• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

JW's Preach A Different Gospel

jojom

Active Member
Which is pure trinitarian assumption.
If it isn't then why do you capitalize god when it means god the father, but don't capitalize it when it means some other deity?

There are two "gods" (mighty ones) spoken about in John 1:1. Only one is THE God. It is plainly there in the Greek text. Why is there use of the capital "G" for both instances of "theos" when only one has the definite article?
The only one that has the article "the" before it is Theon (the first word for god) and the "the" is unexpressed in English because it's implied. The second, Theos, doesn't carry any article "And god was the word." That you want to change the expression to "and the Word was a god" is a shameless deceit to conform to your non-trintarian view. Shameless and obvious.

If it had been translated correctly without trinitarian bias in the first place, no explanation would have been necessary.
And if you had read it correctly no explanation would be necessary.

John 1:18 makes it clear. Why does the KJV translate "theos" as "Son" in verse 18 when it is translated "god" in verse 1? Trinitarian bias at work.
It doesn't. It translates theos as "god," and it translates υἱός huios as "son." Look it up.


John 1:18 (NIV)
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

You know, this JW dance you've been doing has lost its appeal---certainly its worth. Have a nice Fourth of July.
 

Wharton

Active Member
Which is pure trinitarian assumption. There are two "gods" (mighty ones) spoken about in John 1:1. Only one is THE God. It is plainly there in the Greek text. Why is there use of the capital "G" for both instances of "theos" when only one has the definite article? There is a clear distinction there in the text, but trinitarians deny it.



If it had been translated correctly without trinitarian bias in the first place, no explanation would have been necessary.

John 1:18 makes it clear. The Word is a "begotten god". The Almighty is not begotten. Why does the KJV translate "theos" as "Son" in verse 18 when it is translated "god" in verse 1? Trinitarian bias at work.
You have part one correct so let's see if you can move along with simple reasoning. There is no Trinitarian that will disagree with the FACT that the Father is the only stand alone person in the Trinity. Everything comes from the Father. If God is love, then it is sinful for him to be alone. He can't love himself. He can't technically love inferior beings which he created as they are not his equals-just like you can't truly love an animal/inferior being as there is no equal return of affection. So the stand alone person of the Trinity begets a Son of the same substance. Which is why Jesus states that he has a God. If you want to call him a god, it would only mark his POSITION in the Trinity. Jesus is still of the same SUBSTANCE/ESSENCE as his Father. He is God via the Father's nature. Was there a "time" when Jesus did not exist as God? No. There is no "time" in the eternal now.
 

JFish123

Active Member
Here is a warning against judging others like we tend to do: "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca, is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.
(Mat 5) So there is a lot more damage done by dismissing people and browbeating than there is from accepting the wrong people or letting people be wrong, but also there is no room for creed driven church divisions.

You also have to find a way to counter fake holy people, and you just can't do that by judging. Instead by judging you enable them, because they thrive on division. They hate loving non-judging groups. They hate putting up with disagreement and hate submitting to other people. Its not an environment that they can easily manipulate, but if they can find a structure where they can be compared against others they can thrive. Jesus church is one united by love and deeds not words, and rather than providing a clear outline of particular choices and creeds he prayed for unity. (John 17)
Well you don't judge people by dismissing them or calling them a fool. That would be wrong, I agree. But letting people do wrong when you can help them do right is not righteous-it is evil. Say someone's gonna murder someone. Do you not step in and try to do something to prevent it, even telling him its wrong and the consequences?
Whether those who do wrong thrive on division is of no concern. It's still our duty to tell someone (in love ) that what there doing is wrong. If everyone was afraid to confront wrong things because it might cause some division, everyone would end up doing something wrong and hurting themselves and other people because there's no one to tell them otherwise. And Remember we already are divided as Children of God through Jesus Christ will always be divided against the world. Jesus was divided against the world cause he told the world the truth about it which Is one of the reasons why they killed him.
 

JFish123

Active Member
Listen to yourself, please. "The Bible is all we need to know"........"To know who our savior is"......so we need a savior! So the Bible is NOT all we need.
The bible tells about the Truth of Jesus which is what I meant. We can't know the truth today without it (the bible).
But of course we need the actual Jesus who died did out sins lol I think we might have misunderstood one another or maybe I just misunderstood you lol my bad :)
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Well you don't judge people by dismissing them or calling them a fool. That would be wrong, I agree. But letting people do wrong when you can help them do right is not righteous-it is evil. Say someone's gonna murder someone. Do you not step in and try to do something to prevent it, even telling him its wrong and the consequences?
Whether those who do wrong thrive on division is of no concern. It's still our duty to tell someone (in love ) that what there doing is wrong. If everyone was afraid to confront wrong things because it might cause some division, everyone would end up doing something wrong and hurting themselves and other people because there's no one to tell them otherwise. And Remember we already are divided as Children of God through Jesus Christ will always be divided against the world. Jesus was divided against the world cause he told the world the truth about it which Is one of the reasons why they killed him.
They are not DOING wrong. According to you they are THINKING wrong.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The bible tells about the Truth of Jesus which is what I meant. We can't know the truth today without it (the bible).
But of course we need the actual Jesus who died did out sins lol I think we might have misunderstood one another or maybe I just misunderstood you lol my bad :)
We need Jesus. I agree. Can we hear from him according to you? Or is he mute?
 

Pegg

Jehovah our God is One
If it isn't then why do you capitalize god when it means god the father, but don't capitalize it when it means some other deity?

Even trinitarians themselves do this in their own bibles have you noticed 'LORD' as opposed to 'lord' and 'GOD' as opposed to 'god'?
This is done by translators who choose to capitalise every instance where the name Jehovah appears. When you see GOD and LORD you should know that the verse is referencing the name of Jehovah. Just look in the preface of any bible to confirm that.

They know Jehovah is a different individual and there translations prove it.
 

JFish123

Active Member
We need Jesus. I agree. Can we hear from him according to you? Or is he mute?
Yes through His word and the power of the Holy Spirit within us so long as we test the spirits to make sure there actually from God and not our own subconscience etc...
 

JFish123

Active Member
Even trinitarians themselves do this in their own bibles have you noticed 'LORD' as opposed to 'lord' and 'GOD' as opposed to 'god'?
This is done by translators who choose to capitalise every instance where the name Jehovah appears. When you see GOD and LORD you should know that the verse is referencing the name of Jehovah. Just look in the preface of any bible to confirm that.

They know Jehovah is a different individual and there translations prove it.
Pegg Jehovah is not Gods name. Man made that particular name up. Why do you persist in believing and what's worse teaching others that?
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yes through His word and the power of the Holy Spirit within us so long as we test the spirits to make sure there actually from God and not our own subconscience etc...
SIGH. If I was on a deserted island and I had no Bible because it drowned in the shipwreck would I still be able to hear from Jesus?
Or is the Bible Jesus?

I think Jesus is much more than the Bible. You are preaching that they are the same. That is a warning.
 

Wharton

Active Member
The only one that has the article "the" before it is Theon (the first word for god) and the "the" is unexpressed in English because it's implied. The second, Theos, doesn't carry any article "And god was the word." That you want to change the expression to "and the Word was a god" is a shameless deceit to conform to your non-trintarian view. Shameless and obvious.
Which is why they rewrite John 1 as:
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.+
 

JFish123

Active Member
SIGH. If I was on a deserted island and I had no Bible because it drowned in the shipwreck would I still be able to hear from Jesus?
Or is the Bible Jesus?

I think Jesus is much more than the Bible. You are preaching that they are the same. That is a warning.
A warning for what? Lol :)
That's what I've been saying. You can hear from God through the Holy Spirit within you without the bible.
But without knowing Gods word (the bible) you have no reference to fact check if it really lines up with God. Unless you memorize the bible or parts of it etc...
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
A warning for what? Lol :)
That's what I've been saying. You can hear from God through the Holy Spirit within you without the bible.
But without knowing Gods word (the bible) you have no reference to fact check if it really lines up with God. Unless you memorize the bible or parts of it etc...
OK! But some of the Bible was changed. Why are you so sure it wasn't? You are not God.
 

savagewind

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Listen to what Jesus preached. Know he really is called the prince of peace for a good reason THEN explain why Daniel 2:44 says his kingdom is for destroying kingdoms.
 

JayJayDee

Avid JW Bible Student
If it isn't then why do you capitalize god when it means god the father, but don't capitalize it when it means some other deity?

The only one that has the article "the" before it is Theon (the first word for god) and the "the" is unexpressed in English because it's implied. The second, Theos, doesn't carry any article "And god was the word." That you want to change the expression to "and the Word was a god" is a shameless deceit to conform to your non-trintarian view. Shameless and obvious.

And if you had read it correctly no explanation would be necessary.

It doesn't. It translates theos as "god," and it translates υἱός huios as "son." Look it up.


John 1:18 (NIV)
18 No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.

You know, this JW dance you've been doing has lost its appeal---certainly its worth. Have a nice Fourth of July.

The NIV....are you serious? Talk about a trinitarian Bible! How do you get that rendering out of John 1:18 without a lot of fancy footwork? That demonstrates to exactly what I am talking about. Thank you.

Look at the KJV's rendering of John 1:18...

John 1:18...."God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, (theos) who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare."

If it is translated "God" in verse 1 then it has to be consistently translated "God" in verse 18. You can't have it both ways

Either "theos" is God or a god. Context determines which way it is translated. There is no indefinite article in Greek which means that any "a" or "an" is an addition to the text. Look and see how many there are in the NT.

In John 1:1 there are two "gods"...only one is THE God. The other is also a divine "mighty one" but he is not THE God.

Your arguments are empty. There is not one single statement from either Jesus or his Father stating that he is in any way equal to his God in any kind of godhead. The Jews did not worship a trinity...they had one God. (Deut 6:4) So do we. We have the same "only true God" as Jesus does. (John 17:3)

If "theos" can be used to describe the devil, then it isn't an exclusive title for the Almighty. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)
 

JFish123

Active Member
The NIV....are you serious? Talk about a trinitarian Bible! How do you get that rendering out of John 1:18 without a lot of fancy footwork? That demonstrates to exactly what I am talking about. Thank you.

Look at the KJV's rendering of John 1:18...

John 1:18...."God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, (theos) who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare."

If it is translated "God" in verse 1 then it has to be consistently translated "God" in verse 18. You can't have it both ways

Either "theos" is God or a god. Context determines which way it is translated. There is no indefinite article in Greek which means that any "a" or "an" is an addition to the text. Look and see how many there are in the NT.

In John 1:1 there are two "gods"...only one is THE God. The other is also a divine "mighty one" but he is not THE God.

Your arguments are empty. There is not one single statement from either Jesus or his Father stating that he is in any way equal to his God in any kind of godhead. The Jews did not worship a trinity...they had one God. (Deut 6:4) So do we. We have the same "only true God" as Jesus does. (John 17:3)

If "theos" can be used to describe the devil, then it isn't an exclusive title for the Almighty. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)
Your really going to bad mouth a bible when you have the New World Translation? Really? And I and others have posted numerous proofs of The word basically Shouting Jesus is God and the Trinity but you don't understand because of what the Watchtower trained you to see :(
 
Last edited:

jojom

Active Member
The NIV....are you serious? Talk about a trinitarian Bible! How do you get that rendering out of John 1:18 without a lot of fancy footwork? That demonstrates to exactly what I am talking about. Thank you.

Look at the KJV's rendering of John 1:18...

John 1:18...."God no one hath ever seen; the only begotten Son, (theos) who is on the bosom of the Father -- he did declare."

If it is translated "God" in verse 1 then it has to be consistently translated "God" in verse 18. You can't have it both ways

Either "theos" is God or a god. Context determines which way it is translated. There is no indefinite article in Greek which means that any "a" or "an" is an addition to the text. Look and see how many there are in the NT.

In John 1:1 there are two "gods"...only one is THE God. The other is also a divine "mighty one" but he is not THE God.

Your arguments are empty. There is not one single statement from either Jesus or his Father stating that he is in any way equal to his God in any kind of godhead. The Jews did not worship a trinity...they had one God. (Deut 6:4) So do we. We have the same "only true God" as Jesus does. (John 17:3)

If "theos" can be used to describe the devil, then it isn't an exclusive title for the Almighty. (2 Cor 4:3, 4)
This is so sad in so many ways. Have a nice Fourth of July.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
Your really going to bad mouth a bible when you have the New World Translation? Really? And I and others have posted numerous proofs of The word basically Shouting Jesus is God and the Trinity but you don't understand because of what the Watchtower trained you to see :(
Sadly I must also agree.
 

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
If this post has no relevance here, let me know please.

The JW's claim they are the "ONLY TRUE" religion the "ONLY ONES" with an earthly or heavenly hope. But I ask, if they are God's only people, if the GB is the only ones in all the earth directed by God's Spirit, why would they have to, or want to "LIE" about being a religious organization?


*** yb95 pp. 211-213 Mexico *** (1995 Yearbook)

You will recall that back in 1932 La Torre del Vigía de México had been authorized by the government. However, there were obstacles because of the restrictions that the law imposed on all religions. Objections were raised to the house-to-house activity of the Witnesses, since the law stipulated that ‘every religious act of public worship must be held inside the temples.’ For the same reason, objections were raised to our conventions in public places. This was a problem, because these conventions were constantly getting larger. Owning property also presented problems, because the law required that every building used for religious purposes had to become federal property.

For these and other reasons, the Society decided that it would be wise to reorganize, with a view to giving greater emphasis to the educational nature of our work. Therefore, on June 10, 1943, application was made to the Secretariat of Foreign Affairs to register La Torre del Vigía as a civil society, and this was approved on June 15, 1943.

With this rearrangement, singing at our meetings was discontinued, and the meeting places became known as Halls for Cultural Studies. No audible prayers were said at meetings, though nothing could prevent a person from saying an earnest prayer silently in his heart. Every appearance of a religious service was avoided, and truly our meetings are designed for education. When Witnesses in other lands began to call their local groups “congregations,” the Witnesses in Mexico kept on using the term “companies.” House-to-house visits by the Witnesses continued, and with even more zeal; but direct use of the Bible at doors was avoided. Instead, publishers learned the texts by heart so that they could quote them. They also made good use of the book “Make Sure of All Things,” which is a compilation of Scripture quotations on many subjects. Only on return visits and on studies (which were termed “cultural” instead of “Bible”) was the Bible itself used.

The WT choose keeping their property over using their Bibles, praying, praising God and avoided every appearance of a religious organization! And notice the house-to-house visits continued. And you see in the second paragraph that they "choose" to keep their property! And then published this,

*** w90 1/1 p. 7 “Aglow With the Spirit” in Mexico ***

A highlight of 1989 was a change in the status of Jehovah’s Witnesses in Mexico. As a result, the Bible could be used in the house-to-house preaching work for the first time, and meetings could be opened with prayer.

There was no law prohibiting religious activities in Mexico, the WT just didn't want to give up their property. By the publication in 1990, they want you all to believe it was the Mexican government that prevented them from religious activities. This is the organization you serve and protect!
 
Top