What are we really dealing with here?

[APAK]

k then, manana
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus
for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God
For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we
of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God
That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in
he gave authority to become sons of God -- to those believing in his name
for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus
'Happy the peacemakers -- because they shall be called Sons of God

Yes, I was going to say we are also considered sons of God as you just pointed out in scripture....

 

[APAK]

@bbyrd009 ...
also...as the angels had/has God's nature and immortality. Jesus in heaven has God's nature and immortiality, and we as true believers will have the same nature of God and immortality when we are also glorified and transformed...

 

[Naomi25]

The Pope is not the mouthpiece for God. He is the guy who speaks the same truth, even when the world rejects it. If the person who is acting Pope speaks new revelation or different ideas from orthodoxy he is an antipope.

Well...I'd argue against that. I believe Catholics claims that the Pope, when he speaks "ex cathedra", he is speaking as the supreme pastor and teacher of the Universal Church...he is defining doctrines regarding faith and morals...and is, in this role, infallible.

So...You can call it "ex cathedra" or "mouthpiece of God", but ultimately it's the same, wouldn't you say?
And as for new revelation....how would you understand "defining doctrines of faith and morals?' It's that last in particular that bothers me. Like, for example...do we find anywhere in scripture that tells us we can "work off our sins" by doing anything...like saying "hail Mary's", or "Our Fathers"?
The fact that there is nowhere in scripture that points to the permissible appointment of a universal bishop appointed specifically by Christ (no, not even Peter, and even then, there is nothing to suggest that 'appointment' would be handed down to another, then another) means that in effect each and every Pope is only interpreting 'faith and morals' by his own dividing. Yes...he might be genuinely saved, and genuinely have the Spirit, just as every other Christian does. But we see...just on this forum alone, how much differing opinions on scripture we get. So basically, the RCC is going to be beholden to, not infallible interpretation, but very fallible interpretation.

 

[Naomi25]

Hi Naomi. The core of the problem is that the protestant churches never fully distanced themselves from Rome. They have retained some of the foundation beliefs of Rome and continue to practice and believe errors they should have discarded years ago. Because they retain many of those basic doctrines, they are still a part of Babylon and therefore still subject to the same fate as is Babylon. Now Rome is challenging the protestants and asking, if what you believe is the same as us, why are we so divided?
Which is a fair question. However, not all of us believe the same as Rome. But most on this thread do. They are defending Rome and calling the RCC a Christian denomination. The only reason any non Catholics can do that is because they agree with her. They are therefore already deceived by the antichrist and will accept the mark of the RCC when it comes into force.
The purpose of this thread is to encourage protestant and/or non-Catholics into taking a closer look, or scrutinising more closely what they and Rome believes, and working out whether or not they need to move further away than they already are. Claiming Rome has the basics right but you disagree on a few minor issues is going to get you into ak load of trouble down the track.

What are the the foundational beliefs the Protestants have kept from Rome, if you don't mind me asking?

 

[Naomi25]

You are correct it was my mistake

I fear in my haste to appease flesh I was untruthful to the Lord and his truth, I didn’t want you to be upset with me so in answering your reply I compromised the truth for the sake of peace, this was a mistake which has pricked my conscious all night and therefore I feel I must amend my last statement.

The children of light (those begotten of the truth), are to make no compromise when it comes to the truth, as it is written,

“The wisdom which comes from above is FIRST pure, THEN peaceable, gentle, willing to yield to reason (but not to error)…” James 3:17

NOT peace first, but purity first, truth first. God first, his will, his plan, his way. It is earthly wisdom, which suggest “peace at any cost”, which commands the conscience to be silent when others are promoting errors so that selfish peace may be promoted. We have not enlisted into the Lord’s army merely to be on the defensive to be used as a battering ring against the assaults of the Adversaries deceived servants, if so why are we admonished to wear armor? “Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God…” (Eph 6:11)

Unfortunately even some of the Lord’s dear one who profess spirit begettal are being used by the Adversary to promote errors, chiefly the idea that in order to insure peace among the brethren there must be some compromises, some give and take with respects to our faith in order to insure peace, unity, NOT SO the Apostle was quite admit in his statement when he stated that the wisdom which comes from above (i.e. the truth) was first to be pure, truthful, unvarnished by worldly attempts to make it palatable to all, it was never intended for all (not presently) only for a specially called out class who would put the Lord first, his truth first before all others.

We are to love in this order, the Lord first, then the truth, then the brethren.

So then I was wrong to say that you were not a part of the Antichrist but merely deceived, if you are a member of the system which promotes the doctrines of men and of devils, the church nominal whether that be a member of the “Mother” system (the Catholic Church) or a member of one of the “daughter” systems (the Protestant branches of the church) you are a part of the Antichrist.

As for those not joined to any of the various orthodox churches (independent Christians), even yet if you still believe and or promote any of their erroneous doctrines you are a part of the system, the system of error, the Antichrist. As it is written your master is the one with whom you render service.

Now you say, ‘well if you’re not a member of one of the orthodox churches (the common or acceptable branches of Christendom) then you must be in a “cult”’. In your haste to accuse you left out one other option, the “true Church”, that is unless you don’t believe there is a true Church. Oblivious if the Lord considers both the Mother and the daughters (for she is not called the Mother of all harlots for no reason) to be a part of “Babylon the Great” then it’s for certain that none of these are the true church. The very fact that the Lord is calling his people (his true followers) to flee Babylon, to come out of “her” (Rev 18:4) confirms this.

The Antichrist, the Mother of Harlots, Babylon these are all titles given to the great system of error and deception devised by the Adversary to entrap the Lord’s people, the apostate church which the Lord has condemned, and implores his people to flee.

But one may ask, ‘Where shall we flee?’

“For wheresoever the carcass (the truth, the food) is found, there the eagles (the Lord’s true people, those keen of vision and appetite) will be gathered together (brought together by the mutual apprehension of the truth, as eagles are drawn to their food)” Matt 24:28

The truth is not to be found in Babylon, she has been cast off by the Lord, you will have to venture outside the realms of orthodoxy to find the truth and the Lord’s true people, the true Church has long since heeded the Lord’s call to come out of Babylon, all that remains of the Lord’s people in Babylon are “babes in Christ” malnourished and undeveloped Christians, starving for food (truth).

As for Babylon, “The light of a lamp (the Bible, the truth) shall not shine in you anymore, and the voice of bridegroom (the Lord) and bride (the true Church) shall not be heard in you anymore. For your merchants (the clergy, the religious leaders) were the great men of the earth, for by your sorcery (deceptive errors) all the nations were deceived.” Rev 18:23

The implication of this scripture is rather straight forward it clearly states that the true Church (those near or fully grown) are no longer to be found in Babylon, and that the Lord’s voice (his word, the truth) is no longer heard there either, why? Because the light of the lamp has gone out. Therefore it is imperative that any of the Lord’s true people left there depart as soon as possible, because if they linger to long they will suffer the plagues coming upon Great Babylon.

Well, thanks for your honestly. But, considering that you think I'm part of the AC system, and that you are a part of the true Church....I think it would be appropriate at this point, before we go forward, for you to actually give us what it is that you believe. We know that you consider the Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestant Orthodox ones to be against God...we got that. But if you honestly expect us to have an "ah ha!" moment and head out on to your "true church", then we need a little more than that. What's your statement of beliefs, your core doctrines?

 

[Naomi25]

well i am sure you have as much authority as he does, yes, but an important point is that not near as many ppl believe it, right. Fwiw i bet the pope would agree with all of this, at least on some level. My understanding is that he is a pretty humble guy.

He might very well be. He might be a great guy and a good Christian. I just think that to take the seat that he did, he has to have a fundamental flaw in his understanding in what Jesus meant for the Church to be. In how he intended it to function, with the Spirit as helper, Christ as mediator and nothing or no-one needed as a go between of 'figure-head'. But....I suppose that's why I'm Protestant and not Catholic!!

 

[Naomi25]

why this is coming to me i don't know, but it occurs to me that an alien monitoring us from space might believe that we worship 16 oz plastic bottles, that being something that we universally embrace. i can hear the report back to the home planet even; "they seem to love these things, all different colors, different fluids being consumed from them, they even like to fill their oceans with them after they are empty, they cast them beside their roads and walkways, i mean they are everywhere boss."

Or chocolate! "Free chocolate if you follow me!". That could work. What people won't do for chocolate...or free stuff. People are a little stupid...

 

[Naomi25]

well, you might read a post or two above that one for context, i was basically commenting on them. But bam test everything against the Book too, don't get me wrong. They heard the Word, and then read the Book to verify it, so "verifying via the Word" just struck me funny
it has to do with incorrectly labelling Scripture as Word, i was just suggesting mental exercises that might illuminate the difference. But let me reiterate that this is not a big deal to me, and if you want to believe that the Book is the Word (even though you cannot Quote that) then i am fine with that
well, how did you come to believe that the Book is the Word? Scripture did not teach you this, right. Some Guy did. Nice guy too, i'm sure, don't get me wrong. Had good intentions, etcetc. Quite probably a better person than me even, by many measures. i am not interested in judging the guy, but the info.

Well...it's more of an "ipso facto" thing. The bible is a book (psst...books are full of words). The words are from God...some are right out of his mouth, or Jesus' mouth. Therefore, the Bible is God's word. Some guy might have told me this, but more likely I came to this startling conclusion myself. 'Cause I'm sharp like that.

 

[Naomi25]

lol, i get you, ya. Word will never violate the Book, ok. But Book will never breathe the truth right onto your neck, either. I am a terrible example of a witness for Word though, but i have heard just enough that it makes me cringe when you say the Book is the Word, simply bc that means you cannot, by definition, be still seeking Word, or wondering what Word is, right.

so iow i am being codependent basically, pls don't take this as some kind of "placing you"
my guess is you have heard Word plenty of times, that whisper, and have just labelled It differently

So...if I'm reading you right, you're making the distinction between book (bible) and Word (Holy Spirit)? Because I don't necessarily disagree with you, I just think you don't need to categorically pull them apart so much. Don't you feel the Spirit while reading the truth of God's word? Doesn't it echo in your soul? And then, even when not reading, the Spirit can whisper to you...sometimes it's just feelings, pressings upon the conscience. But other times he brings to mind those very passages, those truths. As David said...his word is as sweet as honey, and you can just savor it in your mouth...or soul. We don't need to...and shouldn't, separate them. They go hand in hand, and that's how God wants it.

 

[Harvest 1874]

You said: "...the Lord’s true people,..."
"...if you are a member of the system which promotes the doctrines of men and of devils, the church nominal whether that be a member of the “Mother” system (the Catholic Church) or a member of one of the “daughter” systems (the Protestant branches of the church) you are a part of the Antichrist."

Can someone who is 'a part of the Antichrist' (say a typical Protestant) be saved? Or maybe you think only you and the 'Lord's true people' can be saved?

Just because one resides within the system (the apostate church) does not mean they are not saved.

All men have been (past tense) saved from the original curse (Adamic sin), which was brought upon us by father Adam, this was paid by Christ by means of the ransom sacrifice, this of course does not imply that they will receive enteral life, that is conditional upon the completion of their trial. Presently only the true Church (those who have been spirit begotten) are on trial, the rest of man-kind as well as the church nominal will receive their trial in the next age.

 

[Harvest 1874]

Thank you for taking the time to explain yourself.

I still believe that study is NOT the most important thing. The most important thing is Love or Charity as per I Cor 13 for without it nothing else, including knowledge gained through the study of the scriptures, is worth anything at all.

As to ignorance being bliss, that is a statement that men have made, but I would go slow with applying it to people who in any measure strive to walk with God. Not every believer is the in depth Bible student that you may be, but how important is that to God? Do we suppose that God would bless good Bible students more than those who simply love Him with all that they have? Not everyone is various reasons is, or is even able, to be a good student.

The scriptures state that we are to grow BOTH in the graces (the fruits of the spirit) AND in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. The two go hand and hand it is impossible to grow in the graces without a corresponding growth in knowledge, and of course vice versa.

This is why we have some naive Christians who are all HEART (zeal), and no knowledge, and others who are all HEAD and no heart.

It is written:

"It is not good to have zeal without knowledge, nor to be hasty and miss the way.” Prov 19:2

Those who lack knowledge are prone to jump ahead imaging that God wants them to do such and such without being for sure, having not consulted first with the Word of the Lord. Others are found attempting to teach others what they themselves have yet to have learned. Without a proper knowledge of the scriptures one is easy prey for the snares of the Adversary. It was our Lord's knowledge of the scriptures which allowed him to defeat the Adversary.

The Lord states that we are to put on all the armor, not merely the "breast plate" of righteousness, but we should likewise be knowledgeable enough to weld the "sword of the spirit", the word of God, that we may engage the enemy. Unfortunately due to a lack of study most are unprepared to do this and thus fall easily to the onslaught of the enemies errors.

The scriptures likewise point out that we should always be prepared to give an answer for the hope that is within us to any who ask, but if you have not taken the time to study the doctrine, your questioner can easily stumble you and and make you look foolish, and not only you, but likewise the Word of God which you profess to believe. Skeptics love naive Christians.

How could anyone accept the word of one who isn't even sure about the truths they professes?

 

[brakelite]

What are the the foundational beliefs the Protestants have kept from Rome, if you don't mind me asking?

The RCC herself claims one doctrine above all others as being essential to faith and practice...in fact she believes or professes that all her dogmas and doctrines are built on that one tenet of their faith...the trinity. Or at least, their version of it. Now if you look into the history of how the orthodox doctrine of trinity was first brought about, the means by which it was first established in the Christian church, and through whom it was established, it may well cause current believers in that doctrine some cause for embarrassment. That fact that those original promoters of the doctrine had great difficulty in explaining it in terms anyone could understand, yet demanded everyone believe it anyway, smacks of fraud to me. Particularly when it is realized that it is only an assumed doctrine in the first place.
The other fundamental belief of Catholicism, one which they hold particularly dear to their heart; one which they created themselves and boast of for that reason; and because almost everyone agrees with her on that one precious doctrine, Protestants included who ironically claim sola scriptura, Rome claims it as a sign that all agree with her authority to create it in the first place...being a doctrine that comes from tradition and not from scripture. It is also a doctrine she is avidly promoting today throughout Europe...has been a principle topic in many papal encyclicals over the last 20 or so years, and was used throughout Papal history as an excuse to persecute those who did not accept it. That doctrine is Sunday sacredness. Anyone who accepts Sunday sacredness is submitting to Papal authority, and denying the authority of scripture. Rome herself boasts that by the simple fact that Sunday is universally accepted, it shows she has power to implement doctrine that in the past is contrary to God, but because they have the power to bind and loose, God accepts the new rules. Which of course is typical Antichrist mindset...us in place of Christ. Our day in place of Christ's day. They even had the gall to call Sunday the Lord's day. Such is 'in your face' blasphemy.
Now of course there are other doctrines of Rome we will all disagree with. But those are the two main ones which Protestantism has inherited, and seem very reluctant to let go...despite that fact that neither are taught explicitly in the Bible. So much for sola scripture.
One last thought. If the trinity is the foundation of Catholicism as she boasts, and it is proved that Rome is the Antichrist (and it can be)...how can the root be true and all the branches and fruit be false? What we know is that all the doctrines and dogmas are false...how can they be founded on truth? Including Sunday?

 

[Harvest 1874]

Well, thanks for your honestly. But, considering that you think I'm part of the AC system, and that you are a part of the true Church....I think it would be appropriate at this point, before we go forward, for you to actually give us what it is that you believe. We know that you consider the Roman Catholic Church, and the Protestant Orthodox ones to be against God...we got that. But if you honestly expect us to have an "ah ha!" moment and head out on to your "true church", then we need a little more than that. What's your statement of beliefs, your core doctrines?

We accept Christ as our personal Savior, and that he died not only for the Christian, but for the whole world. (1 Tim 2:5, 6; 4:10; John 3:16)

We accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God and study it in its entirety - seeking the harmony of the complete Scriptural testimony. (2 Tim 3:16, 17)

We believe that each individual is responsible to personally study and prove the interpretation of the Bible for themselves. (2 Tim 2:15) We strongly recommend topical Bible study as the best means of arriving at God's meaning on any particular subject.

We encourage a complete, personal consecration of our all to God, accepting the trials and sufferings that such a life brings as not worthy of comparison with all the joys and glories to come. (Rom 12:1, 2; 8:17-19, 22-23; 2 Tim 2:11, 12)

We believe:

Both the Old and New Testament are God's inspired words; the primary source of all Truth.

Man did not evolve but was created.

God created his only-begotten Son, Jesus. Jesus in turn created all other things.

Jesus descended from heaven to earth and was born of Mary as a perfect human man, NOT as God in flesh.

God raised Jesus from death in a Spirit body, not in a physical body of flesh.

The Holy Spirit is Jehovah's active power and force, NOT a person.

The Trinity is nowhere to be found or taught in the Bible (except by those who have wrestled the scriptures, twisted them to imply something which they do not).

Man is mortal he does not possess an immortal soul. (Man does not possess a soul, man is a soul), and the soul ceases to exist after death.

We do not believe in the doctrine of “eternal torment” as the wages sin, death is the wages of sin. "Hell" is from the same Greek and Hebrew words for "grave," describing the sleep of death, NOT eternal torment.

We believe we are now living in the "time of the end", the time of the “harvest”; the separation of the wheat and the tares has commenced, the “sickle of truth” is the dividing tool.

Earth will never be literally destroyed or completely depopulated.

In the Kingdom, Christ will rule the earth in righteousness and peace.

There are two phases to the kingdom, the earthly phase which will be inhabited by restored mankind, and the spiritual phase which will be inhabited by those begotten of the spirit, those who have experienced a change of natures.

By their faithfulness to God, the obedient of mankind will be granted what our original parents lost-everlasting life in human perfection on a paradise earth.

This is just some of what we believe, there’s more but this should prove sufficient enough for you to get the jest of what we believe.

 

[brakelite]

He might very well be. He might be a great guy and a good Christian. I just think that to take the seat that he did, he has to have a fundamental flaw in his understanding in what Jesus meant for the Church to be. In how he intended it to function, with the Spirit as helper, Christ as mediator and nothing or no-one needed as a go between of 'figure-head'. But....I suppose that's why I'm Protestant and not Catholic!!

Any church, individual, NGO, or state controlled entity that deems it appropriate to impose on others any religious conviction, right or wrong, and threaten some form of compliance order or inducement or threat of punishment, is making themselves 'god'. Such is the RCC, and such are many Protestant churches as well. And such will be that soon to come global counterfeit that enforces the mark of the beast.

 

[Harvest 1874]

@bbyrd009 ...
also...as the angels had/has God's nature and immortality. Jesus in heaven has God's nature and immortiality, and we as true believers will have the same nature of God and immortality when we are also glorified and transformed...

Nowhere in Scripture is it stated that angels are immortal, nor that mankind restored will be immortal. While, on the contrary, it is a quality which is ascribed only to the DIVINE NATURE—to Jehovah (1 Tim 6:16; 1:17), to Jesus in his present highly exalted condition, and to the Church, the "little flock," the "Lamb's wife" and "joint-heir," when glorified with him (2 Tim 1:10).

Despite what is commonly taught not all believers are going to receive immortality, only those who make their calling and election sure, who are proven faith even unto death will receive the crown of life. (Rev 2:10).

The definition of MORTAL is, a state or condition of being liable to death. Not a condition of death, but a condition in which death is a possibility.

The definition of IMMORTAL is, a state or condition not liable to death. Not merely a condition of freedom from death, but a condition in which death is an impossibility.

 

[Harvest 1874]

What are the the foundational beliefs the Protestants have kept from Rome, if you don't mind me asking?

The false doctrine of the Trinity
The false doctrine of eternal torment as the wages of sin.
The false doctrine of the immortality of the soul.

These three doctrines are in complete opposition to the doctrine of the ransom.

 

[brakelite]

We accept Christ as our personal Savior, and that he died not only for the Christian, but for the whole world. (1 Tim 2:5, 6; 4:10; John 3:16)

We accept the Bible as the inspired Word of God and study it in its entirety - seeking the harmony of the complete Scriptural testimony. (2 Tim 3:16, 17)

We believe that each individual is responsible to personally study and prove the interpretation of the Bible for themselves. (2 Tim 2:15) We strongly recommend topical Bible study as the best means of arriving at God's meaning on any particular subject.

We encourage a complete, personal consecration of our all to God, accepting the trials and sufferings that such a life brings as not worthy of comparison with all the joys and glories to come. (Rom 12:1, 2; 8:17-19, 22-23; 2 Tim 2:11, 12)

We believe:

Both the Old and New Testament are God's inspired words; the primary source of all Truth.

Man did not evolve but was created.

God created his only-begotten Son, Jesus. Jesus in turn created all other things.

Jesus descended from heaven to earth and was born of Mary as a perfect human man, NOT as God in flesh.

God raised Jesus from death in a Spirit body, not in a physical body of flesh.

The Holy Spirit is Jehovah's active power and force, NOT a person.

The Trinity is nowhere to be found or taught in the Bible (except by those who have wrestled the scriptures, twisted them to imply something which they do not).

Man is mortal he does not possess an immortal soul. (Man does not possess a soul, man is a soul), and the soul ceases to exist after death.

We do not believe in the doctrine of “eternal torment” as the wages sin, death is the wages of sin. "Hell" is from the same Greek and Hebrew words for "grave," describing the sleep of death, NOT eternal torment.

We believe we are now living in the "time of the end", the time of the “harvest”; the separation of the wheat and the tares has commenced, the “sickle of truth” is the dividing tool.

Earth will never be literally destroyed or completely depopulated.

In the Kingdom, Christ will rule the earth in righteousness and peace.

There are two phases to the kingdom, the earthly phase which will be inhabited by restored mankind, and the spiritual phase which will be inhabited by those begotten of the spirit, those who have experienced a change of natures.

By their faithfulness to God, the obedient of mankind will be granted what our original parents lost-everlasting life in human perfection on a paradise earth.

This is just some of what we believe, there’s more but this should prove sufficient enough for you to get the jest of what we believe.

While I find myself agreeing with much as written above,(although in discussion with JWs I have discovered that there are a few nuances to them that give cause for concern) there is one basic tenet which you, and your church, errs on. The identity of Jesus. And because you get that one so wrong, the rest, even if they are correct, become meaningless. Your claim that He was created is a complete denial of His being begotten. Scripture describes Jesus as being the "first-born" of all creation. This is absolutely true, on many levels. He was born...begotten...which means that He inherited the nature of His Father. As a Son He also inherited His Father's name...God. Which is why God could say to His Son, "Thy throne oh God is for ever and ever." He is His Father's Son, and is in every sense, as much God as is the Father...by inheritance. It is why God could say to the angels, worship Him. IT is why Hebrews 1:6 describes Jesus as being first-begotten and as such being sent of His Father into the world. Jesus was the Son of God from when He was first begotten. Jesus was a Son when He created all things. Jesus was a Son when His Father sent Him to die. Jesus is a literal born Son of the Father. How, we are not told. But that He is a Son in a sense no other being is, is our salvation, and is the Rock upon which the church is built. "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God". When God says He sent His only begotten Son into the world, I believe He had an only begotten Son to send.

 

[brakelite]

well, i have to agree that Catholicism--as opposed to Catholics--is a good fit, but so are other institutions. i don't really perceive Established Protestantism to be any closer to God, personally.

If you trace all prophecy where it refers to the Antichrist, beginning in Daniel 7 where he refers to the little horn growing from among the ten, to that final and full revelation of manifestation of the Antichrist as a whore riding the beast in Revelation 17 and 18, and then comparing with history, one may be able to readily follow the career of the RCC from its inception as it grew to power from shortly after the apostles died, to her establishment as a state power in the 6th century, through the 1260 years of persevering over the saints through persecution and state sponsored war (42 months/1260days/time,times, and half a time) to the 18th century and her deadly wound in 1798 (Naploeon's Genral Berthier capture of the Pope and confiscation of all Papal states)when she lost her statehood temporarily,(the mortal head wound) to its reinstatement in 1929, (Lateran Treaty)and her growing to fullest maturity as we share today. She has fulfilled not just a few of the prophetic criteria, but every single one, without exception. And many of those criteria are so ancient, it is impossible for any future or present individual or institution to fulfill them. Impossible. Rome is far far more than a 'good fit'. She was built for the role. No-one else can wear her mantle.

 

[brakelite]

k then, manana
You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus
for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God
For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God
Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we
of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God
That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in
he gave authority to become sons of God -- to those believing in his name
for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus
'Happy the peacemakers -- because they shall be called Sons of God

Jesus is the Son of God by birth. Angels by creation. Us by adoption.

 

[Harvest 1874]

While I find myself agreeing with much as written above,(although in discussion with JWs I have discovered that there are a few nuances to them that give cause for concern) there is one basic tenet which you, and your church, errs on. The identity of Jesus. And because you get that one so wrong, the rest, even if they are correct, become meaningless. Your claim that He was created is a complete denial of His being begotten. Scripture describes Jesus as being the "first-born" of all creation. This is absolutely true, on many levels. He was born...begotten...which means that He inherited the nature of His Father. As a Son He also inherited His Father's name...God. Which is why God could say to His Son, "Thy throne oh God is for ever and ever." He is His Father's Son, and is in every sense, as much God as is the Father...by inheritance. It is why God could say to the angels, worship Him. IT is why Hebrews 1:6 describes Jesus as being first-begotten and as such being sent of His Father into the world. Jesus was the Son of God from when He was first begotten. Jesus was a Son when He created all things. Jesus was a Son when His Father sent Him to die. Jesus is a literal born Son of the Father. How, we are not told. But that He is a Son in a sense no other being is, is our salvation, and is the Rock upon which the church is built. "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God". When God says He sent His only begotten Son into the world, I believe He had an only begotten Son to send.

First of all I’m not a Jehovah’s Witness nor have I ever been, so let’s get that out of the way.

Now you state: Your claim that He was created is a complete denial of His being begotten. Scripture describes Jesus as being the "first-born" of all creation.

This very text you quote implies that he was indeed a created being, the first born of all creation, God’s first and last work, all that was subsequently created, both the seen and the unseen viz. the angelic realms, the angels themselves, the universe, galaxies, stars, planets and etc., the earth, man, animal, birds, fish all these things were accomplished through our Lord, the Logos (the Word of God), all things being of (or by) the Father (by his power) through the Son, as his representative. As our Lord once said prior to his having been exalted, having receive all power in heaven and earth, “I can do nothing of myself”.

Now as far as being begotten goes of course he was begotten, he was begotten twice, once at the very beginning when he was first created as the Logos and once again following his baptism at the Jordan, later following his death on the cross he was born again, this time to a much higher nature than that which he had previous held before taking the nature of a bond servant, as a man.