JW's Jesus is Archangel Michael?

[Mountain_Climber]

Insofar as the Hebrew household is concerned, it can include kinsmen and on an honorary basis even very close friends: Acts 10:24 "And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them, and had called together his kinsmen and near friends."

 

[Mountain_Climber]

I want to take a minute to comment more about the 8th day circumcision.

The physical circumcision compares to the removal of the veil from off of one's heart. This has gotten confusing for many in that the veil which was upon the heart of those who rejected Christ is often spoken of in a way which can make us think God deliberately placed that veil on their hearts to blind them. But nothing could be further from the truth than that idea is. God was similarly said to have hardened Pharaoh's heart. But this does not work exactly as many think nor exactly as many believe they have used the scriptures to show (places like Romans 9:15-23), for they have not quite understood the setting behind those scriptures. Once one has a completed understanding of circumcision and gotten more background understanding they then are equipped to understand how this hardening of the hearts really works.

Whose primary responsibility was it to open the hearts of the Israelite people? It was primarily their own choice and their own responsibility even as it was Pharaoh's. Now let us proceed to learn that.

1 Samuel 7:3 "And Samuel spake unto all the house of Israel, saying, If ye do return unto the LORD with all your hearts, then put away the strange gods and Ashtaroth from among you, and prepare your hearts unto the LORD, and serve him only: and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines.

What Samuel told the people above has never changed. God has not changed. God places the primary responsibility on us to prepare our hearts so that our hearts are open to him.

Psalms 10:17 "LORD, thou hast heard the desire of the humble: thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear.."

The key is in one's humility as seen above, for, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Psalms 51:17

Psalms 51:17 proves that God hardens no one's heart who has not already well begun hardening it their self.

The situation with the first century Jews whose heart were let wax hard was not about destroying them for there was yet a remnant to be taken from among those hardened ones who would eventually allow their hearts to be softened in response to the preaching of God's word to them. This is where understanding the setting makes all the difference in how we understand the statement that God hardened their hearts. As I proceed on I will try to help you see that.

John the baptist preached, saying, "Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." Matthew 3:3

There what John meant was for them to prepare the way in their hearts and by that to become ready to support and work with the Messiah instead of against him. In this we see that the responsibility to do so was being placed upon the people. Why? Because it is a simple matter of first things first. When anything new is to be built one begins building from the core out. And those who were more readily disposed to soften their hearts would provide that core or nucleus upon which to build. Not that all who at that time would not heed John were now lost but that those of them who were not yet ready to be harvested would need more time before they would choose to allow their hearts to be softened. And it is the word of God which would eventually get to them so that they would become willing.

We see this at Romans chapter 10. Romans 10:14 "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" Many a Jew who are yet hard in their hearts would scoff at that on the basis that they think those of that time all had heard of Jesus but had merely saw through his heresy as they would call it. But if you have been around Christianity for even a short time you should at least be beginning to see how easily one can think they know Jesus when they do not know him at all. And so for them it would take consistent preaching from God's written word to little by little help them to see that they did not really know Jesus and gradually help them to begin to know Jesus. As they begin to know Jesus faith will begin to be born in them. And that birth of faith through the hearing of the word is what begins them being willing to soften their hearts. And that move toward the softening of the heart is the removing of the veil which circumcision represents. It is only a beginning for them like teaching a child from the water of God's word from his or her infancy on up.

I will pause this here but for the addition of one more scripture: Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

 

[savagewind]

I want to take a minute to comment more about the 8th day circumcision.

The physical circumcision compares to the removal of the veil from off of one's heart. This has gotten confusing for many in that the veil which was upon the heart of those who rejected Christ is often spoken of in a way which can make us think God deliberately placed that veil on their hearts to blind them. But nothing could be further from the truth than that idea is. God was similarly said to have hardened Pharaoh's heart. But this does not work exactly as many think nor exactly as many believe they have used the scriptures to show (places like Romans 9:15-23), for they have not quite understood the setting behind those scriptures. Once one has a completed understanding of circumcision and gotten more background understanding they then are equipped to understand how this hardening of the hearts really works.

Whose primary responsibility was it to open the hearts of the Israelite people? It was primarily their own choice and their own responsibility even as it was Pharaoh's. Now let us proceed to learn that.

1 Samuel 7:3 "And Samuel spake unto all the house of Israel, saying, If ye do return unto the LORD with all your hearts, then put away the strange gods and Ashtaroth from among you, and prepare your hearts unto the LORD, and serve him only: and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Philistines.

What Samuel told the people above has never changed. God has not changed. God places the primary responsibility on us to prepare our hearts so that our hearts are open to him.

Psalms 10:17 "LORD, thou hast heard the desire of the humble: thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear.."

The key is in one's humility as seen above, for, "The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Psalms 51:17

Psalms 51:17 proves that God hardens no one's heart who has not already well begun hardening it their self.

The situation with the first century Jews whose heart were let wax hard was not about destroying them for there was yet a remnant to be taken from among those hardened ones who would eventually allow their hearts to be softened in response to the preaching of God's word to them. This is where understanding the setting makes all the difference in how we understand the statement that God hardened their hearts. As I proceed on I will try to help you see that.

John the baptist preached, saying, "Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." Matthew 3:3

There what John meant was for them to prepare the way in their hearts and by that to become ready to support and work with the Messiah instead of against him. In this we see that the responsibility to do so was being placed upon the people. Why? Because it is a simple matter of first things first. When anything new is to be built one begins building from the core out. And those who were more readily disposed to soften their hearts would provide that core or nucleus upon which to build. Not that all who at that time would not heed John were now lost but that those of them who were not yet ready to be harvested would need more time before they would choose to allow their hearts to be softened. And it is the word of God which would eventually get to them so that they would become willing.

We see this at Romans chapter 10. Romans 10:14 "How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?" Many a Jew who are yet hard in their hearts would scoff at that on the basis that they think those of that time all had heard of Jesus but had merely saw through his heresy as they would call it. But if you have been around Christianity for even a short time you should at least be beginning to see how easily one can think they know Jesus when they do not know him at all. And so for them it would take consistent preaching from God's written word to little by little help them to see that they did not really know Jesus and gradually help them to begin to know Jesus. As they begin to know Jesus faith will begin to be born in them. And that birth of faith through the hearing of the word is what begins them being willing to soften their hearts. And that move toward the softening of the heart is the removing of the veil which circumcision represents. It is only a beginning for them like teaching a child from the water of God's word from his or her infancy on up.

I will pause this here but for the addition of one more scripture: Romans 2:29 "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

All these words of yours here are perfect for arguing that Jesus says be disciples, not to be making disciples. Can nobody see it?
"Whose primary responsibility was it to open the hearts of the Israelite people? It was primarily their own choice and their own responsibility"
"prepare your hearts unto the LORD" Each other's hearts?
Psalms 10:17 "LORD, thou hast heard the desire of the humble: thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear.."
"When anything new is to be built one begins building from the core out. "
"And those who were more readily disposed to soften their hearts would provide that core or nucleus upon which to build." Who provides a core with which to build on? The person being built up by Jehovah, not by man.
"for even a short time you should at least be beginning to see how easily one can think they know Jesus when they do not know him at all." Why is that?
"know Jesus" What is the only way to know a person? The way is not by hearing about him. I am reading a biography presently. I realize I will never really know the person if I am never friends with her for real. Preaching about Jesus does not make disciples. Preaching about Jesus just makes some people believe they can know Jesus. I am not against preaching as some people will gladly jump to the conclusion of.

The belief that Jesus, or God, if you are so disposed, says it is a Christian's duty to make disciples is not causing the making of disciples but is really causing the making of idols to Jehovah. The reason? The making of disciples by man is from the outside in, not the inside out.


OK. Now I suppose I have been off topic but arguing to make disciples is a worthless occupation imho.

Then how will they be made? They are not made. They grow. Can anyone say that the vegetables in their garden are made? 1 Corinthians 3:7
Christ has given gifts in men. Ephesians 4:8 But if it is my goal to make someone a disciple and I do then it is me who gave a gift. I am sure you will all think that that is ridiculous. But who is teaching it????????????????????????????? Why is the teaching of it not ridiculous?

 

[Yoshua]

And that is just what happened. The apostles had only the Hebrew Scriptures.....we have their writings and the Christian "traditions" handed down by them is in the Christian scriptures, not in the traditions of an apostate church system. Do you understand the difference?

Hi Jay,
What is the connection with the Hebrew scripture and the writings with the JW organization? How do you connect and reconcile it?

The "wheat" were not going disappear, but their growth was to be stunted by the "weeds". This is made apparent by the fact that the workers were instructed not to uproot the weeds in case they uprooted the wheat along with them. (Matt 13:36-43)

So both have been 'growing together' from the first century all the way to the time of the end (the harvest) It is only at the end times that a distinction was to be made between the two. The reapers are instructed to collect the weeds first and dispose of them. Then the wheat are gathered into the storehouse.

The Bible paints a very clear picture to me.

Then it is clearly emphasized a judgment at the end of the age to separate the unsaved from the saved since this is concerning the kingdom. From this parable until the current settings, what will be the effect of apostasy here? How do you reconcile this parable to the JW org.?

What has that scripture got to do with the apostasy? It is clear that "some" would stand firm for the truth of Christ's teachings. The wheat have been there all along. Many of them were tortured and executed by the church itself for daring to oppose its absolute authority and wicked teachings.
The weeds did not behave in a Christ-like manner but like the Pharisees, imitated their real father. like it or not, this is the foundation of Christendom. If you want to criticise our beginnings, do not fail check out the origins of all the churches of Christendom.... It is shameful, to say the least.

The Reformation did not unite Christians...all it did was break the power of Roman Catholicism and carve Christianity up into even more bickering fragments. Are you proud to be a part of that....? I wasn't. I was relieved to walk away. (Rev 18:4, 5)

Well it is clear that—if the wheat and tares parables does not convey to start a new church, those verses proves that apostasy is not a reason for a church to re-establish; to form a group investigation and start a new organization. Jesus and Paul warned about the coming of false prophets, and how the man of lawlessness will influence the early church.

1 Peter 5:10-11
10. And after you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace, who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you.
11. To Him be dominion forever and ever. Amen.

Jesus and Paul warned us, and told us to do the following:
a. Stand firm (Matt.24;13; 2 Thess. 2:15)
b. The gospel shall be preached in the whole world (Matt. 24:14)
c. We testify to all nations (Matt 24:14)
d. Be on Guard ( Acts 20:31)
e. Command and teach these things. (1 Tim. 4:11)

I encouraged you to do a biblical study.

Why should I will be in shame if there is a Reformation transpired from Roman Catholicism? This only proves that the Scripture is alive and penetrates the heart of everyone. JW, Mormons, Church of Christ/INC, and 7th Day Adv. claimed that there is apostasy to produce a new church, and a need of cleansing by a certain person
(a prophet, man sent by God, a Bible student, a preacher etc.) Did you know about this?

People are born different, and that is healthy to know that we are not a puppet or robot. Those churches always shouted the word “Unity,” but in reality they are only united physically as an organization with one Man behind the church. Protestants may have a denomination, but united in spirit. We are not forced by an organized body to be a puppet. Kindly check our Statement of Faith, we are truly united in spirit and truth in Christ Jesus, and not by the Reformers.

Yes they do "stand firm and dependent on God's protection" otherwise the wheat would have been completely obliterated by the weeds. But Daniel did not foretell a 'future new church'....he foretold a 'cleaning, whitening and refining' of God's people in the future. Just as Jesus came, not to start a new religion, but to clean up the Jewish religion....so in the "time of the end" it was foretold again. Why would God foretell a "cleansing" if there was no filth? Why a "whitening", if there was no stain? Why a "refining" if there were no impurities to be removed? (Dan 12:4, 9, 10)

Dan. 12:9-13
9. And he said, "Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time.
10. "Many will be purged, purified and refined; but the wicked will act wickedly, and none of the wicked will understand, but those who have insight will understand.
11. "And from the time that the regular sacrifice is abolished, and the abomination of desolation is set up, there will be 1,290 days.
12. "How blessed is he who keeps waiting and attains to the 1,335 days!
13. "But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again for your allotted portion at the end of the age."
If there is no foretelling of a new church, then why prophesy, calculate, and have faith to Russell and company? If you believe Jesus clean up Jewish religion, then why JW should be dependent and have faith to what Russell and company did? Russell is not Jesus.

Sorry, your phrasing is a little difficult to understand here.....but the establishment of Roman Catholicism was only a symptom of a much deeper problem....an apostasy that had been festering for centuries. There is a reason why the Christian scriptures were completed at the end of the first century because after that everything went to the dogs. The weeds began to flourish.

By the time of Constantine the church was so weak that the merging of Roman sun worship with apostate Christianity, (still evident in the Catholic Church to this day,) was sure to happen just as Jesus said it would. The weeds then took over in the church and spread all over the world. Churches became divided by nationalism and by sectarianism. Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox......does the Christ exist divided by nationality?
Why did Paul say there were to be NO divisions among Christ's followers? (1 Cor 1:10) Yet we see nothing but division in Christendom.

Did the Mormons, and Iglesia Ni kristo(Church of Christ) and other churches claimed there is apostasy and should not be divided? How about them? Who among you stand for the truth of “No division church”?

The early Church Fathers were not the "propagators" of Christianity, but the instruments used by the devil to fertilise his weeds. Some resisted the change but the tide became too strong.

Oh. Come on. Where did you get that idea? It seems you are saying after Paul died, no other Christians left to propagate the gospel?? Do you think an Apologist cannot preach the gospel? He cannot be an apologist if he does not know the basic of the gospel. How he will defend his faith if he is not capable of knowing the gospel and heretic teachings during their time? Please think about it.

You are also saying that Christ suffered for nothing and that is discarding Christ sufferings for our salvation by shedding His blood. What’s the use of Jesus and Paul’s preaching if at the end there will be an apostasy that needs cleansing and refining (by JW interpretation), and resulted to a new church or teachings. Therefore, it will come out that Jesus and Paul served only as--least important in Christianity, thus, Russell and company served as the priority ( very important) in Christianity.

Yes indeed, the context always reveals things we might not at first understand. Your own sequence seems to be out of order.
Were you there to read his body language and tone of voice? All we have is a brief account of a doubting man's reaction to seeing his Lord after he had suffered a terrible death. Thomas was not among the apostles when Jesus appeared to them. They related that Jesus had been with them...but he doubted that it could be true, stating that he would not believe it unless he saw the proof. So eight days later Jesus granted his request to see with his own eyes that it was truly Jesus. His response is not at all out of order under the circumstances.

Your question “Were you there to read his body language and tone of voice?” backfired your reasoning because you also did that. How come you also read his body language and tone of voice by telling us that Thomas was “Surprised” and by that surprising reaction, he confessed “My Lord and My God”??
You chose and believed more on the JW org. interpretation of “surprise” than reading it “My Lord and My God”, a very self understandable phrase—even a young kid may understand this phrase. Why keep turning away from the phrase?

What I’m explaining to you is the deeper understanding of studying biblical text. Kindly look at this:
John 20:17
18. Mary Magdalene went and said to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord"; and she told them that he had said these things to her.
19. On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."
(there is no mention that Thomas was there)
20. When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
21. Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you."
22. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
23. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained."
24. Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came.
(Now, it is clear that Thomas is not with them when Jesus appeared to them)

25. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe."
(The other disciples [not named] told Thomas that they saw the Lord. Thomas answered in doubt that should see first the print of the nails and place his finger in the mark of the nails, and place his hand on the side of Jesus—to believe what the other disciples are saying.)

Now, do you think Thomas will be in surprise act or manner when he is on the following situation:
1.) Informed already
2.) Unsure of the information of Jesus appearance to the other disciples
3.) Eight days after

If we put ourselves to be Thomas, will you be in the surprise act or manner?

Additionally as you have said that “he doubted that it could be true, stating that he would not believe it unless he saw the proof.”

Thomas is already about 70% believing that it could be true, the 30% is the only thing that he must prove—by seeing Jesus personally. Do you think he will be in surprising act or emotional state??

Ok. If my explanation is not enough, why not try and test the “surprise” act? If we say that Thomas is really surprised in Jesus appearance; why should Thomas need to utter “My Lord and my God.”?

What is the connection of being a surprised person to utter “My Lord and My God”?

26. Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you."
27. Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing."
28. Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!"
29. Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."

 

[Yoshua]

This is not true. Thomas' brief response and Jesus' not making a fuss about it are hardly something that prove a doctrine.

The expression “My Lord and my God” would still have to harmonize with the rest of the inspired Scriptures. Since the record shows that Jesus had previously sent his disciples the message, “I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God,” there is no reason for believing that Thomas thought Jesus was the Almighty God. (Joh 20:17) That would be a contradiction.
John himself, after recounting Thomas’ encounter with the resurrected Jesus, says of this and similar accounts: “But these have been written down that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God, and that, because of believing, you may have life by means of his name.”—Joh 20:30, 31

Lev. 24:16
16. `Moreover, the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death; all the congregation shall certainly stone him. The alien as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.

Did you remember when Jesus used the personal name of Israel’s God (Exodus 3:14), the name given to Moses–to refer to Himself. He even used the Torah for that context,“Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58).

Let us understand the context on what you’re saying at John 20:17
10. So the disciples went away again to their own homes.
(the disciples went away, so that means Mary was left weeping)

11. But Mary was standing outside the tomb weeping; and so, as she wept, she stooped and looked into the tomb;
12. and she beheld two angels in white sitting, one at the head, and one at the feet, where the body of Jesus had been lying.
13. And they said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him."
14. When she had said this, she turned around, and beheld Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus.
15. Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?" Supposing Him to be the gardener, she said to Him, "Sir, if you have carried Him away, tell me where you have laid Him, and I will take Him away."
16. Jesus said to her, "Mary!" She turned and said to Him in Hebrew, "Rabboni!" (which means, Teacher).
17. Jesus said to her, "Stop clinging to Me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to My brethren, and say to them, `I ascend to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God.'"
(Thomas is not here, only Mary; what Mary announced to the disciples is "I have seen the Lord,")

There is no connection on what Jesus had said about ‘My God and your God.’ Why should Thomas used the word of Jesus’ words ‘My God’ when he is not there and Mary did not told him about ‘My God and your God’? Logical.

18. Mary Magdalene came, announcing to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord," and that He had said these things to her.

Why it would be contradicting in John 20:30-31? There will be a contradiction if the understanding of the doctrine is wrong.
Which will you choose? the word of Jesus or John in the gospel, or both?

John 20: 29. Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."
31. but these have been written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

This was a false claim made by the Jews in an attempt to do away with Jesus, not an admission by God's son that he was equal with his Father.

God has many "sons" as the Bible clearly states. The Angels and even Adam are called "sons of God", but they are unlike this unique son who is "only begotten".....a begotten son needs a 'begetter'. "The Word" was "with God in the beginning", meaning the beginning of creation, because the eternal God has no beginning. He is the first and only direct creation of the Father, which makes him unique. (Col 1:15, 16) All other things were brought into existence "through" the son. There is no scriptural reason why Michael cannot be Jesus in his heavenly role. He speaks of his Father as his God even after his return to heaven. (Rev 3:12) Can God have a God?

Your question and reasoning “Can God have a God?” backfired again to the JW theology. This is again a contradiction on your side. JW believed the Father God-Almighty and Jesus-Mighty. I would bring back to you your question “Can God have a God”?

How can God begets God for JW? There will be two Gods in totality. 1-Almighty God + 1-Mighty God= 2 Gods. That will be considered already—a polytheistic belief.

For Trinitarian, we are consistent and reconciled with your question “Can God have a God”? because we believed in one God exists in three persons –only one God.

Now lets get back to Archangel, if Jesus is the only begotten Son; JW believed Jesus is Archangel Michael, Jesus = Archangel Michael (Jesus is Archangel Michael). Therefore, Archangel Michael is the only begotten Son who saved us from sins. I think it sounds a big contradiction here.

For Colossians 1:15, 16, about Jesus, says
15. And He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. 16. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities all things have been created by Him and for Him.

..All things have been created through him and For HIM". If Jesus was Michael the Archangel at the time of creation, would an angel have created all things for himself?

It never meant anything else but a "mighty one". But there is only one "Almighty" God.....the Father. The word "theos" only ever meant a "mighty one" in Greek. In order to qualify which "theos" is spoken about when Father and son are mentioned together, the use of the definite article differentiates between "a god" and "the God". In John 1:1 there are two "mighty ones" spoken about....but only one is "ho theos" (The God).

Angels, human judges and even satan are all called "gods" in the scriptures. It is not a title used exclusively of the Father.

Why does it is translated John 1:1 as "a god", when in John 1:6, 12, 13 18 where "theos" also has no definite article, they translate it as "God" every time?

6.There came a man who was sent as a representative of God; his name was John.

12. However, to all who did receive him, he gave authority to become God’s children, because they were exercising faith in his name.13. And they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from God. 18. No man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god who is at the Father’s side is the one who has explained Him.(NWT)

What is upsetting is the condescension with which many people address us and our beliefs. We can hold our ground scripturally with everything we believe. Just because it is a departure from what is accepted today as Christian belief, doesn't mean that it's wrong. None of it is based on human tradition or the introduced doctrines made part of an apostate church during the period in which Jesus said his enemy would produce a counterfeit form of Christianity.

In the contextual use of the word "theos" in the Greek, it is clear that Jesus, as a divine being, is rightly referred to as a "mighty one" but he is not "THE Mighty One". In John 1:18, he is called "the only begotten god".....since the Almighty cannot be "begotten", it is clear that this is a lesser personage than the Almighty himself. Jesus called his Father "the only true God" (John 17:3) he did not include himself in that designation.....why do you all keep ignoring this scripture?

Because the worship of all lesser beings is to be directed to the Father....all prayer is to the Father.....all honor and glory is to the Father.....because Jehovah is the only true God. (Deut 6:4; Luke 4:8; Matt 6:9; Phil 2:11)

This is what the Bible teaches.

Jesus Christ is referred to as "Mighty God" in Isa 9:6. Jehovah is referred to as "Mighty God" in Isa 10:20-21. How can this be if there is only one God?

Thanks

 

[savagewind]

Then it is clearly emphasized a judgment at the end of the age to separate the unsaved from the saved since this is concerning the kingdom. From this parable until the current settings, what will be the effect of apostasy here?

It is not clear that it is at the end of the age. Acts 7:55

I encouraged you to do a biblical study.

I encourage you to obey Revelation 2:7 Revelation 2:29

 

[Mountain_Climber]

All these words of yours here are perfect for arguing that Jesus says be disciples, not to be making disciples. Can nobody see it?
"Whose primary responsibility was it to open the hearts of the Israelite people? It was primarily their own choice and their own responsibility"
"prepare your hearts unto the LORD" Each other's hearts?
Psalms 10:17 "LORD, thou hast heard the desire of the humble: thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear.."
"When anything new is to be built one begins building from the core out. "
"And those who were more readily disposed to soften their hearts would provide that core or nucleus upon which to build." Who provides a core with which to build on? The person being built up by Jehovah, not by man.
"for even a short time you should at least be beginning to see how easily one can think they know Jesus when they do not know him at all." Why is that?
"know Jesus" What is the only way to know a person? The way is not by hearing about him. I am reading a biography presently. I realize I will never really know the person if I am never friends with her for real. Preaching about Jesus does not make disciples. Preaching about Jesus just makes some people believe they can know Jesus. I am not against preaching as some people will gladly jump to the conclusion of.

The belief that Jesus, or God, if you are so disposed, says it is a Christian's duty to make disciples is not causing the making of disciples but is really causing the making of idols to Jehovah. The reason? The making of disciples by man is from the outside in, not the inside out.


OK. Now I suppose I have been off topic but arguing to make disciples is a worthless occupation imho.

Then how will they be made? They are not made. They grow. Can anyone say that the vegetables in their garden are made? 1 Corinthians 3:7
Christ has given gifts in men. Ephesians 4:8 But if it is my goal to make someone a disciple and I do then it is me who gave a gift. I am sure you will all think that that is ridiculous. But who is teaching it????????????????????????????? Why is the teaching of it not ridiculous?

That is very perceptive. It is a two-way street but at no time does one human actually make a disciple of anyone, not even his or her self. And yet it does work from the inside out even as is the principle Jesus expressed at Matthew 23: 25-26. God's word of truth works from the inside out if we do our part preparing our heart so that the word of truth is able to enter.

1 John 4:19 "We love him, because he first loved us." He has first loved us but it is up to us how we will respond to his first loving us. No one can do it for us. Yet even though God's words of truth must be accepted by us with our hearts it is yet his word of truth actually producing the disciple. And that remains true whether that disciple be our self or someone else. His word of truth is what makes the disciple and the job of each and every person is to become willing to open the door to our heart, letting that word of truth in where it can do the work of making us a disciple.

You said, "if it is my goal to make someone a disciple and I do then it is me who gave a gift." Might it be better said that if you cooperate with God in God's seeking to make disciples that the seeds of truth you share with others from God are able to impart gifts to each one as the spirit of God chooses? You then act merely as an Angel, a messenger, a conveyor of God's powerful words of truth. Insofar as making disciples of others is concerned that is the beginning and the end of your job and of your ability.

As preachers of the word we are not making the disciple but we are participating in disciples being made by sharing the life-giving word of God. We are not the one making the disciple but the word of truth from God which we preach is working in those to whom we preach so as to make disciples of them and in that sense it is God that makes it grow. But even God cannot make it grow if the individual who has been preached to stubbornly refuses to allow the word to penetrate his or her heart. For it is only in his or her heart where the word of truth can do it's work.

1 Corinthians 3:9 "For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building." As laborers with God using God's word we plant seeds of truth and we water those seeds of truth. We do this in two ways, by word and by example: Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." And if we are not first willing to be an example, then we have no business thinking our self worthy to share by word. For at the very same time our mouth speaks his words of truth our actions can be making a mockery of those words.

 

[savagewind]

That is very perceptive. It is a two-way street but at no time does one human actually make a disciple of anyone, not even his or her self. And yet it does work from the inside out even as is the principle Jesus expressed at Matthew 23: 25-26. God's word of truth works from the inside out if we do our part preparing our heart so that the word of truth is able to enter.

1 John 4:19 "We love him, because he first loved us." He has first loved us but it is up to us how we will respond to his first loving us. No one can do it for us. Yet even though God's words of truth must be accepted by us with our hearts it is yet his word of truth actually producing the disciple. And that remains true whether that disciple be our self or someone else. His word of truth is what makes the disciple and the job of each and every person is to become willing to open the door to our heart, letting that word of truth in where it can do the work of making us a disciple.

You said, "if it is my goal to make someone a disciple and I do then it is me who gave a gift." Might it be better said that if you cooperate with God in God's seeking to make disciples that the seeds of truth you share with others from God are able to impart gifts to each one as the spirit of God chooses? You then act merely as an Angel, a messenger, a conveyor of God's powerful words of truth. Insofar as making disciples of others is concerned that is the beginning and the end of your job and of your ability.

As preachers of the word we are not making the disciple but we are participating in disciples being made by sharing the life-giving word of God. We are not the one making the disciple but the word of truth from God which we preach is working in those to whom we preach so as to make disciples of them and in that sense it is God that makes it grow. But even God cannot make it grow if the individual who has been preached to stubbornly refuses to allow the word to penetrate his or her heart. For it is only in his or her heart where the word of truth can do it's work.

1 Corinthians 3:9 "For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building." As laborers with God using God's word we plant seeds of truth and we water those seeds of truth. We do this in two ways, by word and by example: Matthew 5:16 "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." And if we are not first willing to be an example, then we have no business thinking our self worthy to share by word. For at the very same time our mouth speaks his words of truth our actions can be making a mockery of those words.

I think you do well to describe exactly what it is Jesus commanded his brothers to do! Matthew 28:19 But not "make".....BE!
I am certain that his command to be disciples means "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matthew 5:16 1 Peter 2:12 John 15:8

 

[djhwoodwerks]

Children are not necessarily infants. It being for children in no way requires that it includes infants. Asa I said, A child can choose to dedicate their self to God at any age in which they are mature enough to embrace faith and commitment of their own volition.

And you touched on one of the places where I and Jehovah's Witnesses disagree when you asked, "Aren't babies born in sin?"

The human body is but a slave. Adam's human body was but a slave from the moment it was created of God. The human body is a slave to a man's spirit and it does only what a man's spirit allows it to do. In fact sin is said to actually start in the mind rather than in the body. Desire is produced in a man's mind by how a man allows himself to think. And it works that same way for angels. And so it can also be said of angels that their spirit bodies are but slaves to the spirit they let operate in their minds. The fallacy of it being necessary to put on a literal spirit body before it can be said that one is incorruptible is clearly shown in that Satan and other angels were able to corrupt themselves the same as Adam did.

Because a body, whether spirit or flesh, is but a slave of the spirit one allows to operate in their mind, if that spirit one lets operate in the mind is a bad spirit then their body works bad. And conversely, if that spirit one lets operate in the mind is a good spirit then their body works good.

Adam's sin allowed the presence of sin into the world where having presence it could also have influence. And so as a child grows a child is faced with that influence which then requires the child to begin to use knowledge and wisdom to make choices about that influence. And in a child's early days they lack in that knowledge and wisdom and so the presence of sin in the world through Adam and the influence exerted upon the child by that sin which is in the world takes it toll upon them. None of this is true for an infant for that infant has not yet been faced with the influence of sin in the world and has not been forced to have to make choices concerning it.

Where does Romans 5:12 say sin entered? Into the world. Into the world were it has the presence to influence us. And it is sin's nature to influence. It indeed spreads like leaven. But the body is but a slave. Therefore we must be wise and submit our bodies as slaves of God's righteousness, preferably before we train bad habits into ourselves.

Psa 51:5 (ESVST) 5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. (Was David the only person ever to be conceived in sin? Can 2 sinful people give birth to a righteous person?)

Rom 3:22-23 (ESVST) For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Does it say, "for all, except small children or infants" have sinned"?)

Rom 5:18 (ESVST) 18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men. (We understand this to mean all mankind, correct? Everyone is condemned correct?)

Does it state anywhere in the Bible that there is a certain age of accountability? Or is that just a religious opinion? If small children and infants are not guilty of sin, why in the OT when cities were destroyed, were babies and small children killed also? Are we born righteous until we have the ability to choose to sin?

 

[kjw47]

Michael/Jesus is a ''she?"

8 Doth not wisdom cry, And understanding put forth her voice?

2 On the top of high places by the way, Where the paths meet, she standeth; 3 Beside the gates, at the entry of the city, At the coming in at the doors, she crieth aloud: 4 Unto you, O men, I call; And my voice is to the sons of men.

That part is referring to wisdom--the master worker part is about Jesus

 

[kjw47]

What kind of double talk is this?? All other things created through Jesus, but He wasn't Jesus in the OT, He was Michael? If He was Michael in the OT, then all other things were created through Michael, correct? If Jesus wasn't in the OT, how could He create all other things?

Michael and Jesus are the same being. Was there a Jesus ever mentioned in the ot? No-- but all of creation occurred in Genesis.

 

[savagewind]

Michael and Jesus are the same being. Was there a Jesus ever mentioned in the ot? No-- but all of creation occurred in Genesis.

Of course Jesus was mentioned! Even the Watchtower teaches that there were hundreds of scriptures which referred to him. Think of what his name means please and then see if you can honestly say the Jesus was never mentioned. YHVH is Salvation = Jesus. I am sure most if not all of the Hebrew Scriptures (OT) is about salvation by means of YHVH (Jesus Christ).

 

[Wharton]

That part is referring to wisdom--the master worker part is about Jesus

Nope. It's all about a female called wisdom. Nice try though.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

Psa 51:5 (ESVST) 5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. (Was David the only person ever to be conceived in sin? Can 2 sinful people give birth to a righteous person?)

Rom 3:22-23 (ESVST) For there is no distinction: 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Does it say, "for all, except small children or infants" have sinned"?)

Rom 5:18 (ESVST) 18 Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men. (We understand this to mean all mankind, correct? Everyone is condemned correct?)

Does it state anywhere in the Bible that there is a certain age of accountability? Or is that just a religious opinion? If small children and infants are not guilty of sin, why in the OT when cities were destroyed, were babies and small children killed also? Are we born righteous until we have the ability to choose to sin?

Per Psa 51:5, It stands to reason that David and all of us are indeed born in sin being as sin entered this world and thus the world is filled with sin. So if we are born into this world then we cannot be but born in (or, "into") sin. We are born into sin's world.

Per Rom 3:22-23, Being born into this world without knowledge and understanding automatically existing in us to protect us from err, and this world being filled with sin long before we arrived here, sin having entered this world via Adam's sin, then what do you expect? How can anyone avoid sin without knowledge and wisdom is first in them? Therefore all children eventually do sin even as Paul said. (Is it not strange that you are trying to apply this statement to a so-called inherited sin when what Paul stated requires action having been taken, the act of actually committing sin? That shows your previous belief is making you have to struggle. A problem common to us all along the way.)

Per Rom 5:8, Being the things shared above and being that Adam is the one that gave sin it's presence in this world where it could do it's dirty work, doesn't that make it true that one trespass led to condemnation for all men? After all, it placed all men into a position where they would not be able to avoid sin in their otherwise innocent days so that they would be sure to lose that innocence.

Does it state anywhere in the Bible that there is a certain age of accountability? Yes it does:

Romans 5:13 "(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law."

Is there law in an infant that has no understanding?

James 4:17 "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."

 

[Mountain_Climber]

I think you do well to describe exactly what it is Jesus commanded his brothers to do! Matthew 28:19 But not "make".....BE!
I am certain that his command to be disciples means "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matthew 5:16 1 Peter 2:12 John 15:8

I am with you on that being the principal way it is done, for Paul counseled that not many ought to become teachers knowing they would bear heavier judgment.

It has been taken beyond what Jesus outlined, you are right. And that is how the locust army of Joel's prophecy came to be born. But it is nothing that God didn't foresee and he has put it all to use for his purpose.

 

[Wharton]

Per Psa 51:5, It stands to reason that David and all of us are indeed born in sin being as sin entered this world and thus the world is filled with sin. So if we are born into this world then we cannot be but born in (or, "into") sin. We are born into sin's world.

Per Rom 3:22-23, Being born into this world without knowledge and understanding automatically existing in us to protect us from err, and this world being filled with sin long before we arrived here, sin having entered this world via Adam's sin, then what do you expect? How can anyone avoid sin without knowledge and wisdom is first in them? Therefore all children eventually do sin even as Paul said. (Is it not strange that you are trying to apply this statement to a so-called inherited sin when what Paul stated requires action having been taken, the act of actually committing sin? That shows your previous belief is making you have to struggle. A problem common to us all along the way.)

Per Rom 5:8, Being the things shared above and being that Adam is the one that gave sin it's presence in this world where it could do it's dirty work, doesn't that make it true that one trespass led to condemnation for all men? After all, it placed all men into a position where they would not be able to avoid sin in their otherwise innocent days so that they would be sure to lose that innocence.

Does it state anywhere in the Bible that there is a certain age of accountability? Yes it does:

Romans 5:13 "(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law."

Is there law in an infant that has no understanding?

James 4:17 "Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin."

Wow. Your reasoning really shoots down the JW ransom sacrifice as the offering of any innocent infant to Baal or Moloch would suffice as an atonement.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

Wow. Your reasoning really shoots down the JW ransom sacrifice as the offering of any innocent infant to Baal or Moloch would suffice as an atonement.

LOL Leave it to you to come up with the goodies.

Not quite. There is no spiritual life in the child to give as a ransom being as all would have never existed had God destroyed Adam immediately as he could have done and would have been justified to do.

We are born with a promise of life and a hope of life, as Adam lost it for us. But we are not born having a right to life to give on behalf of anyone.

Added: This is an issue of sanctification. Adam lost his ability to sanctify us to life. Therefore we must turn to another hope for that stratification. And that requires that we first be old enough to understand Adam's rebellion and reject taking or continuing any part in his rebellion.

 

[Wharton]

LOL Leave it to you to come up with the goodies.

Not quite. There is no spiritual life in the child to give as a ransom being as all would have never existed had God destroyed Adam immediately as he could have done and would have been justified to do.

We are born with a promise of life and a hope of life, as Adam lost it for us. But we are not born having a right to life to give on behalf of anyone.

Perfect human life for perfect human life is the JW ransom requirement. No age restriction has ever been mentioned but I'm sure they'll soon come up with one. Or pounce on your theory.

 

[Wharton]

had God destroyed Adam immediately as he could have done and would have been justified to do.

Poor Adam. Everything was going along fine in the garden until he took a nap. Then look what happened.

 

[Wharton]

The infant is sanctified in relation to the parent the same as an unbelieving mate is sanctified in the believing mate until they come to the point of making their dedication.

And until a dedication takes place, they are not in the faith.