (on the sexual abuse failure to report to authorities and subsequent cover up by the JW organization) is influenced by Satan and not really true, is an imbecile. I think i have every right to criticize. If my own denomination that i follow did that, i would do the same to them!

Again, derailing the thread!

If you would just respond to @tigger2 ‘s research, you could point out the “deeply, deeply flawed” arguments. That’s what tigger2 wants, right? You could come off the winner, and not go “offtopic”!

You did say:

Anyway...ill stop my rant about JW here before i waste any more space on them as its offtopic to this thread...

(Oops, too late.)


Wasn’t that your concern?

If we weren’t confident in our message & in defending the Bible’s truth, do you really think we would go from door to door, not knowing who is on the other side?


If we don’t know the answer to a question the householder asks, we will humbly admit ‘we don’t know’, then we’ll find the answer and gladly return.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Your words above. If you honestly believe them, when are you going to follow through with a few instances of "claims without any proper support"? Just a few will do.

My brother, you’re not going to get any pertinent information out of @Subduction Zone , he’s just goading you on, testing your Christian personality & wasting your time.
He’s an atheist, so he has no faith in the Scriptures. He has no vested interest in learning if the trinity is right or wrong. It’s all wrong, to him.

Isn’t that right, SZ?

 

[Subduction Zone]

My brother, you’re not going to get any pertinent information out of @Subduction Zone , he’s just goading you on, testing your Christian personality & wasting your time.
He’s an atheist, so he has no faith in the Scriptures. He has no vested interest in learning if the trinity is right or wrong. It’s all wrong, to him.

Isn’t that right, SZ?

Oh my! You really are not being very honest here. Your false personal attack was uncalled for. I always respond when a response is needed. His argument was so poor that all was required was to point out why it failed. You have to know since you have embarrassed yourself endlessly whenever you try to support your flood myth

 

[Soapy]

Still refusing to answer, I see. Surely someone else here can see the dishonesty of your continued avoidance.

Tigger, it’s nothing new for SZ… it’s his speciality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Tigger, it’s nothing new for SZ… it’s his speciality.

Oh my, violating the Ninth Commandment. I am shocked. The OP used an improper source. One could even insult the writer of it if one wanted to if one wanted without breaking forum rules. So one could say "It looks like the author of that was an idiot" and then show why. The OP was the author of the source that he used as if that was written by a scholar. Pointing out that that amateurish piece was written by someone that was not a reliable source was all that was needed to refute it.

Let me put it another way: Referring to something as source that one wrote is the same as that person saying "Because I said so". Why would I need to respond to a "'Because I said so" argument?

 

[shunyadragon]

Before you reply back with John 1:1 in an English version(which will be addressed below) that capitalized "god" when referring to Jesus know that all punctuation, including what to capitalize or lower case was in the hands of the translator. Its best to let scripture explain scripture. Know that the bible says there is only one Almighty God(Jesus' God and Father). Notice other things IN SCRIPTURE (I didnt write it) are called god- again capital and lower case were up to the translator thats why its important to let the bible translate itself.



1. Yhwh is the only one refered to as Almighty God.
" And I used to appear to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as God Almighty, but with regard to my name Yhwh I did not make myself known to them." Ex 6:3

2. "No God but me"?
"This is what Yhwh says, The King of Israel and his Repurchaser, Yhwh of armies: ‘I am the first and I am the last. There is no God but me.'" Isa 44:6

In the overall context of the bible He is saying he has no equal. There are obviously other gods as we will see. He even says, "Have no other gods besides me" Ex 20:3

3. Other gods but not Yhwh
Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”’? If he called ‘gods’ those against whom the word of God came—and yet the scripture cannot be nullified—" John 10:34-35

"God(Yhwh) takes his place in the divine assembly; In the middle of the gods he judges" Ps 82:1

Jesus and Satan are both gods according to scripure but are not Yhwh
"among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, so that the illumination of the glorious good news about the Christ, who is the image of God, might not shine through." 2 Cor 4:4

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." John 1:1



We can see through the scriptures that other living things can be refered to as god, but there is only 1 Almighty God which is Yhwh(Jehovah is some bibles LORD in some bibles)

There are a number of Gods in the Torah. Whose God is the top God?

 

[Muffled]

That looks like a Jehovah's Witness source. Not exactly reliable. You should try to see what actual biblical scholars say.

I believe JW scholars can't automatically be ruled out despite the fact that they are often wrong. There is no sure thing that any other scholar will be much better. I prefer to look at the logic and see if it is valid.

 

[Muffled]

There are a number of Gods in the Torah. Whose God is the top God?

I believe there are gods mentioned but JHVH is God.

 

[shunyadragon]

I believe there are gods mentioned but JHVH is God.

Yes the Torah talks about other Gods, Some lesser Gods some opposing Gods.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I believe JW scholars can't automatically be ruled out despite the fact that they are often wrong. There is no sure thing that any other scholar will be much better. I prefer to look at the logic and see if it is valid.

There are no JW scholars that I know of. I am very sure that you do not know of any.

And logic is almost surely missing from your toolbox. But if you like we can start with basic logic and then move on to applying it.

 

[Soapy]

What??? Grasp at straws much?

This is just a side question…

What does it mean to ‘Grasp at’ [something]?