JW's Jesus is Archangel Michael?

[djhwoodwerks]

There are only two beings in all of scripture who are said to be in command of the angels....Jesus and Michael.

God did not entrust any of those Angels with the task of rescuing the human race...he sent his most trusted son to do the job.
The word rendered "worship" in verse 6 is "proskenyo" which in this instance means "obeisance" as the angels are bowing before one who is their superior....not only their superior but the one who was responsible for their very existence. (Col 1:15, 16) But he is not receiving "worship" such as is rendered to God "alone". (Luke 4:8)

The only difference in the meaning of the word worship in Hebrews 1:6 and Luke 4:8 is which part of the definition the GB picks for each verse.

 

[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.

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."

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

 

[kjw47]

Hi Jay,

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


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.?


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.


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.


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”?


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.



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."


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.


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?



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)



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

At Isaiah 9:6-- it does not say that Jesus the man is-mighty God--it says his name will be called those things--a big difference.

 

[savagewind]

At Isaiah 9:6-- it does not say that Jesus the man is-mighty God--it says his name will be called those things--a big difference.

He is called mighty god.

 

[kjw47]

He is called mighty god.

Where? Not at Isaiah 9:6--it says his name will be called those things.

 

[savagewind]

Where? Not at Isaiah 9:6--it says his name will be called those things.

Right. Do you know what name means?

 

[Norman]

Norman: You have a severe cranial rectal inversion, you should seek medical help for it.

 

[Norman]

I tried debating you like one but you didn't want to so you blocked me. Whose the adult?

Norman: JFish123 is really a child, playing Church in this forum, I wonder where his or her parents are?

 

[Yoshua]

At Isaiah 9:6-- it does not say that Jesus the man is-mighty God--it says his name will be called those things--a big difference.

Hi kjw47,

Did Jehovah Witnesses believe Jesus is a Mighty God or Mighty god?

Thanks

 

[Mountain_Climber]

I have no idea what you mean by this. What is your point? What confusion do you believe I am under?


Do you see yourself as the sole arbiter of what I post MC? Am I to answer to you or to bow before your superior knowledge perhaps? Or am I supposed express my gratitude for your concessions?

Who do you think you are?
Are you a ex-JW who no longer qualifies to be considered as part of Jehovah's organisation?
You obviously consider yourself as being in a position of some authority because that seems to come through in your condescending attitude.



Listen to you? Why should I listen to you? Are you taking the place of the FDS now? You see yourself above the slave?

With whom are you affiliated MC. What religious organisation are you associated with now? With whom do you meet to "incite to love and fine works" as we 'behold Jehovah's day drawing near'? (Heb 10:34, 35)

Your use of the KJV demonstrates that your choice of Bible translation is stuck in the past. I find that quite telling.

My Bible Editor program homes to the KJV and most of the available research tools do also. But I have many different versions on board. Sorry if that annoys you.

My point is that you are side-stepping teachings that are in your own publications. The fact of the matter is that you do all the talking, claiming you are talking for them. Try letting direct quotes of their publications do the talking for a time and prove to me that they really teach what you claim they teach.

As it stands, most of the time you give it to be taken on faith that you are speaking what they teach because you don't back it up with quotes from their publications.

If that offends you for me to point that out I am sorry. But it needs to be addressed.

Sure, you sometimes do quote from their publications, but if you are really representing them then you need to do it more often, relying more on relaying their words than on asserting your own.

 

[JayJayDee]

My Bible Editor program homes to the KJV and most of the available research tools do also. But I have many different versions on board. Sorry if that annoys you.

That your program defaults to the KJV is also telling. Anyone who relies on the KJV for biblical accuracy is not interested it, IMO. I came out of Christendom and studied the KJV with the Witnesses for two years before I was baptised. It is a lousy translation, but still contains the truth of the Christian message. Funny but I never heard the message in the Anglican Church...or any other church for that matter.

My point is that you are side-stepping teachings that are in your own publications. The fact of the matter is that you do all the talking, claiming you are talking for them. Try letting direct quotes of their publications do the talking for a time and prove to me that they really teach what you claim they teach.

You mean like the out of context quotes that we see posted on these forums? No thanks. I can explain my own beliefs quite well without quoting anything but the Bible most of the time.

And talking of side-stepping...you did not answer my questions about your own affiliations. Please do so or this will be the last conversation we have for obvious reasons.

As it stands, most of the time you give it to be taken on faith that you are speaking what they teach because you don't back it up with quotes from their publications.

If that offends you for me to point that out I am sorry. But it needs to be addressed.

By whom? I don't see anyone else complaining about it actually....do you? There is lots quoted from our publications...usually old ones that are no longer current according to our increased understanding....and by those who wish to oppose us. What I am offended by is your superior attitude. Why the condescension? Again I have to ask...who do you think you are?

Sure, you sometimes do quote from their publications, but if you are really representing them then you need to do it more often, relying more on relaying their words than on asserting your own.

Their words simply confirm what the scriptures say and increase our understanding of them.....I prefer to use the scriptures because these are what we are promoting. We are Jehovah's Witnesses and we witness for Jehovah by using his word. All our publications are explanations of His word. We study the Bible with the aid of the FSD.

I wasn't aware that I needed your permission to promote the BIble.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

That your program defaults to the KJV is also telling. Anyone who relies on the KJV for biblical accuracy is not interested it, IMO. I came out of Christendom and studied the KJV with the Witnesses for two years before I was baptised. It is a lousy translation, but still contains the truth of the Christian message. Funny but I never heard the message in the Anglican Church...or any other church for that matter.



You mean like the out of context quotes that we see posted on these forums? No thanks. I can explain my own beliefs quite well without quoting anything but the Bible most of the time.

And talking of side-stepping...you did not answer my questions about your own affiliations. Please do so or this will be the last conversation we have for obvious reasons.



By whom? I don't see anyone else complaining about it actually....do you? There is lots quoted from our publications...usually old ones that are no longer current according to our increased understanding....and by those who wish to oppose us. What I am offended by is your superior attitude. Why the condescension? Again I have to ask...who do you think you are?



Their words simply confirm what the scriptures say and increase our understanding of them.....I prefer to use the scriptures because these are what we are promoting. We are Jehovah's Witnesses and we witness for Jehovah by using his word. All our publications are explanations of His word. We study the Bible with the aid of the FSD.

I wasn't aware that I needed your permission to promote the BIble.

Why are you heated up against me? It is not me who claims to represent your organization, but you.

Am I then to take your reply to mean, "Yes, you are supposed to take my representation of them on faith, having faith that what I say they teach they really do teach." ?

Added: As an amusing side-note, your first paragraph shows you consider yourself to even be able to represent to others what I believe.

In the absence of direct quotes from them, how am I or anyone to know whether you are any better at representing what your organization believes than you are at representing what I believe?

 

[kjw47]

Hi kjw47,

Did Jehovah Witnesses believe Jesus is a Mighty God or Mighty god?

Thanks

a god--carries the meaning--has godlike qualities--for this reason-Acts 2:22-Jehovahs power goes through Jesus.--Jesus didn't do the things written in the bible--Jehovah did all the miracles through Jesus. John 5:30)--same as Jehovah parted the red sea--Moses didn't.

 

[JayJayDee]

Why are you heated up against me? It is not me who claims to represent your organization, but you.

I am offended by your condescension, not your request. Whilst others are angered when we post quotes from WT material or from the NWT, you appear to be just the opposite. It is strange to say the least. I don't see the need to post WT articles in response to other posters when the Bible itself will do the job. What my brothers teach is the Bible. The Bible speaks for itself.

Am I then to take your reply to mean, "Yes, you are supposed to take my representation of them on faith, having faith that what I say they teach they really do teach." ?

If you really want to know what we teach as an organization on any subject go to Jehovah’s Witnesses—Official Website: jw.org You can find out all you need to know from the horse's mouth. It's an easy exercise.

Added: As an amusing side-note, your first paragraph shows you consider yourself to even be able to represent to others what I believe.

I sometimes wonder what it is you believe because you go from agreeing to disagreeing with us in the same post sometimes. I find your position most confusing and your reticence to identify with your teachers make me suspicious of them and your motives. Can you blame me? The Internet is full of people who pretend to be what they are not. We have no interest in talking to trolls, stalkers or apostates.

In the absence of direct quotes from them, how am I or anyone to know whether you are any better at representing what your organization believes than you are at representing what I believe?

Check my words against other JW's on this forum and with the information on our website. How hard is that?

 

[Yoshua]

a god--carries the meaning--has godlike qualities--for this reason-Acts 2:22-Jehovahs power goes through Jesus.--Jesus didn't do the things written in the bible--Jehovah did all the miracles through Jesus. John 5:30)--same as Jehovah parted the red sea--Moses didn't.

Yes, I know that. So you believe that Jesus is a Mighty God and mighty god?

Thanks

 

[Wharton]

a god--carries the meaning--has godlike qualities--for this reason-Acts 2:22-Jehovahs power goes through Jesus.--Jesus didn't do the things written in the bible--Jehovah did all the miracles through Jesus. John 5:30)--same as Jehovah parted the red sea--Moses didn't.

Yet Jesus calmed the sea.

 

[Mountain_Climber]

I am offended by your condescension, not your request. Whilst others are angered when we post quotes from WT material or from the NWT, you appear to be just the opposite. It is strange to say the least. I don't see the need to post WT articles in response to other posters when the Bible itself will do the job. What my brothers teach is the Bible. The Bible speaks for itself.



If you really want to know what we teach as an organization on any subject go to Jehovah’s Witnesses—Official Website: jw.org You can find out all you need to know from the horse's mouth. It's an easy exercise.



I sometimes wonder what it is you believe because you go from agreeing to disagreeing with us in the same post sometimes. I find your position most confusing and your reticence to identify with your teachers make me suspicious of them and your motives. Can you blame me? The Internet is full of people who pretend to be what they are not. We have no interest in talking to trolls, stalkers or apostates.



Check my words against other JW's on this forum and with the information on our website. How hard is that?

OK, that is what I will do.

 

[savagewind]

Yet Jesus calmed the sea.

He says that Jehovah's power through Jesus calmed the sea.

 

[Wharton]

He says that Jehovah's power through Jesus calmed the sea.

He needs to comprehend what he reads:

Jesus: Then he got up, rebuked the winds and the sea, and there was great calm. 27 The men were amazed and said, “What sort of man is this, whom even the winds and the sea obey

Moses: 15 Then the Lord said to Moses: Why are you crying out to me? Tell the Israelites to set out. 16 And you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea, and split it in two, that the Israelites may pass through the sea on dry land.

 

[JayJayDee]

He needs to comprehend what he reads:

Jesus: Then he got up, rebuked the winds and the sea, and there was great calm. 27 The men were amazed and said, “What sort of man is this, whom even the winds and the sea obey

Moses: 15 Then the Lord said to Moses: Why are you crying out to me? Tell the Israelites to set out. 16 And you, lift up your staff and stretch out your hand over the sea, and split it in two, that the Israelites may pass through the sea on dry land.

Did Moses do anything from his own ability? When Jehovah said he was going to make Moses "a god to Pharaoh", do you understand what he meant? All his abilities resulted from the operation of God's power, not his own. When did Moses receive his power? When he took up his role as deliverer. Jesus was the foretold "prophet like Moses" who was to come. He also was empowered with holy spirit when he took up his role as deliverer of his nation.

Tell us whether you think Jesus would have been able to do a single thing of a supernatural nature unless he was empowered by Jehovah's spirit? When did the holy spirit come upon Jesus? Not until his baptism when he was 30 years of age. Prior to that he was just plain Jesus, the oldest sibling in a large Jewish family....why do you think his siblings failed to put faith in him until after his death? Why did people say "isn't this the carpenter's son?" if they were accustomed to see him perform miracles before his baptism?

Jesus was perfect and sinless like Adam, but a mortal human none the less. He was able to perform supernatural fetes, just as his apostles did when they received the holy spirit....they were not God, were they?