JW/Jesus being God [split from General Theology]

[Yeznik]

“A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his lord. It is enough for the disciple to become as his teacher, and the slave as his lord. MATTHEW 10:24,25

Being equal with God in no way means being God.

You asked for the verse I gave it to you.

 

[IamAdopted]

Please tell me where in the bible you find that.

oh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
Joh 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
Joh 1:5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Joh 1:6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John.
Joh 1:7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him.
Joh 1:8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.
Joh 1:9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
Joh 1:11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.
Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,
Joh 1:13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:15 John *testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'"

 

[Oblio]

The Nicene Creed is wonderful and all, but it was written by men.

As was the Holy Scriptures.

 

[jesusfreak3786]

You asked for the verse I gave it to you.

Right and I proved that it doesn't mean that, can you refute that?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

The Nicene Creed is wonderful and all, but it was written by men.

As was the Holy Scriptures.

The Scriptures were written by those chosen by YHWH to write them, but the Creeds of Christendom interpreted what they themselves "felt" was correct. Big difference.
For example, where in the Creeds does it say there has to be a "Pope"?

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Ezekiel 29:3 "Speak, and say, 'Thus says 'Adonay Y@hovih : "Behold Me!, On you, O Pharaoh/Par`oh king of Egypt/04714 Mitsrayim, the Dragon/tanniyn, the Great who lies in midst of his rivers, which he says to Me, 'My River and I, I made for me [Revelation 12]

Mark 14:53 And they led away Jesus unto the chief-priest, and come together to Him do all the chief-priests, and the elders, and the scribes;

 

[Oblio]

For example, where in the Creeds does it say there has to be a "Pope"?

Uh, I'm Orthodox, not Roman Catholic, and I'm not sure what the Pope has to do with any of this.

What part of the Creed is not inspired of God ?

 

[jesusfreak3786]

oh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

qeon vs qeos In greek the words used for God in this verse are not the same. One means lesser god and the other means God as in Jehovah. Here is another way of putting it.


When the Apostle John wrote John 1:1, he used two forms of the Greek word for God. This is a very important point, when translating the verse into English. There's "θεον" (qeon) and there's also "θεος" (qeos).

Even to an untrained eye, it's clear that the final letter of the word is different. Yet, most modern English translations simply translate both forms as "God", even though there's a slightly different meaning. The only real linguistic difference between the two forms, is that 'qeos' is accusative and is 'qeon' nominative.

Curiously, the form 'qeos' is also used at 2 Corinthians 4:4 in reference to Satan. Yet, that isn't translated into English as "God", but as "god". So that raises the question — why do they translate it with a capital G in John, and a lower case G in 2 Corinthians?

Shouldn't it be translated the same way in both cases, even though one refers to Satan and the other to Jesus? If Jesus gets a capital "G" with that word, then Satan should too.

It is a clear case of mistranslation.

Joh 1:2 He was in the beginning with God.
Joh 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

Notice all things came to be, through him not by him.

Joh 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
Joh 1:5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Joh 1:6 There came a man sent from God, whose name was John.
Joh 1:7 He came as a witness, to testify about the Light, so that all might believe through him.
Joh 1:8 He was not the Light, but he came to testify about the Light.
Joh 1:9 There was the true Light which, coming into the world, enlightens every man.
Joh 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him.
Joh 1:11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him.

Joh 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,

And CO-HEIRS with him, a son. (sons or daughters receive an inheritance, you cannot be your own heir)

Joh 1:13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Joh 1:15 John *testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'"
[/quote]

All these other verses are in agreement that Jesus is God son.

 

[Oblio]

It is a clear case of mistranslation.

Care to tell us who translated your Bible ?

 

[Melethiel]

The only real linguistic difference between the two forms, is that 'qeos' is accusative and is 'qeon' nominative.

Other way around. If you can't get basic Greek grammar right, why should we believe you about the translation?

 

[jesusfreak3786]

I love how once people have been proven the truth of the matter they turn to personal attacks....good arguments keep them coming.

 

[Melethiel]

My question was a serious one.

 

[jesusfreak3786]

Other way around. If you can't get basic Greek grammar right, why should we believe you about the translation?

O.K. Then educate me as to how those translations don't apply.

And while your at it will you please explain to me why the word used to supposedly prove that Jesus and Jehovah are one is also used to refer to Satan also.

 

[jesusfreak3786]

My question was a serious one.

I truly didn't mean to offend you.

 

[Melethiel]

O.K. Then educate me as to how those translations don't apply.

And while your at it will you please explain to me why the word used to supposedly prove that Jesus and Jehovah are one is also used to refer to Satan also.

I don't even get the point you were trying to make with θεος vs. θεον. Nominative vs. accusative has to do with the grammatical form of the sentence, not any translational difference. Nominative is used for the subject of the sentence, while accusative is used for the object of the sentence.
Have you studied much Greek?

 

[PattyOfurniture]

I don't even get the point you were trying to make with θεος vs. θεον. Nominative vs. accusative has to do with the grammatical form of the sentence, not any translational difference. Nominative is used for the subject of the sentence, while accusative is used for the object of the sentence.
Have you studied much Greek?

please answer her question concerning why the same word (theos)is used for satan,Thank you.

 

[Melethiel]

please answer her question concerning why the same word (theos)is used for satan,Thank you.

Same as with the English word "god" - generic word. Also used for pagan gods and such. Context determines use.

 

[]RiSeN[]

Same as with the English word "god" - generic word. Also used for pagan gods and such. Context determines use.

Ah yes context determines use. Does the context require an indefinite article at John 1:1?

 

[JustHuman1]

So accourding to Trinitarian translation satan is also equal to Jesus since all it takes is for scripture to call you GOD and poof you are one with all the other gods and become one god made up of several gods.
If all it takes is to have theos refer to you to be part of the godhead
( I like this new God we all now have called God head)
oops but then the scriptures never say we must worship one godhead alone do they?
It doesn't take a Koine Greek major or Hebrew major to smell something fishy with the whole how many gods does it take to make one God theory

 

[PattyOfurniture]

Lets not forget that according to their 'logic'...Moses is God also(may God forgive me for typing this)
Exodus 7:1 says, “And the LORD said unto Moses, ‘See I have made thee Elohiym to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.’”

 

[PattyOfurniture]

Christianity is defined by The Church... and she speaks through the seven Ecumenical Councils.

The creed you agree to when you singed on to this forum is Christian.

JW are most assuredly outside Christianity.

Forgive me...

The most saddening thing about this post is that I do not see the phrase "the word of God","Gods word",or even the Bible.this is how upside-down things are today,this is beyond sad.