moorea944
Well-Known Member
No, not at all. I was just making a point since you had mentioned on an earlier post that you had rejected Jesus as the Messiah, that's all. You just took it to another level. But no worries.
-
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!
So Jesus is not God?
- Thread starter Oeste
- Start date
No, not at all. I was just making a point since you had mentioned on an earlier post that you had rejected Jesus as the Messiah, that's all. You just took it to another level. But no worries.
Muffled
Jesus in me
I do not believe that is so and there is no way you could know that about me.
I believe I have heard it argued that there is no tense in Hebrew. It has to be figured out from context.
I believe that would work if it were a king talking but it is God talking and who is He going to call "Mighty God, Everlasting Father" other than Himself?
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe Paul aid the eyes of Jews were blinded (The ones that didn't become Christians) and I suspect he was speaking from the voice of experience.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
IndigoChild5559 said:
There is a very important issue here. The mythical war between the Greeks and the Trojans was written by the Greek poet, Homer. The Greeks won although a few trojans did escape to Italy. Later on in history Emperor Augustus decided he liked the Trojans better and claimed himself a descendant of Aeneas and his family (a set of the escapees). Augustus painted a very nasty mental picture of the Greeks and claimed the Trojans were the most pious of societies.
Here we see history changed for a personal reason. BUT WE KNOW THE TRUTH despite changes forced on society by those in charge...
As Christians we believe our version of a historic event...an historic writing. We believe that the verse in Isaiah refers to prophecy about someone who the whole of the New Testament attests to and even Isaiah 42:1 claims is the coming Lord:
So are you Greek or Trojan? But emperor Augustus is ‘The Trinity’!! I agree....
Christ is NOT GOD... God is not ‘Anointed’!!
Anointed implies being ‘Set Aside for kingship or Priesthood’.
Almighty God: YHWH, the Father... is not ‘Set aside for kingship or priesthood’!!
By whom could he have been set aside by...? And to whom could he be set aside to??
Jesus is prophesied as being BOTH coming king over creation AND High Priest to Almighty God: YHWH: the Father.
But here is the thing... if you are a Judaist, please don’t say that Christianity... TRUE CHRISTIANITY... is false doctrine.
Yes, trinity is not TRUE CHRISTIANITY - but Christianity is more than just trinity as a belief.
Perhaps True believers in God and Christ should have a different name than CHRISTIAN!!
But, for me, I don’t have a name, a title, a label, for my true Christian belief...
You can argue with Trinitarians etc till death and hell comes and you will get nowhere. You will be like two people who believe equally false doctrines trying to prove to each other that their false doctrines are MORE TRUE than the other...
As I’ve pointed out before: The Truth is one thing... it is irrefutable and unchanging. But how is it to be recognised when it is expressed to the world? Who will believe it?
“... Christians have CHANGED all the verbs in Isaiah 9:5from the perfect tense into the future tense. Perfect present tense is like "He has grown impatient in the past hour." IOW our verse is talking about something that has already occurred, not something that will occur in the future. It cannot possibly be a messianic prophecy. I'm not yelling this at you, or trying to grind this into you. But the Christian translation simply is a lie -- it cannot be the Word of God, because it changes the Word of God. The Christian Church has deceived you.“
There is a very important issue here. The mythical war between the Greeks and the Trojans was written by the Greek poet, Homer. The Greeks won although a few trojans did escape to Italy. Later on in history Emperor Augustus decided he liked the Trojans better and claimed himself a descendant of Aeneas and his family (a set of the escapees). Augustus painted a very nasty mental picture of the Greeks and claimed the Trojans were the most pious of societies.
Here we see history changed for a personal reason. BUT WE KNOW THE TRUTH despite changes forced on society by those in charge...
As Christians we believe our version of a historic event...an historic writing. We believe that the verse in Isaiah refers to prophecy about someone who the whole of the New Testament attests to and even Isaiah 42:1 claims is the coming Lord:
- "Here is my servant, whom I uphold, my chosen one in whom I delight; I will put my Spirit on him and he will bring justice to the nations. ... he will not falter or be discouraged till he establishes justice on earth. In his law the islands will put their hope."
So are you Greek or Trojan? But emperor Augustus is ‘The Trinity’!! I agree....
Christ is NOT GOD... God is not ‘Anointed’!!
Anointed implies being ‘Set Aside for kingship or Priesthood’.
Almighty God: YHWH, the Father... is not ‘Set aside for kingship or priesthood’!!
By whom could he have been set aside by...? And to whom could he be set aside to??
Jesus is prophesied as being BOTH coming king over creation AND High Priest to Almighty God: YHWH: the Father.
But here is the thing... if you are a Judaist, please don’t say that Christianity... TRUE CHRISTIANITY... is false doctrine.
Yes, trinity is not TRUE CHRISTIANITY - but Christianity is more than just trinity as a belief.
Perhaps True believers in God and Christ should have a different name than CHRISTIAN!!
But, for me, I don’t have a name, a title, a label, for my true Christian belief...
You can argue with Trinitarians etc till death and hell comes and you will get nowhere. You will be like two people who believe equally false doctrines trying to prove to each other that their false doctrines are MORE TRUE than the other...
As I’ve pointed out before: The Truth is one thing... it is irrefutable and unchanging. But how is it to be recognised when it is expressed to the world? Who will believe it?
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
There is no present tense is Hebrew, and no linking verbs. Thus, there is no way to say "The Mighty God IS the Everlasting Father." You just say, "The Mighty God Everlasting Father," and the link is assumed.
There are only two tenses in Biblical Hebrew, from what I can remember. (Those who know can correct me if I'm wrong.) There is the perfect tense which is used for those actions which are already completed, and there is the imperfect tense which is used for those actions which are not yet completed.
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
For Paul to generalize from his own experience to that of all Jews was also the height of arrogance. Maybe it was Paul that was blinded...?
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Paul’s mental blindness was in not seeing the harm he was doing to the testimony of Christ that the apostles were expressing. He glorified in his veraciousness of tracing, tracking, and delivering these apostles to the Jewish authorities... who then put them to death either by the Jewish method of stoning, or the Roman overseers method of crucifixion.
His physical blindness which he acquired on the road to Damascus was to teach him that what he was doing against the apostles was wrong - very wrong. He was to remain blinded until he learned to work for these people (for Jesus) rather than against them (against Jesus).
A final blindness was that of the delusion that he could convert all nations and people to Jesus... he was surprised that his varaciousness did not work on all the people he encounter (though happy that many did!!). He clashed with Peter over the best way to spread the news and who should receive it. Peter wanted that it should only be the Jews but Paul desired all people. Peter was later shown (the ‘meat’ dream) that he should accept all people whom God sent him to because all ‘food’ God gave him was good to ‘eat’ (you know it’s talking about Peoples of different nations!)
Jews, Judaism, will contend against Paul simply because Paul preached redemption for all - and not just for Jews. But Jews, Judaism, also protest against JESUS CHRIST, whom they do not believe was/is the Messiah... and so of course, they are not going to hear his words:
- ‘Because you have rejected me, I will reject you!!’
No, absolutely not. Paul’s main trait was absolute fastidiousness in what he believed - and thats exactly how he was AGAINST the Christians - and so he was just the same FOR the word of God via Jesus Christ now!!!
How does standing in fastidiousness for the testimony of Christ make Paul ‘Blind’???
TiggerII
Active Member
Is. 9:6 is usually translated in trinitarian-translated Bibles as:
“For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; and the government will rest on His shoulders; and His name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.” - NASB.
Even most trinitarians do not confuse the two separate persons of the Father and the Son. They do not say the Son is the Father. They say the Father and the Son are two separate individual persons who are equally “God”!
Therefore, since we obviously cannot take “Eternal Father” in the literal sense to mean that Jesus is the Father or may be called the Father, we cannot take the rest of that same name (esp. ‘Mighty God’) in its literal highest sense and say that Jesus is Mighty God, etc., either.
So what is really intended at Is. 9:6?
One interesting fact is that the meaning of many personal names of Israelites were meant as a praise or description of God alone - not a description of themselves.
“JEHU - ‘Jehovah is he.’
(1.) The son of Obed, and father of Azariah (1 Chronicles 2:38).
(2.) One of the Benjamite slingers that joined David at Ziklag (1 Chronicles 12:3).
(3.) The son of Hanani, a prophet of Judah (1 Kings 16:1, 7; 2 Chronicles 19:2; 20:34), who pronounced the sentence of God against Baasha, the king of Israel.
(4.) King of Israel, the son of Jehoshaphat (2 Kings 9:2), and grandson of Nimshi.” - Easton’s Bible Dictionary, ‘Jehu,’ from Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Thomas Nelson Publ. (Also p. 331, Today’s Dictionary of the Bible, Bethany House, 1982.)
So four different men, worshipers of the one true God, Jehovah, were named ‘He is Jehovah’ in the Holy Scriptures! This popular Israelite name obviously was not intended to describe the person who bore it!
“Now Malchiel means ‘God is king,’ ... Gedaliah ‘Jehovah is great,’ Zerahiah ‘Jehovah hath risen in splendor,’ Jehozadak ‘Jehovah is righteous,’ and Joel, if a compound name, ‘Jehovah is God.’ A moment’s reflection makes clear that these names do not describe the persons who bear them, but in every case speak of God. ....
"[Early in the 9th century B.C.] .... it was conventional for the king of Judah to have for his name a sentence with Jehovah as its subject. .... During the five centuries and a half, beginning near the close of Solomon’s reign and extending to the end of Nehemiah’s administration, 22 high priests held office, so far as their names have been preserved in the records. Of these pontiffs 17 bear names which are sentences with Jehovah as subject, and another is a sentence with El [God] as subject. .... evidently the priests of Jehovah’s temple at Jerusalem not only recognized the appropriateness for themselves and their families of names possessing a general religious character, but came to favor such as expressly mentioned God, especially those which mentioned God by His name of Jehovah.” - p. 2115, Vol. 3, The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia, Eerdmans, 1984 printing.
Another important detail about personal names is that those names composed of more than one Hebrew word (e.g., Immanuel; Isaiah; Michael; Jehoshabeath; etc.) is that minor words such as prepositions ('of',' 'in,' 'with', 'on,' etc.) and some verbs such as 'is,' 'are,' etc. are omitted in the scriptures.
For instance, two of the best-known Bible concordances (Young’s and Strong’s) and a popular trinitarian Bible dictionary (Today’s Dictionary of the Bible) differ on the exact meaning of many Biblical personal names because of those “minor” words which must be added to bring out the intended meaning.
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, for example, says the name “Elimelech” (which is literally just “God King”) means “God of (the) King.” Young’s Analytical Concordance says it means “God is King.” Today’s Dictionary of the Bible says it means “ God his King” - p. 206, Bethany House Publ., 1982. And an online meaning is given as “My God is the King.” - http://www.kveller.com/jewish_names/display.php?n=Elimelech&k=840 .
I haven’t found any scholar/translator who says the name of Elimelech should be translated with its literal meaning of “God King.” And no scholar ever claims that it means that Elimelech himself was "God King."
Those missing minor words that the translator must supply at his own discretion can often make a vital difference! - For example, the footnote for Gen. 17:5 in The NIV Study Bible: The name ‘Abram’ “means ‘Exalted Father,’ probably in reference to God (i.e., ‘[God is the] Exalted Father’).” - bracketed information is in the original.
But perhaps most instructive of all is the compound name given to the prophet’s child in Isaiah 8:3 shortly before his giving the name found in Is. 9:6.
Is. 8:3
Maher-shalal-hash-baz: Literally, “spoil speeds prey hastes” or “swift booty speedy prey.” Translated by various Bible scholars as: “In making speed to the spoil he hasteneth the prey” - - “swift [is] booty, speedy [is] prey” - - “the spoil speeded, the prey hasteth” - - “Speeding for spoil, hastening for plunder” - - “There will soon be looting and stealing”- - “Speeding is the spoil, Hastening is the prey” - - “The Looting Will Come Quickly; the Prey Will Be Easy” - - “Take sway the spoils with speed, quickly take the prey” - - “Swift is the booty, speedy is the prey” - - “Swift the Spoils of War and Speedy Comes the Attacker” - - “Make haste to plunder! Hurry to the spoil!” - - “Make haste to the spoil; fall upon the prey.” - - “Your enemies will soon be destroyed.’” - TLB. - - “They hurry to get what they can. They run to pick up what is left.” - NLV.
And trinitarian John Gill wrote:
“‘hasten to seize the prey, and to take away the spoil.’ Some translate it, ‘in hastening the prey, the spoiler hastens’; perhaps it may be better rendered, ‘hasten to the spoil, hasten to the prey.’”
Therefore, the personal name at Is. 9:6 has been honestly translated in the footnote as:
“And his name is called: Wonderful in counsel IS God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace” - The Holy Scriptures, JPS Version (Margolis, ed.)
to show that it is intended to praise the God of the Messiah who performs great things through the Messiah.
The Leeser Bible also translates it:
“Wonderful, counsellor of the mighty God, of the everlasting Father, the prince of peace”
Also, An American Translation (by trinitarians Smith & Goodspeed) says:
“Wonderful Counselor IS God Almighty, Father forever, Prince of Peace.”
From the Is. 9:6 footnote in the trinity-supporting NET Bible:
".... some have suggested that one to three of the titles that follow ['called'] refer to God, not the king. For example, the traditional punctuation of the Hebrew text suggests the translation, 'and the Extraordinary Strategist, the Mighty God calls his name, "Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."'"
Of course it could also be honestly translated:
“The Wonderful Counselor and Mighty God Is the Eternal Father of the Prince of Peace.”
And the Tanakh by the JPS, 1985, translates it:
[1] “The Mighty God is planning grace;
[2] The Eternal Father [is] a peaceable ruler.”
So it is clear, even to a few trinitarian scholars, that Is. 9:6 does not necessarily imply that Jesus is Jehovah God.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
I’m blown away by all you’ve said above. When the truth is spoken, who can in righteousness refute it??
Two things:
- “The name ‘Abram’ “means ‘Exalted Father,’ probably in reference to God (i.e., ‘[God is the] Exalted Father’).”
And:
- “So it is clear, even to a few trinitarian scholars, that Is. 9:6 does not necessarily imply that Jesus is Jehovah God.”
- “So it is clear, even to a few trinitarian scholars, that Is. 9:6 ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT imply that Jesus is Jehovah God.”
What they constantly and DISINGENUOUSLY do is to simply claim that Jesus is ‘GOD’...!!!
Now, we know that the term (meaning) of ‘God’, is:
- ‘Majestic’, ‘Highest’, ‘Most Noble’, ‘Ruler’, ‘Commander’, ‘Superior’, ‘....’ etc
So [a] God is ‘nothing more’ than the ‘person’, the deity of spirit, or the person in flesh, or stone of stick or animal, whom they WORSHIP.
We encompass ALL those meanings into ONE WORD: ‘GOD’. And if more than one then ‘GODS’.
In CHRISTIANITY... in Judaism, ... in ISLAM... we believe that there is ONE AND ONLY ONE DEITY whom we call GOD... so we need not even speak a name for ‘him’ but say only: ‘God’. We need not say like pagans, ‘Which God are we worshipping... tell us his name?’
But the fallacy of trinity forces the mind to say: ‘Which OF THE THREE are we submitting ourselves to’ at any one time... is it Jesus? Is it The Holy Spirit? Is it the Father?
But trinity has been around for a while and Satan is not sleeping... they say: ‘Subduing to ANY ONE is subduing to ALL..,!’
And that sounds fine and well meant.., until you realise that it is therefore COMPLETE FOLLY that there should be THREE SUPERIORS, THREE RULE MAKERS, THREE ... which are all identical, absolute, inseparable, immutable, all powerful, all eternal (from forever..,!) ..... and yet are ALL DIFFERENT:
- Jesus is not the Father (but: ‘I and the Father are one’)
- The Father is not the Holy Spirit (but If you lie to the Holy Spirit then you are lying to [the Father])
- The Holy Spirit is not Jesus (But The Holy Spirit TAKES FROM that which is Jesus’ and gives it to the apostles...)
And how does Jesus only do AFTER he first sees the Father do - and say only AFTER the Father first reaches him what to say.. yet Jesus IS THE SAME GOD as the Father... (repeat for yourself what ‘God’ is defined as!!)
It comes to the fore that trinity presents a fallacy and conundrum that cannot be resolved by any common reality truth - and truth is one thing... there are not MANY TRUTHS concerning one thing... so there is only ONE GOD for a true believer and cannot be differentiated to MANY DEITIES... as trinity tries to profess!!!
Last edited:
Muffled
Jesus in me
I believe it is a paradox. He was blind even though he could see but needed to be blinded so he could see.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
S’what I said... cool!!
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
I think clearly Paul had a lot of problems.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
Name two...!
IndigoChild5559
Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
He taught salvation by faith alone, despite the fact that this message doesn't exist in the Torah. Emunah in Hebrew means both faith and faithfulness -- Hebrew doesn't tear the two apart the way Greek does. What is taught from Genesis to Chronicles (the last book in Jewish Bibles) is that we are to obey, obey, obey. Paul completely lost touch with this.
Paul also hallucinated on the road to Damascus. It makes me wonder about his emotional stability.
Soapy
Son of his Father: The Heir and Prince
I think your argument is invalid.
If you are arguing from the point of view of Judaism then everything you just said is prejudiced by your disbelief of the Christian view point.
You cannot Argue that a Christian is wrong or has been misled if you don’t first believe in what the Christian believes. ... You cannot believe or not believe in anything Christian if you don’t believe there is such a thing as Christian.
We who believe in Christianity (true Christianity - not the trinitarian nonsense!) accept that Paul has his attitude changed by his confrontation with the risen Christ Jesus while on the road to Damascus. We believe that his aggression AGAINST the new Christ-belief was used by God as an Unquenchable force FOR the new belief.
We are told that Paul was sent to the gentiles because he accepted that the Jews had rejected Jesus and Jesus had rejected them in turn. Paul argues with Peter about this very fact so much so that the two parted company... Peter was shown by God that it is he who was wrong... that ALL FOOD (people) cleansed by God was favourable to eat (to be accepted into the faith of his Son, Jesus Christ).
Paul was afflicted with medical problems but did not pray for relief. He willingly subjected himself to his suffering as a way of showing that he was looking forward to life in the new world and anything in this world was merely a temporary problem he was willing to put up with. It also served to show other apostles and believers in Christianity that we shouldn’t pray for earthly and fleshly comforts but rather that of the Spiritual only.
As a start to you understanding the above, can you understand that God had already prophesied that the Saviour would be ‘rejected by his own’?
- 41 Now as He drew near, He saw the city and wept over it, 42 saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things thatmake for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. 43 For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side, 44 and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.” (Luke 19:41-44)
- Isaiah 28:16: “Therefore thus says the Lord God, ‘Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation: “Whoever believes will not be in haste.” ‘ ”
Believe in Christianity and all else falls into place as to the state of the world today.
One question... What is the state of the Jewish view of the messiah today - Do you believe the messiah is still yet to come (first coming?) - and what are the signs you are looking out for towards that revelation??
moorea944
Well-Known Member
[He taught salvation by faith alone,]
Totally incorrect! First of all, faith IS a big part of this and obedience too. Faith and obedience go hand and hand together. Paul also taught alot of other things too. What else saves us? Paul tells us that faith, endurance, truth, baptism, etc, etc. But faith is part of it.
Look at the book of Romans, Paul tells the Jews that you dont need that Law anymore, it was never meant to save!!! It was to bring us to Christ. We are all understand sin, none of us are any good! We all fall short of God's Glory! Salvation is now by faith. Jews hated to hear that, they thought they were all ready saved and good to go with their Heavenly Father because they were Jews and that they had the "Law". Paul says no!!
[despite the fact that this message doesn't exist in the Torah.]
The message of faith isnt in the Torah? You serious?!?.... Of course it is!! Just look at Abraham.... Read Hebrews 11 (the faith chapter), plus Paul also says in Romans, and he was trying to make the Jews understand this, was Abraham accounted worthly and justified before God before or after curcumcision?.....
[What is taught from Genesis to Chronicles (the last book in Jewish Bibles) is that we are to obey, obey, obey. Paul completely lost touch with this.]
Again, incorrect. I can tell that you dont read the NT, if you did, you would know what is in Paul's letters and what is in it.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
That's true of most fundamentalist Protestant churches but not of Catholic, Orthodox, and most mainstream Protestant churches. Jesus' "Sermon On the Mount" is basically a call for the need to live out of a lifestyle based on "love one another...".
Oeste
Well-Known Member
Oeste
Well-Known Member
No, your statement is incongruous. You can be both parent and friend Soapy.
If you are a Parent, try it. I think you'll be please with the results. God certainly did the same with Abraham.
So scripture lies?
John 15:15 - Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you.
James 2:23 - And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.
And getting back to the OP, did you forget that Jesus laid down his life for his friends?
John 15:13 - Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.
So we know God called Abraham His friend. We also know Jesus called his apostles "friends". What do you think happened afterwards? Did Abraham and the apostles proclaim God and Jesus was no friend of theirs??? Did they look this up on the internet?
Well that may be the problem...you're looking things up on the internet rather than the bible.
Scripture please? Or do I look this up somewhere else??
Oeste
Well-Known Member
Correct
Incorrect.
But no worries! For purposes of this thread we've banished any Trinitarian thinking and now we're all a bunch of happy Unitarians trying to rightly divide the word of God.
I don't see why not.
Jesus is the Father of our future. As various translations put it:
Douay-Rheims Bible
For a CHILD IS BORN to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace.
For a CHILD IS BORN to us, and a son is given to us, and the government is upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called, Wonderful, Counsellor, God the Mighty, the Father of the world to come, the Prince of Peace.
or literally:
Young's Literal Translation
For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.
For a Child hath been born to us, A Son hath been given to us, And the princely power is on his shoulder, And He doth call his name Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Father of Eternity, Prince of Peace.
Whoa! Now I am confused.
The Watchtower clearly states that Jesus is a "Mighty God", and now Tigger 2, a Jehovah Witness, says differently. Who are we to believe?
You're not "running ahead of the chariot" here, are you?
That would be correct. The difference, of course, is that the names in Isaiah 9:6 are used to describe the child born, rather than simply serve as a "pointer" to our heavenly Father. So the names would obviously be intended to describe the person who bore them.
Otherwise this child would be no different than every other "Tom, Dick, and Harry" in Israel. Just give your child a "pointer" name, and you too could be the prophet!!
In other words, this child would have the characteristics of these names, and not simply "point" to someone else who does.
Did you forget the "child is born..." part directly preceding this?? Also, I can't seem to find this peculiar translation anywhere. As such I suspect this is your own personal translation.
Which of course brings us back to the question: Is Tigger 2's translation more accurate, more "honestly translated", than the NWT?
It appears to me, however wrongly, that once the Watchtower started modifying scripture the "cat was out of the bag". As such, it would not be unexpected if members feel they could make "needed adjustments" by doing the same.
In any event, these have been interesting and entertaining asides from the OP, which still remains unanswered.
Scripture becomes easier to harmonize when Jesus is God, so difficult when he is not!