Wrangler
Well-Known Member
You are taking Thomas' words - out of context! All you got is eisegesis. "My" landlord is not everyone's landlord. You know this. You carry on the self-deception, anyway.I'll take Thomas' word over yours any day.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
You are taking Thomas' words - out of context! All you got is eisegesis. "My" landlord is not everyone's landlord. You know this. You carry on the self-deception, anyway.I'll take Thomas' word over yours any day.
The Bible is the context. Jesus is God the Creator.You are taking Thomas' words - out of context!
I didn't interpret anything. You are! You're doing exactly what you're accusing me of doing!All you got is eisegesis. "My" landlord is not everyone's landlord. You know this.
So your argument is, 'the Bible doesn't mean what it says, it means what I say it means'. Just like JW's!You carry on the self-deception, anyway.
Um . . . that's not what I've claimed. You are sidestepping my question.So the meaning of “theos” is not what you claim. Calling someone “theos” isn’t necessarily calling them Yahweh….
Symbolic, no, I'm sorry. This is narrative prophecy.When the symbolic mountain splits,
That IS why they killed Him, so yes, they did reject Him for making Himself equal with God.No Jew would ever have accepted a Messiah who claimed to be God. That would have been blasphemy.
Actually, I have been reading the various replies. You claim Jesus is "a god", but you claim only one God, therefore, Either Jesus is that one true God, or you have more than one God. This is simple arithmatic. Of Jesus is a false god. That's your other option.Apparently you don’t read our replies….we acknowledge ONE God…..Yahweh.
Sure you are! You are taking Thomas' personal comment to be a universal truth. That's eisegesis.I didn't interpret anything. You are!
Marks. AJ is the exact opposite of one who side steps. More than almost anyone else here, she gives comprehensive answers.Um . . . that's not what I've claimed. You are sidestepping my question.
You have a God and a demi-god apparently, which makes you polythiestic, which makes you false.
So you admit Thomas called Jesus "my God". Good for you. Jesus taught Thomas personally.Sure you are! You are taking Thomas' personal comment to be a universal truth. That's eisegesis.
A JW cheerleader! No surprise.Marks. AJ is the exact opposite of one who side steps. More than almost anyone else here, she gives comprehensive answers.
And I don't know how you can repeat your claim that she (JW) have a God and a demi-god after what she wrote. You are not merely ignorant; you are willfully ignorant.
It's fine if you do not agree with us on the point under discussion but it is in bad form to misrepresent what our position is.
Well . . . she side-stepped me. So there you go.Marks. AJ is the exact opposite of one who side steps. More than almost anyone else here, she gives comprehensive answers.
And I don't know how you can repeat your claim that she (JW) have a God and a demi-god after what she wrote. You are not merely ignorant; you are willfully ignorant.
It's fine if you do not agree with us on the point under discussion but it is in bad form to misrepresent what our position is.
Zechariah 14:1-5 KJVWhen the symbolic mountain splits, half to the north and half to the south, Yahweh’s feet remain set upon both mountains. “A very great valley” comes into existence beneath his feet. This symbolic valley represents divine protection, by which Jehovah’s servants find safety under his universal sovereignty and his Son’s Messianic Kingdom. God will make sure that pure worship will never be snuffed out, no matter how wicked human society becomes.
Just because Jesus preached on the Mount of Olives, doesn’t mean that he is Yahweh.
Ditto!Sure you're not JW? You're quite evasive of the Scriptures I posted. I'll take Thomas' word over yours any day. Jesus taught Thomas. Who 'taught' you?
"our position", so apparently Wrangler is JW.It's fine if you do not agree with us on the point under discussion but it is in bad form to misrepresent what our position is.
Suddenly I'm wondering . . .
Isn't the Watchtower doctrine that Michael became Jesus, and then became Michael again?
Can someone confirm that? Maybe I'm getting mixed up.
Much love!
I have never declared Jesus to be a demi-god.....Um . . . that's not what I've claimed. You are sidestepping my question.
You have a God and a demi-god apparently, which makes you polythiestic, which makes you false.
Reading John 10:31-36 in Greek, makes it evident that Jesus was not calling himself “God” (Almighty, Yahweh) because the definite article is missing there, as I have already shown you. If Yahweh himself can call human judges “gods” because they represented him, call Jesus what he called himself “the son of ho theos”.... (Yahweh)That IS why they killed Him, so yes, they did reject Him for making Himself equal with God.
You see what you did there....? You seem to have very little comprehension of anything that is outside of your own indoctrination......you gave me two options.....your options. This is not an “either/or” scenario.Actually, I have been reading the various replies. You claim Jesus is "a god", but you claim only one God, therefore, Either Jesus is that one true God, or you have more than one God. This is simple arithmatic. Of Jesus is a false god. That's your other option.
Once again, I've never said that Theos = YHWH. Theos is the word for God/god.“You claim to know Greek and yet you fail to acknowledge what the word “theos” actually means in Greek rather than how it is understood in English.
Then Who is this male child called "Mighty God"?I have never declared Jesus to be a demi-god.....
My reply to you was....
“You claim to know Greek and yet you fail to acknowledge what the word “theos” actually means in Greek rather than how it is understood in English.
Strongs gives the primary definition of “theos” (god) as …..
So the meaning of “theos” is not what you claim. Calling someone “theos” isn’t necessarily calling them Yahweh….even satan is called “theos”. Judges in Israel were called “gods” by Yahweh himself. They were divinely authorized as God’s representative. Jesus too was Yahweh’s representative on earth. He only ever said he was God’s son….never that he was Almighty God in human form. No Jew would ever have accepted a Messiah who claimed to be God. That would have been blasphemy.”
- “a god or goddess, a general name of deities or divinities”
Reading John 10:31-36 in Greek, makes it evident that Jesus was not calling himself “God” (Almighty, Yahweh) because the definite article is missing there, as I have already shown you. If Yahweh himself can call human judges “gods” because they represented him, call Jesus what he called himself “the son of ho theos”.... (Yahweh)
You read very selectively, only focusing on what you want my words to say....I am a Bible student of many years, and research is my favorite thing to do......don’t put words in my mouth...especially not your words because what you believe is not scriptural in any way.
You see what you did there....? You seem to have very little comprehension of anything that is outside of your own indoctrination......you gave me two options.....your options. This is not an “either/or” scenario.
The simple arithmetic is that God is one, not three. The simple truth is that God has a son who is “only begotten”. He was begotten long before anything or anyone else existed according to the apostle Paul.
Colossians 1:15-17 is a concise and accurate statement.....read it.
Speaking about Jesus he said....
“Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” (KJV)
What does this tell us? That the son is the “image of the invisible God”. What is an “image”? If I show someone a photograph of my father, is that image my father, or does it simply reflect what he looks like?
And if he is the “firstborn of every creature”....what is a creature? It is a living entity, of which the pre-human Jesus was the “firstborn”.
As Revelation 3:14 says, Jesus addresses the seven congregation and says.....
“And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God”.
He calls himself the “beginning of God’s creation”.
All of creation came “through” the agency of God’s “firstborn”. This includes the angels as he is their Commander. He is NOT the Creator and never once does scripture tell us that Father and son are equals in any way. The son, like all other creation, is a “servant” to his God and Father. (Acts 4:30)
Jesus always acknowledged his Father’s position as “the only true God” (John 17:3)
In answer to your other question.....
As commander of the angelic forces, we do believe that the pre-human Jesus is Michael the Archangel. There is only one archangel and he is “the great prince” spoken about in Daniel, who stands in behalf of God’s people...and always has.
Nothing prevents him from being Michael as he has many names in the service of his God. Each name is attached to the role he is playing. On his return to heaven he now has a new name. (Rev 3:12)
Thomas was not wrong in declaring his Lord as a ‘divine mighty one’, which is what “theos” means in Greek.Ditto!
If Jesus were not God, and did not refuse Thomas' worship, that would be sin. Just like the angel in the Revelation. And to ascribe Thomas' words as if he were using "My Lord and My God" as though it were the ancient version of the modern day "OMG", that's some of the poorest Biblical interpretation I can imagine.
You seem to think that JW’s are the only ones who reject the trinity.....we are not. The “our” in @Wrangler’s statement includes all who deny that Jesus is anything but what he called himself.....”the son of God”.Regarding who is and is not JW, ......
"our position", so apparently Wrangler is JW.
LOL....now that made me laugh.Maybe review my posts?
It sounds to me that you don't really understand the Koine Greek rules for articles. There were many statements Jesus made, not just this one.Reading John 10:31-36 in Greek, makes it evident that Jesus was not calling himself “God” (Almighty, Yahweh) because the definite article is missing there, as I have already shown you. If Yahweh himself can call human judges “gods” because they represented him, call Jesus what he called himself “the son of ho theos”.... (Yahweh)
You read very selectively, only focusing on what you want my words to say....
Never mind, I have no taste anymore for this kind of conversation. You needn't reply to my posts, I'll not be replying to yours.You seem to have very little comprehension of anything that is outside of your own indoctrination