This really grabbed me today!

[Azim]

Following this thread, I wanted to share this verse I find quite interesting, from Matthew 11:25-27:

25At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. 26Even so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. 27All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him.

No one knows the Son, except the Father. And no one knows the Father, except the Son, and whom the Son reveals the Father to? So to know the Son, the Son has to reveal the Father to them first?

 

[Lambano]

It depends on what part of theology you are talking about. If you deny Christ is God are you really following him and trusting him? No. You don't know him.

12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. (1 Corinthians 13:12)

 

[bbyrd009]

Following this thread, I wanted to share this verse I find quite interesting, from Matthew 11:25-27:



No one knows the Son, except the Father. And no one knows the Father, except the Son, and whom the Son reveals the Father to? So to know the Son, the Son has to reveal the Father to them first?

does seem logically impossible huh

 

[Aunty Jane]

These 'essentials' have a common thread.

They all spiritually contaminate the 'inner person' and therefore seriously effect the fellowship as a whole.

The “essentials” were all things pertaining to Gentile practices, because Jews had already observed all these things from birth. Former pagans did not grow up with God’s law, neither were they bound by it when they came to Christ. They were used to practicing idolatry, immorality and eating blood and unbled (strangled) animals as part of their diet. They now had to adopt Jehovah’s standards in these “essential” things.

Cornelius and his household were the first Gentiles to become Christians without first converting to Judaism. They received holy spirit before their baptism, which was Jehovah’s seal approval and confirmation of Peter’s vision of the unclean animals.....Gentiles had now been “cleansed by God” and free to come to Christ in faith.

Christ ended the old law covenant by instituting the new covenant on the night before his death. (Romans 10:4; Romans 6:14)
Things pertaining to the old covenant like the sacrificial laws were no longer binding. Circumcision and Sabbath observance were not required by any Christian and so “the Israel of God” (Galatians 6:16) were a new nation made up of both Jewish and Gentile Christians...united by their faith and sanctified by the blood of Christ. (Acts 15:14)

 

[Carl Emerson]

The “essentials” were all things pertaining to Gentile practices, because Jews had already observed all these things from birth.

Not all - immorality was not uncommon among the Jews.

When Jesus said "He who is without sin cast the first stone..." this was telling.

 

[Aunty Jane]

How many Jews were around when the 7th day was made holy? Can you inform us when God removed the holiness from that day?

The sabbath law was to be a sign between Jehovah and whom?....Only Israel.

At Exodus 31:13-14, 17 it is written....
“But as for you, speak to the sons of Israel, saying, ‘ You shall surely observe My sabbaths; for this is a sign between Me and you throughout your generations, that you may know that I am the Lord who sanctifies you. Therefore you are to observe the sabbath, for it is holy to you. Everyone who profanes it shall surely be put to death; for whoever does any work on it, that person shall be cut off from among his people. . . . . It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed.” (NASB)

“So I took them out of the land of Egypt and brought them into the wilderness. I gave them My statutes and informed them of My ordinances, by which, if a man observes them, he will live. Also I gave them My sabbaths to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord who sanctifies them. Also I swore to them in the wilderness that I would not bring them into the land which I had given them, flowing with milk and honey, which is the glory of all lands, because they rejected My ordinances, and as for My statutes, they did not walk in them; they even profaned My sabbaths, for their heart continually went after their idols. Yet My eye spared them rather than destroying them, and I did not cause their annihilation in the wilderness.” (Ezekiel 20:10-12,15-17 - NASB)

While you claim that the sabbath law applied from Eden onward, Moses plainly stated to his people: “It was not with our forefathers that Jehovah concluded this covenant, but with us, all those of us alive here today.” (Deuteronomy 5:3)

Are you Jewish? Are you getting the point?

And the connection with the Sabbath is....

It was not “essential” for the Gentile Christians to follow Jewish Law, because they were not Jews, nor were they Jewish proselytes. These things were common in their pagan life prior to becoming Christians....
Galatians 3:23-25...
"But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the Law, being confined for the faith that was destined to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our guardian to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
Enforcing God's law on those to whom it was not given was pointless since "the law was [their] guardian leading [them] to Christ".....who fulfilled it....then it was dispensed with.

So only those 4 were essential? Which leaves adultery and theft and idolatry okay?

The word for sexual immorality there is "porneia" from which we get the word "pornography".....it means...

1. illicit sexual intercourse
   1. adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
   2. sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
   3. sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mark 10:11-12
2. metaph. the worship of idols
   1. 
      
   2. of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idol." (Strongs)

All of a Christian's conduct is based on "love of God and neighbor" so as it says in Strongs' definition..."
metaph. the worship of idols

1. 
   
2. of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idol."

Theft is covered by "love of neighbor". So these things are covered.....its a shame that you can't see them.

The Bible really opens up when you explore the original language words.....our understanding is stunted when we fail to do our own homework. You are missing so much but you don't seem to know or care about that as long as you maintain you chosen beliefs. They are yours to do with as you wish.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Not all - immorality was not uncommon among the Jews.

When Jesus said "He who is without sin cast the first stone..." this was telling.

You missed the point.....the Jews already knew God's law pertaining to sexual sin...the Gentiles did not. Since the Jews had known the Law from birth and were obligated to keep it, they had no excuse for their immoral conduct....the Gentiles needed to be educated about Jehovah's standards and to leave their former practices behind.

 

[Carl Emerson]

You missed the point.....the Jews already knew God's law pertaining to sexual sin...the Gentiles did not. Since the Jews had known the Law from birth and were obligated to keep it, they had no excuse for their immoral conduct....the Gentiles needed to be educated about Jehovah's standards and to leave their former practices behind.

The reason for the Jerusalem Council was to settle the issue of whether the Gentiles were required to keep the Law.

The answer was NO but the three requirements had the common consequence I outlined.

The Jerusalem Council did not insist that the Gentiles be schooled in the Law.

 

[Enoch111]

The Bible blatantly says Jesus is God.

I believe you meant "emphatically" or "unequivocally" rather than "blatantly" (which applies to falsehoods).

As to JWs being banned from Christian forums, at the very least the TOS should state that the doctrines of the deity of Christ and the Holy Trinity may not be subverted or opposed by any poster. Cultists surely have their own forums.

 

[Nancy]

Reading that scripture through a different lens, it is quite clear to me that he is not Almighty God.

Firstly, he is the “image” of his God. Is an image the same as the one reflected? Is the image in the mirror, you? Or is it a reflection of you?
We are all made in God’s image....it means that we possess his qualities...but it doesn’t mean that we are all God.

The Father created all things “through” the agency of his son, gifting it all to him.....“created through him and for him”....if Jesus is God, how can that be said? How does God give things to his equal self?

He existed before anything else.....but he did not exist before his Father because he is God’s “firstborn”. The Son is the first and only direct creation of his Father...that is what makes him unique.....all other things came via the Son by means of God’s spirit, which is the power behind all of God’s activities, directed to whomever and wherever he wishes.

The Son is “begotten” which means that his Father is his ‘begetter’...the one who caused his existence. (Revelation 3:14) The son had a beginning.....the Father did not.
“Begotten” means that the Father had to exist before his son....just like it is with us.

Jesus is the appointed “Mediator between God and men”.....if Jesus was God, again that makes no sense. If Jesus was God, we would need a mediator between us and him too. Sin is the barrier between us and our God...a barrier bridged by the agency of the Son, appointed as the ‘go-between’ so that we could still have our prayers heard by the Father, “in Jesus’ name”.

Jesus never taught that he was his Father’s equal and he plainly states in Revelation that the Father is his “God” even in heaven. (Revelation 3:12) How can God worship an equal part of himself?

It dishonours both the Father and the son to declare them as equals. It is a breach of the first Commandment. (Exodus 20:3) Blasphemous IMO.

How then does one explain "Let us make man in our image"? This was before "time" existed. The earth was formless, not even created yet. Who was God speaking with?
Thank you.

 

[Nancy]

What if yours is lying to you?

We will all know soon enough I guess.

No one really wins this argument.....because the answer is just the truth as the Bible has always told it. The Jews never knew this three headed god, and so the first Christians, (all being Jewish) would never have heard of it. It took over 300 years of apostasy to make it official in the Catholic church....and through much controversy.
So which truth has always been there.....and which one was introduced much later?

Those who commit blasphemy by attributing equal "god" status to Jesus Christ are in breach of the first Commandment, which is first for a very good reason. (Exodus 20:3) I can only voice what is truth to me. Your truth is yours to contend with. Who will Christ reject? (Matthew 7:21-23)

John 5:18
"Because of this, the Jews tried all the harder to kill Him. Not only was He breaking the Sabbath, but He was even calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

-The Jews sure understood that one, yes??


Philippians 2:6
"who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,"

This seems to be saying (to me) that, Jesus could have taken on equality with God and had men serve Him when He came. But, He became a servant TO His own creation.

Sry SBG, this touches a bit o the trinity but, it gets the point across
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
1 John 5:7

 

[Aunty Jane]

How then does one explain "Let us make man in our image"? This was before "time" existed. The earth was formless, not even created yet. Who was God speaking with?
Thank you.

You do understand that the material creation came last....? Since Jehovah and his "firstborn" son existed long before the creation of both heavenly things and material things, the son was used as the 'agency' in all creation as it says in Colossians 1:15-17...
"He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn 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 through Him and for Him. 17 He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."

So God created all things "through" his son...."all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible".
Do you see...? The earth was created along with the rest of the Universe by God's power in the hands of his son. He is the "us" and the "our" in God's declaration to Moses in genesis 1:1. He was God's "master workman". (Proverbs:8:30-31)
Creation was made "through" the pre-human Jesus, by the power of God's spirit.....and gifted to him by his Father.....

 

[Aunty Jane]

John 5:18
"Because of this, the Jews tried all the harder to kill Him. Not only was He breaking the Sabbath, but He was even calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God."

-The Jews sure understood that one, yes??

The Jews were looking to pin a charge of blasphemy on him so that they could get rid of him. Of course they were going to accuse him falsely. But calling God his Father was hardly admitting to being God. Read John 10:31-36 and see what God called the human judges in Israel ("gods") and also what Jesus called himself...(not God)

Philippians 2:6
"who, as He already existed in the form of God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped,"

This seems to be saying (to me) that, Jesus could have taken on equality with God and had men serve Him when He came. But, He became a servant TO His own creation.

Or it could mean that although he had come from heaven as a spirit being, (existing "in God's form" simply meant that he was a spirit being) and became a mere human, endowed with the power of God's spirit (received at his baptism).....what happened to Paul and Barnabas might have happened to him? In the first century, the townspeople of Lystra, upon seeing Paul heal a lame man, considered Paul and Barnabas to be gods, identifying Paul with Hermes and Barnabas with Zeus. The priest of Zeus even brought out bulls and garlands in order to offer sacrifices with the crowd. (Acts 14:8-18) Had Paul and Barnabas carried on to appease the crowds, they would have been treated as gods, but they refused the accolades.

Jesus was 100% human and open to temptation as much as any other......even though he was sinless, he was free willed like Adam, so he could have to succumbed to efforts to undermine his resolve to remain obedient to his God like Adam had done....otherwise the temptations from the devil make no sense.

Sry SBG, this touches a bit o the trinity but, it gets the point across
"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one."
1 John 5:7

That is a spurious verse that was never part of the early manuscripts....it was added later. There is no such thing as a "holy ghost".

 

[Enoch111]

That is a spurious verse that was never part of the early manuscripts....it was added later. There is no such thing as a "holy ghost".

You are wrong on two counts: (a) 1 John 5:7 is an integral part of that passage and Scripture, and this has been proven very effectively by many, and (2) "Holy Ghost" is also an integral part of Scripture and is an alternative name for the Holy Spirit. Even Luther's German has "Heilige Geist" which is an exact translation of "Holy Ghost", who is the third person of the Godhead.

 

[Aunty Jane]

You are wrong on two counts: (a) 1 John 5:7 is an integral part of that passage and Scripture, and this has been proven very effectively by many, and

It was never in the earliest manuscripts because it isn't true and does not belong there....though these words would have been most pertinent for trinitarians, early church writers never once used them.

The correct translation of 1 John 5:6-8 is....
"This is the one who came by means of water and blood, Jesus Christ, not with the water only, but with the water and with the blood. And the spirit is bearing witness, because the spirit is the truth. 7 For there are three witness bearers: 8 the spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."
There never was a trinity in that passage. It is omitted by the American Standard Version, An American Translation, English Revised Version, Moffatt, New English Bible, Phillips, Rotherham, Revised Standard Version, Schonfield, Wade, Wand, Weymouth.
If recognized scholars who support the trinity insist that it doesn't belong.....who are you to argue with them? The Bible was not written in archaic English....nor does it contain any reference by God or his son expressing any kind of equality or co-eternity.

(2) "Holy Ghost" is also an integral part of Scripture and is an alternative name for the Holy Spirit. Even Luther's German has "Heilige Geist" which is an exact translation of "Holy Ghost", who is the third person of the Godhead.

There is no such thing as a "holy ghost"....the word "ghost" does not appear in any passage of scripture.
"Ghost" is based on the German word "geist" which means "spirit". Was the Bible written in German?

The"spirits" spoken about in the Bible are not "ghosts" as in former dead people. The only "spirits" in the Bible are those who belong to the angelic family of God who found themselves observing a battle between the Creator and his adversary, who was one of their own, turned traitor.

When the Bible speaks of good spirits and bad spirits...they were all angels. All who dwell in the spirit realm are spirits, including God and his son. The holy spirit is not an entity...it is "God's spirit"...it belongs to him, it emanates from him, but is not an entity of itself.

Not until the fourth century C.E. did the teaching that the holy spirit was a person and part of the “Godhead” become official church dogma. Can you tell me why it took over three hundred years for God to become a threesome?

The early church “fathers” did not teach about a triune god.
Justin Martyr of the second century C.E. taught that the holy spirit was an ‘influence or mode of operation of the Deity’.
Hippolytus likewise ascribed no personality to the holy spirit. The Scriptures themselves unite to show that God’s holy spirit is not a person but is God’s power by which he accomplishes his purpose and executes his will.

 

[Lambano]

Was the Bible written in German?

Ask Herr Gutenberg.

 

[BARNEY BRIGHT]

God is Spirit. Spirit is invisible to the human eye. So this line falls apart really.

No actually it doesn't.

 

[stunnedbygrace]

No actually it doesn't.

lol…
Oh, okay, I see your point. You explained it very clearly…

 

[Nancy]

Indeed! How DOES God sit beside Himself??
And HOW can a man be born again? Can he crawl back into his mother’s womb?
And HOW can: my Lord said to my Lord, sit at My right hand?

I find it ludicrous when someone asks "HOW" God can do something. Is there anything He cannot do?

 

[Nancy]

The Jews were looking to pin a charge of blasphemy on him so that they could get rid of him. Of course they were going to accuse him falsely. But calling God his Father was hardly admitting to being God. Read John 10:31-36 and see what God called the human judges in Israel ("gods") and also what Jesus called himself...(not God)


Or it could mean that although he had come from heaven as a spirit being, (existing "in God's form" simply meant that he was a spirit being) and became a mere human, endowed with the power of God's spirit (received at his baptism).....what happened to Paul and Barnabas might have happened to him? In the first century, the townspeople of Lystra, upon seeing Paul heal a lame man, considered Paul and Barnabas to be gods, identifying Paul with Hermes and Barnabas with Zeus. The priest of Zeus even brought out bulls and garlands in order to offer sacrifices with the crowd. (Acts 14:8-18) Had Paul and Barnabas carried on to appease the crowds, they would have been treated as gods, but they refused the accolades.

Jesus was 100% human and open to temptation as much as any other......even though he was sinless, he was free willed like Adam, so he could have to succumbed to efforts to undermine his resolve to remain obedient to his God like Adam had done....otherwise the temptations from the devil make no sense.


That is a spurious verse that was never part of the early manuscripts....it was added later. There is no such thing as a "holy ghost".

You guys seem to have an "excuse" for so many verses...not the right version, they changed this or that...blah blah blah.
You seem to be an intelligent woman, and you are very faithful to the JW's. I know you think that the Arc angel, Michael was, is Jesus...God NEVER called an angel His son. You are too swift for me and I won't take you on.