Is Jesus God?

betsy123

New member
a7485efaf46dd7b9ac5afdff0c4d35c8.jpg


The Hebrew has "YHWH" in verse 2.


I was referring to the actual verse that he quoted - he changed "Lord" to "Jehovah."
 

betsy123

New member
I made a reply to this in my last post to you (#409), I will cop and post what I said, maybe this time you'll answer the question you ignored, something you accuse me of ironically.

How is YHWH having titles and Jesus having the same titles a dilemma?

If Jehovah alone is a savior and yet makes another savior to save a group of people through, how many saviors are there, one or two?

(Judges 3:15) Then the Israelites called to Jehovah for help, so Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Eʹhud the son of Geʹra, a Benʹja·min·ite who was left-handed.

(Isaiah 43:11) I—I am Jehovah, and besides me there is no savior.”

E'hud is a savior according to Judges 3:15, Jehovah is the only savior according to Isaiah 43:11, how many saviors do we see in the above, 1 or 2?

I've answered that, too. I'll repeat the gist of my response to that:


Jesus isn't like any other human saviors (those who saved Israel).
Jesus saved MANKIND by dying for our sins! To compare the prophecied Messiah (Jesus) to saviors who'd been annointed by God to save Israel, is to diminish what Jesus Christ had undergone for man, and the importance of such act to mankind.

If we take a close look at what JW teaches - a lot of it is about downgrading Jesus Christ!



I've dealt with your point, two people sharing titles does nothing to my understanding of the scriptures, it doesn't contradict anything, however it does with your belief system, answer my above question in bold about saviors.

Your understanding of the Scriptures has been warped by the false teachings that has been given you!

You're in a state of denial too. All the arguments JW give has been contrary or in conflict with the Scriptures! It is inconsistent with the Bible!

It's more than just sharing titles too! Read them again!
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
The Apostle Peter, and the Apostle John were both real Christians and they believed Jesus was the Son of God, and not God himself. Maybe that’s because Jesus agreed with them, and they were standing right there when God told them that.

Peter and John, according to you, "believed Jesus was...not God himself". Since, by "God himself", you mean God the Father, all you are saying is that Peter and John "believed Jesus was not God the Father". Bravo!
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
If you don't believe Jesus is God Himself - then, you're committing idolatry in your worship of Jesus! You commit idolatry when you serve Jesus Christ!

But, you have to remember: NWL doesn't worship Jesus; NWL doesn't serve Jesus Christ.
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
this nonsense about what it does not say is grasping at straws... Are you saying that Jesus was at a loss for words... We are discussing the scripture... which is what is written... and what is said... bringing up what was not said is a strawman... Paul wrote to us there is but one God The father.. not one God The Trinity..

At least you admit, here, that "what was not said" in Scripture is that Jesus is not God the Son.
You admit, of the Bible, that "what it does not say" is that God is not Triune.

You are, thereby, admitting that you did not learn your doctrines (that Jesus is not God the Son, and that God is not Triune) from Scripture; you are admitting that those beliefs of yours are extra-Biblical.

Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that Jesus is not God the Son?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.

Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that God is not Triune?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.​
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
Yep and you didn't understand what Peter was saying... see if you can glean anything from this passage...33 And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

35 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in:

36 Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me.

37 Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?

38 When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?

39 Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?

40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

42 For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink:

43 I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not.

44 Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee?

45 Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me.

46 And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.

Based on your understanding when Jesus said if you did it unto to them you did it unto me... they were actually feeding clothing and visiting Jesus in prison...

You imagine you have lit upon some analogy between Acts 5:3-4 KJV and Matthew 25:33-46 KJV? Is that what you're trying to get at? If not, what? Now, why ever did you just copy/paste the Matthew passage, and then merely write part of a sentence, all broken up by ellipses, rather than actually try to spell out for us, as clearly and exactly as you can, the nature of your supposed analogy? Let's hear your explanation, right away, please! Very, very curious, here! :)

  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds (according to your supposed analogy) to the Holy Spirit in the Acts passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to God (in the phrase "but unto God") in the Acts passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to the men mentioned, in the Acts passage, in the phrase, "not lied to men"?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to those who "gave [Jesus] meat" in the Matthew passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to "the least of these [Christ's] brethren" in the Matthew passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to Christ in the Matthew passage?

Go ahead, Professor, please flesh out for us, as clearly and concisely as you can, the analogy you suppose inheres between the two Scripture passages. We sit humbly and patiently at your feet, waiting to be made wise by your wisdom. :)
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
to show me that the Trinity is biblically true you have to show me where the scripture says that God is a Trinity

Now, feel free to try this out, also, just for fun:

"Originally Posted by newbirth61, but slightly tweaked by 7djengo7->

to show me that the Trinity is biblically [false] you have to show me where the scripture says that God is [not] a Trinity

You do believe the Trinity is "biblically [false]", don't you? Then, by all means, please show us where (according to your imagination) "the scripture says that God is [not] a Trinity". Should be no problem for you, right? I mean, after all, you learned "that God is [not] a Trinity" from Scripture, did you not?

Remember, as some of your fellow anti-Christs (as well as, perhaps, yourself) take great pride in pointing out, the word 'Trinity' cannot even be found in the Bible. And why not? Because the Bible does not teach "that God is [not] a Trinity".
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
At least you admit, here, that "what was not said" in Scripture is that Jesus is not God the Son.
You admit, of the Bible, that "what it does not say" is that God is not Triune.

You are, thereby, admitting that you did not learn your doctrines (that Jesus is not God the Son, and that God is not Triune) from Scripture; you are admitting that those beliefs of yours are extra-Biblical.

Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that Jesus is not God the Son?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.

Q. Where did newbirth61 get his/her doctrine that God is not Triune?
A. From outside the Bible, as newbirth61 admits.​
What part of the Bible does not say that do you not understand???I will agree not to discuss anything that the scripture does not say if you will agree to same. It's that simple. Let's discuss only what the scripture say. Can you do that???
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
Now, feel free to try this out, also, just for fun:



You do believe the Trinity is "biblically [false]", don't you? Then, by all means, please show us where (according to your imagination) "the scripture says that God is [not] a Trinity". Should be no problem for you, right? I mean, after all, you learned "that God is [not] a Trinity" from Scripture, did you not?

Remember, as some of your fellow anti-Christs (as well as, perhaps, yourself) take great pride in pointing out, the word 'Trinity' cannot even be found in the Bible. And why not? Because the Bible does not teach "that God is [not] a Trinity".
You seem to have an understanding problem.I will not be discussing anything that the scripture does not say. For example the scripture does not mention Trinity therefore the Trinity cannot be a point of discussion... the scripture does not say Jesus is God therefore Jesus is God cannot be a point of discussion. That would be like adding to the scripture.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
You seem to have an understanding problem.I will not be discussing anything that the scripture does not say. For example the scripture does not mention Trinity therefore the Trinity cannot be a point of discussion... the scripture does not say Jesus is God therefore Jesus is God cannot be a point of discussion. That would be like adding to the scripture.

Thomas said to Jesus "the Lord of me and the God of me."

You say "Jesus is not God."

Who's right, you or Thomas?
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
You imagine you have lit upon some analogy between Acts 5:3-4 KJV and Matthew 25:33-46 KJV? Is that what you're trying to get at? If not, what? Now, why ever did you just copy/paste the Matthew passage, and then merely write part of a sentence, all broken up by ellipses, rather than actually try to spell out for us, as clearly and exactly as you can, the nature of your supposed analogy? Let's hear your explanation, right away, please! Very, very curious, here! :)

  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds (according to your supposed analogy) to the Holy Spirit in the Acts passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to God (in the phrase "but unto God") in the Acts passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Matthew passage, would you say corresponds to the men mentioned, in the Acts passage, in the phrase, "not lied to men"?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to those who "gave [Jesus] meat" in the Matthew passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to "the least of these [Christ's] brethren" in the Matthew passage?
  • Whom or what, in the Acts passage, would you say corresponds to Christ in the Matthew passage?

Go ahead, Professor, please flesh out for us, as clearly and concisely as you can, the analogy you suppose inheres between the two Scripture passages. We sit humbly and patiently at your feet, waiting to be made wise by your wisdom. :)

Ok it's quite simple...Ananias was speaking to Peter and the other apostles. Therefore when he said.. you have not lied to men he was referring to himself and the other apostles...So if you want to believe that Peter meant that Ananias was actually speaking with the holy Spirit and God you would have to conclude that He Peter was the holy Spirit / God. But since we know that is not the case then we have to conclude that the holy Spirit/God must be in Peter and the other apostles as dictated by the scripture. In any case as a believer if you lie it is God you are lying to. That is the reason I brought up the particular passage that says if you did it unto them you did it unto me... It's the same principle. Whatever a believer does to another believer it is done as unto Jesus. And whatever the unbeliever does to a believer it is done as unto Jesus. The father has committed all things to Jesus..
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
Since, by "God", you mean God the Father, here is what you have just told us:



Well done, Professor! A+ for you! :)
Yep and to us there is but one God The father... not one God The Trinity..1 Cor 8
5 For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)

6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

7 Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
Thomas said to Jesus "the Lord of me and the God of me."

You say "Jesus is not God."

Who's right, you or Thomas?
That is your conclusion ... Jesus called his Father God... and there is only one God... Jesus told Peter that his father in heaven revealed to Peter that he Jesus was God's son... Did Jesus make a mistake.. because Jesus and the Thomas are not saying the same thing...
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
That is your conclusion ... Jesus called his Father God... and there is only one God... Jesus told Peter that his father in heaven revealed to Peter that he Jesus was God's son... Did Jesus make a mistake.. because Jesus and the Thomas are not saying the same thing...

You missed it. Try again.

Thomas said to Jesus, "the Lord of me and the God of me."

You say "Jesus is not God."

Who's right, you or Thomas?
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
Why are you guys still discussing things that the scripture does not say??? Even if Thomas called Jesus God you can't use that to confirm something that the scripture does not say...
 

newbirth61

BANNED
Banned
Lord of me would be Jesus... and God of me would be the father... remember that God made Jesus Lord and Christ... Unless you are saying that Jesus is the father... are you saying that Jesus is the father???
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Why are you guys still discussing things that the scripture does not say??? Even if Thomas called Jesus God you can't use that to confirm something that the scripture does not say...

Are you calling Thomas a liar?

If not, then you should accept that Jesus is God based on the fact that Thomas is recorded as calling Jesus God, and that after which, Jesus DID NOT REBUKE HIM, as ANY righteous creature would do when called God.

We're discussing what is in scripture. You seem to reject what Scripture says in favor of your own extrabiblical belief that Jesus is not God.

Again:

Thomas said to Jesus, "the Lord of me and the God of me."

You say, "Jesus is not God."

Who's right, you or Thomas?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Lord of me would be Jesus... and God of me would be the father... remember that God made Jesus Lord and Christ...

Thomas was speaking to Jesus, not muttering under his breath.

Unless you are saying that Jesus is the father... are you saying that Jesus is the father???

Are you asserting that ONLY the Father is God?

Because that's not what scripture says, and I thought you weren't interested in things the Bible does not say...
 

Lon

Well-known member
None of those verses say"Jesus is God"
Yeah, it does. Fact. ANYBODY with a 6th grade reading level understands 'with' and 'was' God. It is as plain as that. No equivocation needed. Verbatim.

what you are saying is that you understand the scripture to mean that....
:nono:
"Verbatim."

which is what you have to say...
:nono:
"Verbatim."
Means 'exactly what it says.'


I have posted verses that are explicit... Jesus is the son of God... Jesus ascended to His God... God said that Jesus is his so...I am not going to argue with what you conclude based on your own understanding...So unless you have a verse that says Jesus is God.. Jesus is the son of God
:nono: Doesn't matter. The verse in question ALREADY says 'with.' Do YOU understand that? It is word for word.
"Verbatim."
The next phrase says 'and was.' You are done. We are done. I am done. It is this simple. Help me out. Say you understand this. Thanks.
 
Top