Between this and John 5:18 I left a Jehovah witness saying he must not be monotheistic. I pray God will water the seed. Much love brothers and sisters Jesus Christ is King
Amen I’ve subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have started a youtube channel with 31 videos Kindly subscribe to my youtube channel and share my videos in Jesus name Love and blessings in Jesus name,from Ireland
I had to see it again, can't wait to see your video about the trinity. "I would rather have questions I can't answer than having answers I can't question"...
Amen I’ve subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have started a youtube channel with 31 videos. Kindly subscribe to my youtube channel in Jesus name
Zero truth to this more ignorance then anything! His trying to confuse people, what he read is what he read, jehovah' is almighty psalms 83:18, Jesus is god like because his of Devine nature, yet his not God almighty! Jw do not treat him as a God but our savior threw him everything is done! Its very simple just have a clear mind n dont be a puppet Prov 3:5
Very good brother. In the past I took their own 1901 American Standard Bible that Watchtower Society use to publish before NWT. And I showed them Jenovah was the Mighty God and also the Almighty God. Jeremiah and Psalms. When they turn to Proverbs and said God's Wisdom was the one that created the world WITH Jehoavh, I would ask them when was God without His wisdom? As long as God was, His wisdom was. How else would He have the wisdom to create Wisdom?
Very informative as always and very easy to understand thanks again for taking the time to share God's word, I speak to Jehovahs witnesses all the time in my business I just try and plant a seed in the hearts and minds I try to express the core difference in our faith, and on John 1:1 I remind them that Jesus accepted worship in the Scriptures and only God is supposed accept worship ( JESUS IS GOD) and I also encourage them to study Johannes Greber and spirtism and the relationship he had with them , which is referenced by Watchtower and tract society on several occasions, thanks again brother!!!!!
I caught on the the polytheistic note of their interpretation/erroneous interpretation of John 1:1 but you are the first one I've seen that pointed that out. Enjoyed your video.
Treat them with respect even though they don't except what you tell them the word was given to them , remember he came to his own and they rejected him , some will listen n accept some won't those that reject him we must keep praying for them
Thanks and God bless. This is an excellent exhibit of how a person must put logic aside in order to believe the watchtower's doctrine. I've asked Jehovah's Witnesses to show me the proof of Jesus's creation, along with the destruction of his body after the crucifixion. All they can offer is watchtower rhetoric. It's sad, but they have been convinced that the Bible is incomplete without the supplement of the "new light" of watchtower material. So sad.
Hasn't the phrase "a god" been used in the old testament multiple times, denoting a "high status"? If yes, the "you're a polytheist" argument is pretty weak.
God Bless you. I just came across your channel, and I have watched and commented on a few of your videos. I want to thank you and show my support for the truth you tell. It is true that the Jehovahs Witnesses are being programmed, literally. I had two encounters at work. I had a high supervisor give me “Christian books” to give my little sister when I was new on the job. On downtime, I was sitting with an older coworker of mine, reading thru the children’s books. I turned the page, and out slipped a watchtower pamphlet. The coworker saw this, and then told me that it was a Jehovahs Witness pamphlet and that JWs are sneaky, and will go behind parents backs to get to the children. Then, my coworker told me about her live in JW nanny she had as a young child who also homeschooled her. When her parents weren’t home, which was most of the time, the nanny forced her to attend JW meetings, and she forced her to learn JW programming and pray to their false God as part of her homeschooling. The Nanny told her NOT to tell her parents or she would go to hell for being disobedient to God. One day, the mom found JW pamphlets, Bible and school lessons in the room the nanny used for homeschooling and called the nanny in and asked her about it. Of course, the nanny lied and said she didn’t know where it came from. Her mother asked her, and she told her mom the truth. The mom immediately fired the nanny and found a Christian nanny and homeschool teacher from their Christian Church.
The Greek theon in “the word was toward the god,” is in the accusative case ending and has the definite article (Gr. ho; English the) preceding it. It is correctly translated, “the Word was with God” in English. However, the 3rd clause in the verse contains theos in the nominative, singular form without an article: “and god was the word.” As controversial as it may sound to trinitarians, it is correctly translated as “and a god was the Word.” A minimal literal (“formal equivalence”) translation would rearrange the word order to match the proper English expression: “And the Word was a god.” This is consistent with other occurrences in the Greek. For example, the following are instances where various translators have rendered singular anarthrous predicate nouns occurring before the verb with an indefinite article (“a”) to denote the indefinite and qualitative status of the subject nouns. Examples are taken from the King James Version, New International Version, Revised Standard Version, and Today’s English Version: Mark 6:49: “a spirit” or “a ghost” Mark 11:32: “a prophet” or “a real prophet” John 4:19: “a prophet” John 6:70: “a devil” or “an informer” John 8:44: “a murderer” John 8:44: “a liar” John 8:48: “a Samaritan” John 9:17: “a prophet” John 9:24: “a sinner” John 10:1: “a thief” John 10:13: “an hireling” or “a hired man” John 10:33: “a man” or “a mere man” John 12:6: “a thief” John 18:35: “a Jew” John 18:37: “a king” If you study these occurrences in many translations, you will note that most translators consistently apply these translation rules, except when it comes to John 1:1c. Why the exception here? Bias. Bias has shaped most of these translations much more than has accurate attention to the wording of the Bible. The NW translation (New World Translation) of John 1:1 is superior to that of the other eight translations we are comparing. . . .it breaks with the KJV tradition followed by all the others, and it does so in the right direction by paying attention to how Greek grammar and syntax actually work. No translation of John 1:1 that I can imagine is going to be perfectly clear and obvious in its meaning. John is subtle, and we do him no service by reducing his subtlety to crude simplicities. All that we can ask is that a translation be an accurate starting point for exposition and interpretation. Only the NW achieves that, as provocative as it sounds to the modern reader. The other translations cut off the exploration of the verse’s meaning before it has even begun. - Truth in Translation - Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, Jason David BeDuhn, page 218 (ebook) Is There Scholarly Work that Shows How These Nouns Should Be Translated From the Greek? Philip B. Harner: In his article, “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1” (Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92, Philadelphia, 1973): “anarthrous predicate nouns preceding the verb may function primarily to express the nature or character of the subject, and this qualitative significance may be more important than the question whether the predicate noun itself should be regarded as definite or indefinite.” (page 75) “with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos. There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite.” (page 85) “In John 1:1, I think that the qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite. . . .Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’ This would be one way of representing John's thought, which is, as I understand it, that ho logos, no less than ho theos, had the nature of theos.” (page 87) What About the Other Occurrences of ‘Theos?’ Some insist that the New World Translation is inconsistent here because theos without the article in John 1 is not translated the same way in other locations. For example, some will claim that if the NWT was truly consistent and applied the grammatical rule of inserting the indefinite article “a” where the definite article (English “the”) was not present in Greek, we would have the following: There came a man who was sent as a representative of [a] God (theou); his name was John. - John 1:6 However, to all who did receive him, he gave authority to become [a] God’s (theou) children. - John 1:12 And they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from [a] God (theou). - John 1:13 And others. What they fail to note is that not only are the Greek constructs different in these other verses, but these other uses are genitive (theou), not nominative (theos). The genitive form of the noun, in this case theou, does not require the article (Gr. “ho;” English “the”) to be definite, whereas the nominative form normally does. In Koiné Greek, the nominative case ending usually indicates the subject of a sentence. It is normally preceded by the definite article. However, in John 1:1c, this nominative form (theos) is not preceded by the article. That being the case, the noun becomes “primarily qualitative in meaning,” as explained by Bible scholar, Philip B. Harner, in his article posted above
The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός…means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12. John 1:1 Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (theos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “and the Word was God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.
I used to be a JW and when I was challenging their views I challenged this as well and found no reason to abandon Arianism for the later philosophical construct of the Trinity dogma. Jehovah's Witnesses can't handle your reasoning because they don't know the biblical languages and can't read the Bible in them. That's because the Watchtower discourages them from learning them for obvious reasons. However, I do, and if we ever talked you can believe me when I tell you I would be reading from the text in those languages. What gets missed is that the Bible admits there are other Gods. Don't believe me? Turn to John 10 and see how Jesus handled the accusation that in verse 30 he made himself to be a god. In the Hebrew God didn't claim to be the only God, instead stated there was no other Gods on his Level, no God who was equal to him, or his peer. That is what the Hebrew in most of the Isaiah passages you quoted says. Because of that, I have no trouble copping to polytheism with the proviso that I only worship the one and see myself as an heir in his house betrothed to his son the other god. By the way, only one of the early languages into which the Gospels were translated which had the indefinite article, Sahidic Coptic which was translated in the 2nd century has come down to us with John 1:1 intact (Gothic from the fourth century had it but John 1:1 is missing from all copies still around). So the translation we have was made at a time when the translators both spoke Koine while it was still a spoken language and were devout men while some still accurately knew the Gospel. They knew the Greek better than any of us can ever possibly know it and they translated the c phrase as "and the word was a god." Hmmmm. In fact all known copies of Coptic known in any of its dialects where that verse survives translate it exactly the same way. That has modernCoptic scholars scrambling to explain it away since a JW studying Coptic noticed it and put it out there on the internet.
I am not sure what you mean by saying that the Watchtower discourages them from learning the original languages for obvious reasons. What are the "obvious reasons?" I actually know a few JWs and they are university and College Lecturers. Indeed, one is a Greek Specialist, an associate professor, and the other a Hebrew specialist.The Watchtower does help its readers to understand the concept of biblical monotheism.Finally, you suggested that JWs are in some way liked to Arianism. I can assure you that they are not and that most people who talk about Arius don't have a clue about what he taught. From what you said in your comments, you seem to be among them.
Omission of the article with "Theos" does not mean the word is "a god." If we examine the passages where the article is not used with "Theos" we see the rendering "a god" makes no sense (Mt 5:9, 6:24; Lk 1:35, 78; 2:40; Jn 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 9:16, 33; Ro 1:7, 17, 18; 1 Co 1:30; 15:10; Phil 2:11, 13; Titus 1:1). The "a god" position would have the Jehovah's Witnesses translate every instance where the article is absent. As "a god (nominative), of a god (genitive), to or for a god (dative)." But they do not! "Theou" is the genitive case of the SAME noun "Theos" which they translate as "a god" in John 1:1. But they do not change "Theou" "of God" (Jehovah), in Matthew 5:9, Luke 1:35, 78; and John 1:6. The J.W.’s are not consistent in their biblical hermeneutics they have a bias which is clearly seen throughout their bible.
In the BEGINNING the Word WAS, WAS, WAS. He is after the order of Melchizedek a King and a priest, without beginning or end of days the last part of the statement for obvious reasons could not be talking abut Melchizedek.
But Jesus never denied that he was A god...When quoting from Psalm 82:6 He said, at John 10:31-36 that they could not stone him for calling himself a god...cuz He was trying to make them understand that He was the son of God..! Believing that Satan exists and that the Bible calls him "a god" does not makes us politheists...(2 Corinthians 4:4). At Isaiah 9:6 Jesus is called "Mighty God" but there's not one single citation that addresses him as "Almighty God"...The Almighty God called him "MY SON" from heaven when he was baptized..! (Matthew 3:16,17)...John the Baptist called him the son of God, not The God.. (John 1:34)...and Jesus himself never claimed to be The Almighty God... (Matthew 16:13-17). Why is Jesus "... the way..." to the father (John 14:6) and "...the only mediator between God and Man..."(1Timothy 2:5) if he is, as many people believe, The Almighty God..???.. That does not make any sense..! Does it..? Oh! and please don't get me wrong cuz I'm not one of Jehovah's witnesses and I do not belong to any religious organisation whatsoever...I try to live my life as the Word of God commands...Thanks for your video and God bless you..!
In the very next chapter of Isiah. Chapter 10, Jehovah God is also called Mighty God. Mighty God is El Gibbor in Hebrew . Both the messiah and jehovah are called el gibbor
Also Jesus isn’t the father . Since John 1:1 says the Word was With God and the Word was God. He is begotten if the father, they share the same being/Substance, making him fully Divine. Father Son Homy spirit 3 persons sharing the same being of God
Hey Samuel, I have a very interesting study to share with about this topic. How can I reach you?It is undeniable in the NWT. I would like to share those notes
@@samueltolleyWhich church are true according to the Bible in this world? Because many churches are not true according to this scriptures, Matthew 7:21-23,Roman's 10;1-3,2Corintians 11:12-15,2thimoty 4:3-4,2Peter 2:1-3,1John 4:1.
Which church are true according to the Bible in this world? Because many churches are not true according to this scriptures, Matthew 7:21-23,Roman's 10;1-3,2Corintians 11:12-15,2thimoty 4:3-4,2Peter 2:1-3,1John 4:1..
You’ll know them by their fruits. These people bear no good fruit. They’ve also made several false prophesies over their decades of forming their doctrine. So much that their doctrine had to be changed time and time again. We all know what the Bible says about false prophets.
Scholar Robertson in his book New Testament Word Pictures says this regarding John 1:3 “Hence it is not a peculiar doctrine that John here enunciates. In 1Co 8:6, Paul distinguishes between the Father as the primary source (\ex hou\) of the all things and the Son as the intermediate agent as” Therefore he recognises Jesus was used by God to create not that Jesus himself created
There are so many reasons why John 1:1 can should simply not be used when talking about the trinity. In the Greek language, they do not use ‘indefinite articles’ such as “the” “a” or an”. So it is a 50 percent chance that it was meant to read “the word was God” and a fifty percent chance that it was meant to read the “the word was a god.” We simply can NEVER know. Also, some scholars believe that since the translators of the Bible had a leaning toward trinitarianism, that could also have affected which one they went with and they chose to leave the article “a” out of it. There are several bible translations that made the last part of it read “and the Word was divine”. Others say “and the Word was a deity.” In addition, in the original Greek language the Greek word logos (translated as “Word” in John 1:1) meant INTELLIGENT BEING”. Since these three arguments by themselves completely rule out ever knowing which translation was meant here, there are those and I am one of them, that feel that this particular scripture needs to be thrown out completely when arguing about the trinity. Now there are many other scriptures one can use in discussions of this type, but NOT this one.
Hi *Samuel Tolley,* I'm not a Jehovah's Witness and I agree they are wrong but you are also wrong in your understanding of John 1:1 and verse 3. If you would like to discuss this with me I be more than happy too if you are truly open to the concrete truth of the scriptures.
4:23 If you will notice the word "through" there. Are you familiar with how God delivered Israel through Moses. Or how God delivered the law through Moses. While it is called the Mosiac Law, it didn't come from Moses, did it? It came from God, delivered through Moses. Also consider this illustration. An officer comes into a room, and says "everyone in this room is under arrest". Is it reasonable to think the officer is also under arrest, or would he be an obvious exception? The point is, Jesus obviously did not create himself when it says al things were created through him.
Everyone is a technical polytheist since in one place the bible says "there are many gods and many lords." But as commonly applied, a polytheist is someone open to WORSHIPING more than one god not simply acknowledging the existence of other gods. Thus there are two definitions and you're trying to mix the two. In the meantime, since Christ is a God and God has set him up to be worshipped, even by the angels, worshipping both Jesus and Jehovah is polytheism, but it is God-approved polytheism. Our act of worshipping God involves worshipping Christ as well. In the meantime, the problem with John 1:1 is that if it was meant to refer to the Word as "a god" or simply "god" (as I prefer), there is no other way to Express that. However, if John really wanted to suggest that God and the Word were the same being, he would have used the definitive article twice. Thus John 1:1 interpretation as "and the Word was God" is a mistranslation. You must use other scriptures to claim Jesus and Jehovah are the same person. But how can you in the face of all the scriptures that call Jesus God's "SON." So I support polytheism as well as the JW teaching that Jesus is Michael, the archangel (1 Thessalonians 4:15-18) . Thanks for discussing this topic.
“ALL means ALL” ?? This is a something no JW’s I’ve ever talked with will concede. ALL and EVERY never means what they mean…. They always tap dance over this. BUT…. I think they get their argument from THIS verse… “For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.” 1 Corinthians 15:27-28 NIV So be prepared for that to.
That’s crazy showing the trinity with their own Bible. I have a work friend who is a JW 35yrs deep and I spoke to him the other day and told him I was worried about his salvation as he has nothing to worry about as he thinks he is a Christian.. I want to say thank you for helping me to help show some of the flaws for a false religion.
The only thing that is getting worse is your knowledge probs 3:5. Jesus is not a God by any means he is God like divine nature, Almighty God is only one Jehovah!!! jehovah's witnesses do not treat Jesus like a God but our savior! again God Almighty Jehovah God ONLY. The Bible is very clear you just refuse to see it all praise goes to Jehovah God 2+2=4
Since the Bible is from our heavenly Father, you will benefit the most if you have the attitude of a child who is ready to learn from a loving parent. If you have any negative, preconceived ideas about the Bible, try to set them aside so that God can teach you.-Psalm 25:4.
JW’s would argue this point by pointing out - there are various humans and heavenly beings called “gods” in the Bible. Moses, David, the Angel of YHWH… even the angels of the psalms “assemblies of the gods” “Ye are gods” And in John 10 if he called them gods to whom the Word of God came…. They would say God allows the “title” of god to be applied to beings that have a divine office or function as an agent of Jehovah …. So be aware you then have to contend with that…… Personally it still doesn’t get them out of the True God vs false god argument. But they would argue “well Jahoveh calls them ‘gods’ !”
Polytheism is the worship of more than one god/God. Henotheism is the belief that one God should be worship but they do not deny the existence that others can be called gods.
Efxaristo eimai poly kala (ευχαριστώ είμαι πολύ καλά). I totally think that this video plus your video about the question JWs cannot answer really ruins this deadly cult. And I would like to see more of these cult devestating videos. And why not make a video about the "light' God created on the first day (Gen. 1,3 Γεννηθήτω το φως). He creates the light on the first day but He creates the sun on the fourth day. So what kind of light of the first day? Ευλογία Κυρίου και έλεος έλθοι επί σε.
@Aubrey Shatner This is very easy to answer. The New Testament was written in Greek, as you know. What puzzles me is that not many people seem to know that Greek at that time was written ONLY in capital letters. "Small" latters came into existance in Greek at about the 9th century along with the Caroligian minuscule. So there is no possib;ility, none whatsoever, that God could be written as "god". It was definately written as GOD. Regards from Greece.
@Aubrey Shatner And who has told you that in ancient Greece there was no indefinite article? Probably somebody who doesn't know Greek like thise guys at Bethel. Ask them please what does 'εις' or "τις" mean?
@@Scott48-m7e Sorry, but in the language the Godspells were written (Greek koine) there were now lower case letters.Only capital letters. Small letters were introduced much later. You can easily see this ig you see ancient inscriptions or manuscripts of the time. Trust me I am Greek!!!!
I had some JWs stop by a few weeks ago. I brought up John 1:1. The approach I used was the Logos was a philosophical concept of Greeks and Hellenic Jews including the time the Gospel of John was wrtitten. It was never thought that the Logos was "a god" by those who were familiar with the concept of the Logos. John was speaking to those people and was telling them this concept of the Logos is Jehovah who created the universe and brings order to it. The Logos is a complicated concept and changed from Heraclitus, to Plato to Philo. I don't think they understood.
@@wfqsfg Jesus is Gods Son that's it Not (God Almighty the Creator) Let's take a Look at the Bible and see what it Says 1. Then why is God head of Christ just as Christ is Head of man? (1st coriethians 11:3) 2.) Then why does Scripture consistently phrase Jesus as a Separate person from God? (John 20:17); (John 14:1); (Mark 10:18); (John 17:1-3), Also in Heaven, (Luke 22:69) 3.) Then how can Jesus have a god? (Micah 5:4), (pslams 45:6, 7; 89:26, John 20:17; (Romans 15:6;2), (Coriethians 1:3, Eph. 1:3; (Col. 1:3) (Mark 15:34); (John 17:1-3) Also in heaven (Rev. 1:6; 3:3, 12) 4. Then why does Scripture say he was born and part of creation? (Colessians 1:15) 5. Then why does (Rev. 3:14) Say that Jesus was the beginning of the Creation by God? 6. Then why is he subject to god like we are subject to him? (1st Cor. 15:27,28); (Eph. 1:17) 7. Then why does (Micah 5:2) say that Jesus Origin was from Early times? 8. Then why does Jesus not know what God knows? (Matthew 24:36,) (Rev. 1:1); (Luke 8:45) 9. Then why is Jesus still subject to (god) when he is as high as he will ever be? (1st Cor. 15:27,28) 10. Then why does (Proverbs 8:22-31) show that the Messiah was created/Produced by God? 11. Then why is he not powerful enough to subject things to himself? (1st Cor. 15:27); (Eph. 1:17,22) 12. Then why would he have to be given any power & authority? (Matthew 28:18; 11:27; (John 5:22; 17:2; 3:35;) (2nd 1:17) 13. Then why did he have to learn anything? (Hebrews 5:8), (John 5:19; 8:28) 14. Then why is speaking against him not as bad as speaking against the Holy Spirit? (Matthew 12:31, 32;); (Luke 12:10) 15. Then why did Jesus Call the Father the Only True God? (John 17:3) 16. Then why did he need to be saved? (Hebrews 5:7); (John 12:27) 17. Then why did he have to be exalted to leader & savior? (Acts 5:31) 18. Then how can he be exalted and (Given) a higher name then he had? (Philippians 2:9-11); (Hebrews 1:2-4) 19. Then why did he have to be given Life in himself? (John 5:25, 26) 20. Then how could his Father be Greater then he and not equal trinity? (John 14:28) 21. Then how could Jesus be tempted by Satan in(Matthew 4:10) when God cannot be tempted by Evil (James 1:13) 22. Then why did Jesus (Worship) the Father (John 4:22) 23. Then why can he not do anything of his own? (John 5:19; 6:38) 24. Then why would Jesus pray to Anybody? (Luke 22:44; ) (John 17:1,2) 25. Then why do John 1:18 and 1st John 4:9 say that Jesus is God's only Begotten Son? 26. Then how can Jesus be God's servant? (Acts 4:26, 27,30) 27. Then how could he receive strength from an angel? (Luke 22:43) 28. Then how could he be the mediator between God & man? (1st Timothy 2:5) 29. Then how could he be with God (ton theon)? (John 1:1) 30. Then how could he be God's image? (Col. 1:15;) (Hebrews 1:3) Then why is he called the agency (dia) of creation and not the originator (ek)? (1cor. 8:6); (John 1:1-3); (Prov. 8:30) (Hebrews 2:10); (Col. 1:15, 16) 32. Then why did Jesus say God was good in a way that Jesus was not?(Mark 10:18) 33. Then why does Jesus have the voice of the Archangel and not the voice of God? (1st thess. 4:16) 34. Then why is the only worship given to him the same given to humans ? (Heb. 1:6) (Matt. 18:26;); (Rev. 3:9) 35. Then why do many who believe and rely on a few so called proof texts instead of the context of the consisent teachings of the entire Bible? 36.then how can Jesus be commanded to do anything? (John 12:49), (deutronemy 18:18) 37. Then why did Steven see 2 separate entities God & Jesus and not just one god or 3 person's? (Acts 7:55) 38. Then how could Jesus be seen at God's right hand?(Luke 22:69); (Acts 7;55); (Romans 8:34) 39. Then how could Jesus be exalted not to become God himself, but to the position of the right hand of God?(,Acts 2:33) 40. Then why would he have to receive a revelation from God?(rev. 1:1) 41. Then why is he called God's begotten Son before he came to Earth? (John 3:16); (Galations 4:4), (1st John 4:9) 42. Then how could he have a father (John 20:17) 43. Then how could he come in Flesh? (1st Kings 8:27); (Acts 17:24, 25) 44. Then why did Jesus not come in his own Name? (John 5:41-44) 45. Then why did Jesus come down from Heaven to do God's will and Not His Own? (Luke 22:42); (John 6:38) (John 5:30) (John 8:42) 46. Then how could Jesus appear before God when he went back to (Heaven)? (Hebrews 9:24) 47. Then how could Jesus die? Can God die? Can part of God die? (Romans 5:10); (Acts 5:30); (Habbuk 1:12); ,(1st time. 6:16); (Numbers 23:19) (1st Cor. 15:3); (Plsams 90:2); (Daniel 6:25-26) 48. Then why is it that God ressurrected Jesus? (Acts 2:32) (Acts 5:30) (Romans 10:9,10) 49. Then why can we see him if No Man has seen God at any time? (John 1:18) 50. Then why is there not one clear scripture where Jesus is called God the Son, (Equal to those declaring God the Father) 51. How is it that the Jews rounded up some false witnesses to make up lies to obtain a death sentence for Jesus, but niether the Jewish officials nor even one of those false witnesses made a claim that Jesus was God or Equally god? (Matthew 26:59-67) 52. John summed up his whole Gospel by saying that it was written that we may believe that Jesus is Christ, the son of God. Why is there no mention in that summary of the entire Gospel of what would be the Most important thing of all that Jesus is God? (John 20:31)
@@tiffanywright6653 You know, the only replies I ever get from Jehovah's Witnesses are copy and paste. You don't know the information so you go to JW.Org and copy it and paste it.
@@tiffanywright6653 John 1:1 In the beginning was the Logos, the Logos was with God, the Logos was God. John 1:14 And the Logos (God) became flesh (human). Who is the Logos? Where did that term come from? What is its history? I guess I'll get another copy and paste answer. LOL!!!!!!!
@@brickbybrick6516 What about Catholics.? They have a man in the Vatican. Or Mormons, they have a President. Do you make videos for them too? if not, what does that say about you.
@@gerryquinn5578 Oh I agrer completely watchtower is litteraly just another religion. You have the same power structure, same money making mentality, same child abuse problems. The difference is that other religions dont control their members in the same authoritarian way. Ie. Shunning ex members, dying for blood policy, child abuse cover up being hidden from members, 2 witness rule. (All of these can be ruled out with scriptures btw) Splitting up families, proffiting from weapons companies, etc. Also the fact tgat watchtower uses the BITE method almost to the letter to control its members. If you dont know what the BITE method is, its a checklist of mind control techniques commonly used by well known cults around the world. Scientology, watchtower, and Mormons (LDS) are the worst offenders. But its a scholarly work about mind control/ behaviour modification etc. Its not aimed at watchtower, nor does it mention jws but if you read the list *we all know you wont* then you will see how your life is also tightly controlled. Btw, yes I do call out Mormons for their bizarre take on the bible, and their shunning practices etc. As a point of fact Mormons and watchtower are identical apart from doctrine. Same with scientology. I suppose if my family had not been completely destroyed by watchtowers false teachings, I wouldnt care so much. But they did. So I do. I know you wont answer any of the points iv mentioned. You will veer off on some unrelated topic like Catholics or whatever. Or claim that what im saying is wrong without providing one shred of evidence. The sad thing is, your not even allowed to look up anything iv told you in case its "apostate". Seriously look up bite mehod mind control. Read the list and tell me watchtower doesnt do almost every single thing on that list.
You have a problem Samuel Tolley. The Bible shows the angels are called gods. God said Moses was God to Pharaoh. The judges of Israel are called gods, by God Himself. These things are all true, and the Jews knew these verses, yet they were strictly monotheists. In that they worshipped only one God. So your understanding is inaccurate. (Deuteronomy 10:17) For Jehovah your God is the God of gods
The first bit "in the beginning was the word, is in-reference to the verse 2 and 3 that being Jesus was the beginning before God who had made him and anything after occurs after the begging of Jesus. "And the Word was with God", refereeing to Jesus separate from God but there with God at the dawn of creation. John 14:28 latter clearly states that Father (God) is greater and Ephesians 1:20 shows that. Also note the 'Word was **with** God'. This would mean that God and Jesus are separate not the same being.
There's a problem with you using Ephesians 1:20 to illustrate God is greater. In John 2:19 Jesus says he is the one who would raise the temple of his body again. So either Jesus is lying or the Son and the Father are the same God.
@@rts876 In regards to Ephesians 1:20, this passage clearly shows that Jesus and God being separate as it states that God raised up Jesus and God put Jesus on his right hand. Further more noted in Psalm 110:1 and Acts 7:55. In regards to 2:19, its further explained in Mark 14:57 and 58. The power to do such acts is explained in Acts 10:34-43. Jesus did not resurrect himself but Jehovah did. Just remember that your trinity, the holy spirit, has no form but is always explained as a force. Mat 28:19, Ac 1:8, Ac 15:28 and especially Luke 1:35. The holy spirit is a force that Jehovah uses to guide and exercise his will.
@@rts876 There puts a conundrum. Acts 10:40 clearly states Jehovah raised up Jesus. Verse 38,40-42 clearly mentions 'with him' and not is him. This, IMO, is a form of separation. Also remember that holy spirit is part of trinity. Romans 9:1, 14:17 and 2 Peter 1:21. I've got tons of example showing that the holy spirit is a force, Gods will, that gets his will done. Holy spirit is doesn't have a humanoid form or is an entity like a life. 1 con 12:8-11 gives some further examples of how holy spirit works. Back on the conundrum: Either Jesus was talking about the power of Jehovah that actually raised him up or Somehow Jesus died then as God brought himself back then went about proclaiming about doing Gods will shortly before he returned to heaven to reconnect with himself (as himself since God=Jesus). Its as If God made a human character of himself that constantly kept glorify himself in third person.
Please read the whole chapter not just one verse, so everyone seeing this video can reason based on the entirety of the whole chapter and not just one verse. Please explain the whole chapter the context of it . Why Isaiah was inspired to penned this words Let see, verse 24 Jehovah God is appealing to the Jews. Which Jews ? The ones living in Jerusalem in the moment when Isaiah by inspiration wrote those words or perhaps to the future exiled Jews in Babylon or perhaps both ? I know you know the reason why the Jews were exiled to Babylon. As a nation they stop worshiping The only true God, Jehovah God and they followed human traditions as well as worshiping the man made false ( gods). Also they deteriorate their special relationship with the truth God, when they started acting even worse than their neighbors yes by abandoning Jehovah their God, they were exiled to Babylon. One of the reason of the strong reprove in chapter 44 that explain why Jehovah is asking who is equal to him where are all those false gods and what can they do about it, that is Man made false gods = idols= idolatry. Please explain verses 14- 28 Where in the Bible says that is ok to represent Jesus with a symbol or cross , where explain that as well, Let me see. Verse 14- 18 14 There is one whose work is to cut down cedars.He selects a certain type of tree, an oak,And he lets it grow strong among the trees of the forest. He plants a laurel tree, and the rain makes it grow. 15 Then it becomes fuel for a man to make fires.He takes part of it to warm himself;He builds a fire and bakes bread. But he also makes a god and worships it.He makes it into a carved image, and he bows down before it. 16 Half of it he burns up in a fire;With that half he roasts the meat that he eats, and he is satisfied. He also warms himself and says:“Ah! I am warm as I watch the fire.” 17 But the rest of it he makes into a god, into his carved image.He bows down to it and worships it.He prays to it and says:“Save me, for you are my god.” 18 They know nothing, they understand nothing,Because their eyes are sealed shut and they cannot see,And their heart has no insight. Lets make the same exercise, why don’t you pray for holly spirit as well, Perhaps verse 19 -20 would make more sense. Then perhaps we can “reason” not argue verses 21-28 Does the author of the Holly Bible didn’t make it clear enough that it is detestable to him when individuals use physical forms made from human hands to worshiping him. Please explain that from the Bible not from human theology or some sort of experience or story. Why is your real motive to make these type of videos, Are you a judge? Or you alone came to understand the Bible in a level that other professed Christians haven’t achieved? 2 peter 3:16 Please don’t worry the Lord Jesus Christ is well aware of the situation. John 15:1-5. According to these verses Who acts as judge and executor yes I know it doesn’t say that, But we can see that the cultivator or. The only true God is the one who takes away the branches not producing fruit.
Isaiah 44:6-7 “This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and BESIDES ME THERE IS NO GOD. 7 And who is there like me? . A question! And who is there like me? . Answer: NO ONE! , But hold on: . Revelation 2:26-27 26 And to him that conquers and observes my deeds down to the end I will give authority over the nations, 27 and he shall shepherd the people with an iron rod so that they will be broken to pieces like clay vessels, THE SAME AS I have received from my Father, . Mere men can become THE SAME AS Jesus Christ! . But there is NO ONE like God! . Romans 8:28-29 Now we know that God makes all his works cooperate together for the good of those who love God, those who are the ones called according to his purpose; 29 because those whom he gave his first recognition he also foreordained to be patterned after the image of his Son, that he might be the FIRSTBORN AMOUNG MANY BROTHERS. . The righteous question here is; who will be the second born? . Patterned after the image of HIS SON. In other words; JUST LIKE JESUS CHRIST! . Now go back to Isaiah 44 . Isaiah 44:6-7 “This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. 7 And who is there like me? . And who is there like me? . Answer: NO ONE! . Jesus Christ is NOT Almighty God . Frustrated? . Isaiah 44:25 [I am] frustrating the signs of the empty talkers, and [I am] the One that makes diviners themselves act crazily; the One turning wise men backwards, and the One that turns even their knowledge into foolishness; . . . . .
What do all the other verses say about the relationship and positions of Jesus Christ the Son and God the Father. John 1:1 says “in the beginning” the Word had a beginning because he was and is the Son of God
God the Father had no beginning and has no end. The Word the Son had a beginning and has no end. The translation of John 1:1 seem to imply that the Word is God but at the same time it says the the Word was with God. However, the translation of other Bible verses clearly show the Word is the Son and the eternal God is the Father whose will the Word obeys.
2- to understand the roles in creation, read 1 corinthians 8:6. There is only one God, the Father. *From* whom all things are, and we for him. And one lord, Jesus Christ *through* whom all things are, and we through him. All things were created FROM the father THROUGH the son. God spoke and his Word made it so. Speaking of his "Word." We agree that "the Word" in John 1:1 is Jesus... you might want to revisit the book of Zechariah. Where "The Word" speaks to the prophet. Again, messages FROM God, Through his Word. ... yet "The Word" is quite clearly referred to as the "Angel of Jehovah."
Although the Scriptues are extremely powerful, they are extremely conflicting, which is why the only conclusion brought by Christians is to understand that Jesus is one in the same with God.With a healthy perspective now from the outside, I stopped arguing these points, years ago, as I realized the conflicts in Scripture. Yet people stand so firmly with seemingly no fear or healthy concern over disregarding the Father, although the Scriptures state clearly that THE FATHER is the entity that we truly worship, including Jesus, and also that the JWs are absolutely crazy for giving reverence the God The Father and the glorification of His Name which was the pronouncement from Jesus. Then in this video there is dialogue to argue over the JWs creating a "two God" dynamic as if the concept of God on the throne with "The :Lamb" seated next to him is not totally "drummed in one's head" from Revelations. NOTHING from the JWs is far reaching and ever some radical a concept from what is plainly said in the Scriptures. In an attempt to make the New Testament Scriptures "pure and cohesive", however, Christian folks had to morph the forever understood monotheistic nature of God into a multi-faced, and EXTREMELY schizophrenic God while on Earth that spoke 98 percent of the time of being beneath, just a vessel, always of honoring The Name of his Father, praying to and asking that the burden of his plight be taken away from him by said Father and somehow accepting that God is a Trinity with only The Son being the one having a name. The Witnesses, even though they want to keep to the same thought that the Scriptures are "all pure", treat the matter like a court case and see it that 99.9 percent of the dialogue should not be defined by .1 percent of the Scriptures. It would not work in a court case, so why does it work for modern Christianity? if Jesus spent so much time making blatant and simple statements , why is it that all of his statements are now being explained in modern times as if he was talking 99 percent of the time in the abstract in some Bible scholar-like, "to be interpreted" language when he was speaking to simple people who he wanted to take simple action? Forget about the JW missed prophesies and what not and analyze Scripture for Scripture and stop thinking that people are some kind of voodoo cult, it breeds ignorance on both sides. As for John 1, think about the fact that the discovered Sahidic Coptic manuscripts from the 2nd century (the first translations from the Greek by those fluent in Greek) that the original wording was "a god" and the Christian world has tormented the Witnesses while that same Bible used in the video, was the only one in print that had it right from day one. and knowing these facts the Christian world have been absolutely silent to their congregants on the matter. The point is , stop the name calling and pious attitudes because God works in ALL of us and translations of Scriptures and opinions you may have lived by may be bogus upon actual research.
@Gino Losoya Usually I just avoid them, or tell them (like Morman's , 7th day Adv etc) "let me tell you about Jesus, but I want to pray for you first" & then ask God to touch them so they will know the truth. Usually that sends them scurrying away. But so interested to know rebuttals to hopefully open their eyes. They Are Brainwashed & so deceived. I'm a new sub & want to know so much more. I have never argued with them, or tried to point out their deceptions. Great to learn, & maybe bring some to the truth. I never let them in my home-no need to invite that spirit in.
Jennifer- they don’t pray with you first, because they have already prayed before the visit people, second because you believe in a different god then they do.
@@filipesantos8730 Dr. James White explains through scripture why Jesus is Jehovah in this short clip. And all this through The new world bible translation: th-cam.com/video/8VHfZBde2j4/w-d-xo.html
People who are desperate to make Jesus into God fail to understand what John 1:1 is about. 'In the BEGINNING' would indicate that TIME had begun. How would time begin? Obviously with God CREATING SOMEONE OR SOMETHING. Jesus is called the FIRSTBORN of all Creation (Col 1:15). This Created being would logically be WITH God when time began. If Jesus was God, there is nothing called a beginning. Aside from 'and the Word WAS God' translation making no sense. WAS the past tense means Jesus lost being God.
Jehovah's Witnesses are Biblically correct in their assessment that Jesus is a god both from a grammatical point of view of the Greek text that is properly translated "a god" in John 1:1 _(I can prove that by using non JW sources from trinitarian scholars)_ and from the rest of Bible including Isaiah. Trinitarians are preprogramed to read into the text information that is not there The Bible *_IS_* truly a polytheistic book. It teaches that there are many gods but 9only one is to ever receive religious type worship. The original language of the OT shows that there are 4 types of gods 1)The one true God how alone is to be worshiped in a religious manner 2) false gods that should never be worshiped in a religious manner 3) true gods approved of by GOD ( _but never worshiped_ ) 4 ) other non living creations of GOD that the Hebrew uses the word god for The ancient word for god/God simply means a mighty one. that description can fit so many people and things. The texts in John 1: 3 and the ones you use in Isaiah actually do prove that Jesus is a god. If only you would take the time to properly examine them There are no texts in the original languages of the Bible that hint at Jesus being GOD. Some poorly translated verses in many Bibles do give that impression.
You speak as Ephesians 4:14 warns against, with the trickery of men. Jesus is mediator between God and man. (1 Timothy 2:5) In ancient Israel the people served the King, but they worshipped God. They did not sacrifice or pray to the King, they did recognize the kings authority. The same is with Jesus. God has appointed Jesus and gave him all authority, so we recognize that. But our prayers and worship and sacrifices still go to God. Where did one of the Apostles pray to Jesus? The confusion here is that the KJV many times renders Jesus as coming out of God. This is false. The Greek to English translation renders Jesus as 'beside of the Father I came out'
Its immaterial and unnecessary whether the Jews were polytheists why? Because Jesus while he was on earth directed that religious worship (Gk- proskyneo) must only be given to his Heavenly Father and not to anyone else. - see John 4:24 and Matthew 4:10. Jesus made it clear at Matthew 4:10 that True Christians must only Jehovah the True God.The Jews were strictly a monothesitic faith so its moot and immaterial to claim that the Witnesses by making Jesus 'a god' are polytheists...even the Bible says at 1 Corinthians 4:4 that Satan the Devil is the god of this system of things, which means he controls and rules our visible world.
I'm not a JW but they are actually correct in this. There are no indefinite articles in koine Greek so the translator has to put them in where he thinks they are needed. The very first translation from the Greek scriptures to another language was in the Coptic language by FLUENT speakers of Koine Greek and this very first translation has John 1:1 as "a god". Many modern translations have the same or similar renderings. Regardless, the fact is that if the verse is not in harmony with the rest of scripture then something is wrong. People would rather deny Christ's very own words that he has a God at John 20:17 and at Rev 3:12 He says 4 times in one verse that he HAS a God. Going back to the translator having to add in the articles a and an where needed, why does no one see it to be a problem at Acts 28:6 but freak out when its added at John 1:1? Paul was shipwrecked on the island and when the viper bit his hand and nothing happened to him the locals thought he was "a god". But in the original Greek it would have said "they thought he was God" the translator has no problem adding the "a god" there. There are always biases of translators that creep in when translating scripture and the KJV is no exception. The KJV has added an entire verse in scripture that is not in a single manuscript. 1st John 5:7 Just answer this one question. If John 1:1 is saying that Jesus is God Almighty, then why does the rest of the book of John completely contradict this? Why did John summarize his whole writing at the end of it and say "so all will know that Jesus is the son of God" rather than saying "so all will know that Jesus is God"? And why would Jesus say he HAS a God if he IS God? When is the son ever called the Father? When is the Father ever called the son? When is the holy spirit ever called either one?
mojo jojo Firstly the wts translators weren't qualified greek scholars. Secondly the definate article argument is flawed because john 1:6 also doesn't have the definate article yet they don't translate it a god . They're clueless.
mojo jojo asks: "[...] why does no one see it to be a problem at Acts 28:6 but freak out when its added at John 1:1? Paul was shipwrecked on the island and [...] the locals thought he was "a god". But in the original Greek it would have said "they thought he was God" the translator has no problem adding the "a god" there. [...]" At first sight, it is a good question. The Greek in the New Testament has two different ways to render two different kinds of thoughts. Let me explain. Way 1: "Marylin (subject) is [a] mother (object)". That means that Marylin is a mother among many other mothers. Way 2: "[A] mother (object) is Marylin (subject)." That means that Marylin has all the required qualities to be called a mother, because she has born a child. As you see, the place of the subject and of the object is different. Another example: Way 1: "Peter (subject) is [a] king (object)". That means that Peter is a king among many other kings. He could also be an incompetent king. Way 2: "[A] king (object) is Peter (subject)." That means that Peter has all the required qualities to be called a king, because he has the power and the authority of a king. Way 1: Act 28:6: "[...] he (subject) was [a] god (object)." That means that the people believed that Paul was one of the many gods. Way 2: John 1:1: "[a] god (object) was the Word (subject)". That means that the Word has all the required qualities to be called god, because he made/created all things.
[...] because he made/created all things. To us, God is God because he created all things, as Revelation 4:11 says: "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being." So both, Almighty God and the Lamb (Jesus Christ) are worthy to receive "power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing!” [...] “To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be praise and honor and glory and power forever and ever!" (Revelation 5:12-13) The Bible makes no more difference in the worship of God, no matter if it is the Father, or if it is the Son. The Father is not jealous of his Son, because he wants "that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father" (John 5:23a). JWs do "not honor the Son [just as they honor the Father, therefore they do] not honor the Father who sent Him." (John 5:23b)
In John 1:1it says Ho Theos compared to theos ,He Ho Theos is his daddy or (Abba) God is a title just like lord or mr.It says in the scriptures there are many gods but only one true God he was the only begoten god
People need a quick lesson in basic vocabulary. Eloh. Mighty, exhaulted one. Eloheim , the amplified version of Eloh, the mightiest of mighty ones. Totally exhaulted. From these words came ,god. Mighty one. Biblical judges, even foreighn kings were gods. To refer to almighry God. ,,,the god. You have know , there was no capital letter to use to didtinguish at that time. John 1: 1. The word was with the ( that right folks , trinitarians just overlook this tiny word ,,the ) god. (GOD) AND the word was ,(a) god. GOOGLE. Coptic koine greek john 1:1. There are several articles. Further , multiple researchers and scholors use ,a god, or similiar. I heve listed just few here.
Well Jacob in Isaiah 10:21 worships the MIGHTY God described in Isaiah 9:6. Isaiah 1:24 in the New World Translation in a contradiction. In their Insight which is like an Encyclopedia defines Worship as Rendering homanage in Matthew 2:2, so they Worship Kristos and dont even know it.
The amazing thing is, in the NWT they cross reference verses that contradict their beliefs. For example, Isaiah 43:11 says, "I, I am Jehovah and besides me there is no savior." It is cross referenced to Titus 2:13, which says, "while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of the savior of us Christ Jesus..." Also, John 1:1 is cross referenced to Revelation 19:13, regarding the Word of God that is sprinkled with blood! There are so many passages like this, whereby the JWs even cross reference them!
Predicate nominatives usually omit a definite article, so you wouldn't expect there to be a definite article for theos there! Besides, John doesn't always use a definite article for theos anyway, even in the prologue. If it has to mean "a god," then John the Baptist was sent by "a god" in John 1:6. The JW position on this is sheer nonsense!
John 1:1 is, indeed, a very popular Trinitarian proof-text, but it's actually full of holes and contradictions. First of all, both in verses 1 and 2, John writes that the Word was with God. You cannot be God and be with him, that's makes no sense. Also, if that were the case, that would mean there are two true Gods and that would contradict Scripture. (Deuteronomy 6:4) Secondly, when one examines the Greek grammar, it's quite obvious that an alternate translation is also permissible. At the final clause in the first verse, the Greek word "Theos" (god) is without a definite article (ho). Bible scholars agree that 'Theos' by itself can be translated not only as 'God,' but also 'a god' (lowercase 'g') and even 'divine'. The Moffat Bible translation reads, "and the Word was divine". Thirdly, even with the definite article in the Greek, 'God' (uppercase 'G') isn't really always the best translation either. At 2 Corinthians 4:4, the Bible refers to Satan as the "god" of this age. The definite article is there in the Greek, yet not a single Trinitarian translator renders it 'God,' but 'god' (they use a lowercase 'g' to denote a lesser god). A better translation of John 1:1 is, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god (or divine)." John here is simply stating the divine nature of the Messiah and also bringing to light his preexistence in heaven. The Bible makes it quite clear that Jesus is Jehovah God's first created son and that he is the image of the invisible God. (Colossians 1:15; John 1:18, Revelation 3:14) This is why at John 1:2, John writes that he was with God, not God.
5:34 Isaiah was God comparing Himself to the gods the nations worshipped. None of the nations gods were there. They were created by men. You cannot take that context and apply it to, for instance the angels who were there.
I listen to JWs they are good people doing what is commanded in the Bible acts 20:20 I think everyone thinks there right depending on what.you we're raised in God knows your heart.psalms 83 18 says God's name is Jehovah Jesus says I will sit at the right hand ofy father. peace
Is Mr Tolley correct? Is he correct in calling the JWs polytheists because of their translation "a god.? Is there more than One God? Is he not aware that in scripture angels, judges and Moses are called God? Yet this is from the OT. The Jews are viewed as monotheists but they saw nothing wrong with these passages and it did not conflict with their biblical monotheism. So, if angels, judges and Moses can be called God/god, then surely the Son of God can be viewed as a god. This is in harmony with the Jewish biblical world view. But perhaps Mr Tolley gave the game away with his comments at the start when he talked about looking at the bible through his Christian perspective. He has assumed that his take is true and is forcing it on the text, rather than let the text form his view. Mr Tolley believes it is wrong for others to do this, but clearly not for him.
I hate to say it, but your watchtower tunnelvision is going into overdrive. Are you aware that watchtowers "translation" is not reffered to as a bible by Greek scholars, because it has been deliberately altered in so many places. You can never gain truth from a fake interpretation of the bible. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing the names of any Greek scholars that agree with it. Or the names/ qualifications of anyone involved in writing it. The bible very clearly states who Jesus is. watchtower have dobe their best to alter these passages. (Collosians chapter one "other") You cant make sense of watchtower dogma, without their "version" of the bible.
@@brickbybrick6516 Really? Are you aware the JWs had their theology in place BEFORE they had their NWT. They used and published the same bibles as everyone else. They took their beliefs from the Bible, not the settled religious controversies of the second to fourth centuries. I recommend the book "Truth In Translation."a modern comparison of some modern bibles. This scholarly work may disabuse of your anti-WatchTower hysteria. You should be able to get it online. Why not read it. You nothing to fear but the truth.
@@gerryquinn5578 yes I know all about the masonic origins of your religion. I have c t russels studies in the scriptures vol 1-7 including finished mystery. The original version. Including all the parts about measuring pyramids to come to the date 1914. I have the millions now living will never die book by rutherford, saying that abraham and the "bible worthies" would be resurrected and live with rutherford in a purpose built mansion in san diego (beth sharim). I know all about their false prophecies. And much more about their corrupt history. A history which your nit allowed to look into because its "old light" 🤣🤣🤣 Sorry for laughing. Its just the entire religion is so comical from the outside. Getting onto the disgraceful book (NWT) I could start quoting Metzger, Rowley, Barclay or half a dozen other top Greek scholars who flatly refuse to call it a bible. But il just quote Julius R Mantey, because he is quoted as a scholarly reference i your purple interlinear. He says, (you can watvh him speak on youtube) that after taking legal action to remove his name from watchtower publications. He read the nwt, and concluded it was a "disgusting and deliberate mistranslation, that has been alters in scoresand scores of passages, its not a bible" Hes the guy watchtower quoted. The only dcholar you csn bring up is called Bahrum. He is respected, and does support the JW John 1.1 definate article. But then later in the same paper, says that inserting the name Kehovah into the New Testament is wholly unacceptable. I know more about your religion than you ever will. Again, prove me wrong by quoting ANY greek scholar that agrees. Or naming ANY of the writing team. Should be easy, right?
God is Jesus; Jesus is God; the name of [your] God is Jesus; Jesus is the name of [your] God. You are worshiping God Jesus. What to do with the God of Abraham, Isaac, Yaakob, Moses, David, and Yeshua, and Paul, etc. whose name is replaced with 'the LORD' in OT, making a nameless God. Pre-human Jesus was God, Jesus born was God, Jesus died on the cross was God, praying to his Father, O God. What the heck is the word God you are using? God of Catholics, God of Protestants, God of Mormons, God of Pentecostals, God of hell-fire preachers, God of prosperity peddlers, etc. etc.
John 8:17,18. Jesus speaking. 'In your own law it is written 'the witness of 2 MEN is true. I am ONE who bears witness about MYSELF, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me'. You are taking one Scripture and using it to say Jesus is God. There are over 30 scriptures that say Jesus is the son of God. There are 17 scriptures that say Jesus is/ will be at God's right hand After his ascension to heaven. You are distorting the truth about God and about Jesus. Now you have twice the judgement, from God and from Jesus.
Between this and John 5:18 I left a Jehovah witness saying he must not be monotheistic. I pray God will water the seed. Much love brothers and sisters Jesus Christ is King
100% man can't be God
God bless your ministry. I will keep you in my prayers.
Amen I’ve subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have started a youtube channel with 31 videos Kindly subscribe to my youtube channel and share my videos in Jesus name Love and blessings in Jesus name,from Ireland
You are a clever disciple of the Lord Jesus with the wisdom of God. You are a great blessing to the body of Christ
I had to see it again, can't wait to see your video about the trinity. "I would rather have questions I can't answer than having answers I can't question"...
Another insightful and practical lesson. Thank you, brother Tolley.
So gullible
Awesome explanation. Keep them coming. May our Creator richly bless you with wisdom.
Amen I’ve subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have subscribed to your TH-cam channel and I now have started a youtube channel with 31 videos. Kindly subscribe to my youtube channel in Jesus name
This is a great argument. Thank you Samuel. You are my Brother in Christ.
Thank you. You laid that out beautifully. I am a former JW and was once very confused but I feel even more enlightened by your lesson 🙏🏽
Continue the good works Sir😊👏
Excellent brother. Keep revealing the truth
Zero truth to this more ignorance then anything! His trying to confuse people, what he read is what he read, jehovah' is almighty psalms 83:18,
Jesus is god like because his of Devine nature, yet his not God almighty! Jw do not treat him as a God but our savior threw him everything is done! Its very simple just have a clear mind n dont be a puppet
Prov 3:5
Well put. Amen
Very nicely put!
I like that couldn’t have said it better my self.
Awesome video 👌👍👏
Thank you for all work that you do to reveal the truth.
God bless you!
The truth according to your church...
@@filipesantos8730 The truth according to the bible.
@@filipesantos8730 What is your answer to the questions and claims done in this video?
I did replay. 1 of my comments is there the replay to others was deleted
@@filipesantos8730 Give some examples on answers to this video.
Very good brother. In the past I took their own 1901 American Standard Bible that Watchtower Society use to publish before NWT. And I showed them Jenovah was the Mighty God and also the Almighty God. Jeremiah and Psalms. When they turn to Proverbs and said God's Wisdom was the one that created the world WITH Jehoavh, I would ask them when was God without His wisdom? As long as God was, His wisdom was. How else would He have the wisdom to create Wisdom?
Very good job sir in your theological reasoning and description. God bless
Very informative as always and very easy to understand thanks again for taking the time to share God's word, I speak to Jehovahs witnesses all the time in my business I just try and plant a seed in the hearts and minds I try to express the core difference in our faith, and on John 1:1 I remind them that Jesus accepted worship in the Scriptures and only God is supposed accept worship ( JESUS IS GOD) and I also encourage them to study Johannes Greber and spirtism and the relationship he had with them , which is referenced by Watchtower and tract society on several occasions, thanks again brother!!!!!
Jesus is not God the Father. Jesus said that the Father is greater then he is.
@@filipesantos8730 in ranking not in being
Andreas- In human terms the President is not the same as the Prime Minister...
@@filipesantos8730 They are both human beings aren't they? Is one of them a dog?
@@filipesantos8730 is that that hard to understand?
Awesome work brother! Keep looking up my fellow defender of the Actual Truth! I am a former JW...
i loved this. saved to watch again
Hallelujah. That why we have to prove all things and test the spirits.
Amen!!! Thank you Sam!!
Wonderful teaching.
I caught on the the polytheistic note of their interpretation/erroneous interpretation of John 1:1 but you are the first one I've seen that pointed that out. Enjoyed your video.
There are no capitals in Greek it does not say the word was the God
Well explained brother Sam🙂you just made me hit the Subscribe button! Keep up the good work in Christ Jesus.
Treat them with respect even though they don't except what you tell them the word was given to them , remember he came to his own and they rejected him , some will listen n accept some won't those that reject him we must keep praying for them
Thanks Sam. Powerful!
Thanks and God bless. This is an excellent exhibit of how a person must put logic aside in order to believe the watchtower's doctrine. I've asked Jehovah's Witnesses to show me the proof of Jesus's creation, along with the destruction of his body after the crucifixion. All they can offer is watchtower rhetoric. It's sad, but they have been convinced that the Bible is incomplete without the supplement of the "new light" of watchtower material. So sad.
JW 4524 Thanks for your kind words!
It’s very very good argument! The other video you made about Johova’s witness is also excellent Thanks a lot. God bless you
God bless you ministry
Very effective thanks
Well said.great video.
Hasn't the phrase "a god" been used in the old testament multiple times, denoting a "high status"? If yes, the "you're a polytheist" argument is pretty weak.
Rameez Balagamwala .... if it was used then it was not used for Jesus... Hebrews 1:8 Jehovah God calls His Son God.
Excellent! Thank you!
God bless you sir❤️
Are you related to Chris rock?
Wow. This is phenomenal.
God Bless you. I just came across your channel, and I have watched and commented on a few of your videos. I want to thank you and show my support for the truth you tell. It is true that the Jehovahs Witnesses are being programmed, literally. I had two encounters at work. I had a high supervisor give me “Christian books” to give my little sister when I was new on the job. On downtime, I was sitting with an older coworker of mine, reading thru the children’s books. I turned the page, and out slipped a watchtower pamphlet. The coworker saw this, and then told me that it was a Jehovahs Witness pamphlet and that JWs are sneaky, and will go behind parents backs to get to the children. Then, my coworker told me about her live in JW nanny she had as a young child who also homeschooled her. When her parents weren’t home, which was most of the time, the nanny forced her to attend JW meetings, and she forced her to learn JW programming and pray to their false God as part of her homeschooling. The Nanny told her NOT to tell her parents or she would go to hell for being disobedient to God. One day, the mom found JW pamphlets, Bible and school lessons in the room the nanny used for homeschooling and called the nanny in and asked her about it. Of course, the nanny lied and said she didn’t know where it came from. Her mother asked her, and she told her mom the truth. The mom immediately fired the nanny and found a Christian nanny and homeschool teacher from their Christian Church.
The Greek theon in “the word was toward the god,” is in the accusative case ending and has the definite article (Gr. ho; English the) preceding it. It is correctly translated, “the Word was with God” in English.
However, the 3rd clause in the verse contains theos in the nominative, singular form without an article: “and god was the word.” As controversial as it may sound to trinitarians, it is correctly translated as “and a god was the Word.” A minimal literal (“formal equivalence”) translation would rearrange the word order to match the proper English expression: “And the Word was a god.”
This is consistent with other occurrences in the Greek. For example, the following are instances where various translators have rendered singular anarthrous predicate nouns occurring before the verb with an indefinite article (“a”) to denote the indefinite and qualitative status of the subject nouns. Examples are taken from the King James Version, New International Version, Revised Standard Version, and Today’s English Version:
Mark 6:49: “a spirit” or “a ghost”
Mark 11:32: “a prophet” or “a real prophet”
John 4:19: “a prophet”
John 6:70: “a devil” or “an informer”
John 8:44: “a murderer”
John 8:44: “a liar”
John 8:48: “a Samaritan”
John 9:17: “a prophet”
John 9:24: “a sinner”
John 10:1: “a thief”
John 10:13: “an hireling” or “a hired man”
John 10:33: “a man” or “a mere man”
John 12:6: “a thief”
John 18:35: “a Jew”
John 18:37: “a king”
If you study these occurrences in many translations, you will note that most translators consistently apply these translation rules, except when it comes to John 1:1c. Why the exception here? Bias.
Bias has shaped most of these translations much more than has accurate attention to the wording of the Bible. The NW translation (New World Translation) of John 1:1 is superior to that of the other eight translations we are comparing. . . .it breaks with the KJV tradition followed by all the others, and it does so in the right direction by paying attention to how Greek grammar and syntax actually work. No translation of John 1:1 that I can imagine is going to be perfectly clear and obvious in its meaning. John is subtle, and we do him no service by reducing his subtlety to crude simplicities. All that we can ask is that a translation be an accurate starting point for exposition and interpretation. Only the NW achieves that, as provocative as it sounds to the modern reader. The other translations cut off the exploration of the verse’s meaning before it has even begun. - Truth in Translation - Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament, Jason David BeDuhn, page 218 (ebook)
Is There Scholarly Work that Shows How These Nouns Should Be Translated From the Greek?
Philip B. Harner: In his article, “Qualitative Anarthrous Predicate Nouns: Mark 15:39 and John 1:1” (Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 92, Philadelphia, 1973):
“anarthrous predicate nouns preceding the verb may function primarily to express the nature or character of the subject, and this qualitative significance may be more important than the question whether the predicate noun itself should be regarded as definite or indefinite.” (page 75)
“with an anarthrous predicate preceding the verb, are primarily qualitative in meaning. They indicate that the logos has the nature of theos. There is no basis for regarding the predicate theos as definite.” (page 85)
“In John 1:1, I think that the qualitative force of the predicate is so prominent that the noun cannot be regarded as definite. . . .Perhaps the clause could be translated, ‘the Word had the same nature as God.’ This would be one way of representing John's thought, which is, as I understand it, that ho logos, no less than ho theos, had the nature of theos.” (page 87)
What About the Other Occurrences of ‘Theos?’
Some insist that the New World Translation is inconsistent here because theos without the article in John 1 is not translated the same way in other locations. For example, some will claim that if the NWT was truly consistent and applied the grammatical rule of inserting the indefinite article “a” where the definite article (English “the”) was not present in Greek, we would have the following:
There came a man who was sent as a representative of [a] God (theou); his name was John. - John 1:6
However, to all who did receive him, he gave authority to become [a] God’s (theou) children. - John 1:12
And they were born, not from blood or from a fleshly will or from man’s will, but from [a] God (theou). - John 1:13
And others.
What they fail to note is that not only are the Greek constructs different in these other verses, but these other uses are genitive (theou), not nominative (theos). The genitive form of the noun, in this case theou, does not require the article (Gr. “ho;” English “the”) to be definite, whereas the nominative form normally does.
In Koiné Greek, the nominative case ending usually indicates the subject of a sentence. It is normally preceded by the definite article. However, in John 1:1c, this nominative form (theos) is not preceded by the article. That being the case, the noun becomes “primarily qualitative in meaning,” as explained by Bible scholar, Philip B. Harner, in his article posted above
The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός…means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.
John 1:1 Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (theos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “and the Word was God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.
I used to be a JW and when I was challenging their views I challenged this as well and found no reason to abandon Arianism for the later philosophical construct of the Trinity dogma. Jehovah's Witnesses can't handle your reasoning because they don't know the biblical languages and can't read the Bible in them. That's because the Watchtower discourages them from learning them for obvious reasons. However, I do, and if we ever talked you can believe me when I tell you I would be reading from the text in those languages. What gets missed is that the Bible admits there are other Gods. Don't believe me? Turn to John 10 and see how Jesus handled the accusation that in verse 30 he made himself to be a god. In the Hebrew God didn't claim to be the only God, instead stated there was no other Gods on his Level, no God who was equal to him, or his peer. That is what the Hebrew in most of the Isaiah passages you quoted says. Because of that, I have no trouble copping to polytheism with the proviso that I only worship the one and see myself as an heir in his house betrothed to his son the other god.
By the way, only one of the early languages into which the Gospels were translated which had the indefinite article, Sahidic Coptic which was translated in the 2nd century has come down to us with John 1:1 intact (Gothic from the fourth century had it but John 1:1 is missing from all copies still around). So the translation we have was made at a time when the translators both spoke Koine while it was still a spoken language and were devout men while some still accurately knew the Gospel. They knew the Greek better than any of us can ever possibly know it and they translated the c phrase as "and the word was a god." Hmmmm. In fact all known copies of Coptic known in any of its dialects where that verse survives translate it exactly the same way. That has modernCoptic scholars scrambling to explain it away since a JW studying Coptic noticed it and put it out there on the internet.
Scripture places Jesus as Jehovah from the Old Testament to the New Testament clear as day.
I am not sure what you mean by saying that the Watchtower discourages them from learning the original languages for obvious reasons. What are the "obvious reasons?" I actually know a few JWs and they are university and College Lecturers. Indeed, one is a Greek Specialist, an associate professor, and the other a Hebrew specialist.The Watchtower does help its readers to understand the concept of biblical monotheism.Finally, you suggested that JWs are in some way liked to Arianism. I can assure you that they are not and that most people who talk about Arius don't have a clue about what he taught. From what you said in your comments, you seem to be among them.
There are no capitals in Greek Jesus is a god not God
Omission of the article with "Theos" does not mean the word is "a god." If we examine the passages where the article is not used with "Theos" we see the rendering "a god" makes no sense (Mt 5:9, 6:24; Lk 1:35, 78; 2:40; Jn 1:6, 12, 13, 18; 3:2, 21; 9:16, 33; Ro 1:7, 17, 18; 1 Co 1:30; 15:10; Phil 2:11, 13; Titus 1:1). The "a god" position would have the Jehovah's Witnesses translate every instance where the article is absent. As "a god (nominative), of a god (genitive), to or for a god (dative)." But they do not! "Theou" is the genitive case of the SAME noun "Theos" which they translate as "a god" in John 1:1. But they do not change "Theou" "of God" (Jehovah), in Matthew 5:9, Luke 1:35, 78; and John 1:6. The J.W.’s are not consistent in their biblical hermeneutics they have a bias which is clearly seen throughout their bible.
In the beginning was the word .........that tells it all
In the BEGINNING the Word WAS, WAS, WAS. He is after the order of Melchizedek a King and a priest, without beginning or end of days the last part of the statement for obvious reasons could not be talking abut Melchizedek.
You nailed brother
But Jesus never denied that he was A god...When quoting from Psalm 82:6 He said, at John 10:31-36 that they could not stone him for calling himself a god...cuz He was trying to make them understand that He was the son of God..!
Believing that Satan exists and that the Bible calls him "a god" does not makes us politheists...(2 Corinthians 4:4). At Isaiah 9:6 Jesus is called "Mighty God" but there's not one single citation that addresses him as "Almighty God"...The Almighty God called him "MY SON" from heaven when he was baptized..! (Matthew 3:16,17)...John the Baptist called him the son of God, not The God..
(John 1:34)...and Jesus himself never claimed to be The Almighty God... (Matthew 16:13-17).
Why is Jesus "... the way..." to the father (John 14:6) and "...the only mediator between God and Man..."(1Timothy 2:5) if he is, as many people believe, The Almighty God..???..
That does not make any sense..! Does it..?
Oh! and please don't get me wrong cuz I'm not one of Jehovah's witnesses and I do not belong to any religious organisation whatsoever...I try to live my life as the Word of God commands...Thanks for your video and God bless you..!
No one has to be a JW to use common sense.
In the very next chapter of Isiah. Chapter 10, Jehovah God is also called Mighty God. Mighty God is El Gibbor in Hebrew . Both the messiah and jehovah are called el gibbor
Also Jesus isn’t the father . Since John 1:1 says the Word was With God and the Word was God. He is begotten if the father, they share the same being/Substance, making him fully Divine. Father Son Homy spirit 3 persons sharing the same being of God
Hey Samuel,
I have a very interesting study to share with about this topic. How can I reach you?It is undeniable in the NWT. I would like to share those notes
John Leon please email me at inhimfirst@twc.com
@@samueltolleyWhich church are true according to the Bible in this world? Because many churches are not true according to this scriptures, Matthew 7:21-23,Roman's 10;1-3,2Corintians 11:12-15,2thimoty 4:3-4,2Peter 2:1-3,1John 4:1.
Which church are true according to the Bible in this world? Because many churches are not true according to this scriptures, Matthew 7:21-23,Roman's 10;1-3,2Corintians 11:12-15,2thimoty 4:3-4,2Peter 2:1-3,1John 4:1..
So glad I clicked on this video, you explained it so very plainly who is talking and who the real God is and out of their own trash translation too!
Straight trash translation
@@GodGunsGills John 1:1
1) drive.google.com/file/d/16ccDJ_IVy-Ur29HErP8pFVGm3XAJi7yZ/view?usp=drivesdk
2)
www.scribd.com/document/401322675/Grzegorz-Kaszyński-145-translations-not-rendering-theos-ēn-ho-logos-as-the-Word-was-God-John-1-1
3)
www.scribd.com/document/50330864/John-1-1-List-of-Alternate-Readings
John 1:1
1) drive.google.com/file/d/1A-MqX2_DlbzVqtdWtYRWJxahAL32RJDF/view?usp=drivesdk
2)
www.scribd.com/document/401322675/Grzegorz-Kaszyński-145-translations-not-rendering-theos-ēn-ho-logos-as-the-Word-was-God-John-1-1
3)
www.scribd.com/document/50330864/John-1-1-List-of-Alternate-Readings
You’ll know them by their fruits. These people bear no good fruit. They’ve also made several false prophesies over their decades of forming their doctrine. So much that their doctrine had to be changed time and time again. We all know what the Bible says about false prophets.
Scholar Robertson in his book New Testament Word Pictures says this regarding John 1:3 “Hence it is not a peculiar doctrine that John here enunciates. In 1Co 8:6, Paul distinguishes between the Father as the primary source (\ex hou\) of the all things and the Son as the intermediate agent as” Therefore he recognises Jesus was used by God to create not that Jesus himself created
There are so many reasons why John 1:1 can should simply not be used when talking about the trinity. In the Greek language, they do not use ‘indefinite articles’ such as “the” “a” or an”. So it is a 50 percent chance that it was meant to read “the word was God” and a fifty percent chance that it was meant to read the “the word was a god.” We simply can NEVER know. Also, some scholars believe that since the translators of the Bible had a leaning toward trinitarianism, that could also have affected which one they went with and they chose to leave the article “a” out of it. There are several bible translations that made the last part of it read “and the Word was divine”. Others say “and the Word was a deity.” In addition, in the original Greek language the Greek word logos (translated as “Word” in John 1:1) meant INTELLIGENT BEING”. Since these three arguments by themselves completely rule out ever knowing which translation was meant here, there are those and I am one of them, that feel that this particular scripture needs to be thrown out completely when arguing about the trinity. Now there are many other scriptures one can use in discussions of this type, but NOT this one.
Hi *Samuel Tolley,* I'm not a Jehovah's Witness and I agree they are wrong but you are also wrong in your understanding of John 1:1 and verse 3. If you would like to discuss this with me I be more than happy too if you are truly open to the concrete truth of the scriptures.
Thanks for that really great explanation of the deity of Jesus! I have to share this video.
But the question is what do we mean by the deity of Jesus. According to the scriptures, others are called God/god.
They now have two Gods in heaven at the right hand of The Father sits a God
brilliant
4:23 If you will notice the word "through" there. Are you familiar with how God delivered Israel through Moses. Or how God delivered the law through Moses. While it is called the Mosiac Law, it didn't come from Moses, did it? It came from God, delivered through Moses.
Also consider this illustration. An officer comes into a room, and says "everyone in this room is under arrest". Is it reasonable to think the officer is also under arrest, or would he be an obvious exception? The point is, Jesus obviously did not create himself when it says al things were created through him.
Amazing
What about the scripture that says I am not greater than him that sent me how could he be God of he was sent by God
He is tellying you, I'm powerful.... He is I & I'm him😘
Everyone is a technical polytheist since in one place the bible says "there are many gods and many lords." But as commonly applied, a polytheist is someone open to WORSHIPING more than one god not simply acknowledging the existence of other gods. Thus there are two definitions and you're trying to mix the two.
In the meantime, since Christ is a God and God has set him up to be worshipped, even by the angels, worshipping both Jesus and Jehovah is polytheism, but it is God-approved polytheism.
Our act of worshipping God involves worshipping Christ as well.
In the meantime, the problem with John 1:1 is that if it was meant to refer to the Word as "a god" or simply "god" (as I prefer), there is no other way to Express that. However, if John really wanted to suggest that God and the Word were the same being, he would have used the definitive article twice. Thus John 1:1 interpretation as "and the Word was God" is a mistranslation. You must use other scriptures to claim Jesus and Jehovah are the same person. But how can you in the face of all the scriptures that call Jesus God's "SON." So I support polytheism as well as the JW teaching that Jesus is Michael, the archangel (1 Thessalonians 4:15-18) .
Thanks for discussing this topic.
There is no mention of the holy spirit at JOHN 1:1,2 ????
“ALL means ALL” ??
This is a something no JW’s I’ve ever talked with will concede. ALL and EVERY never means what they mean….
They always tap dance over this.
BUT…. I think they get their argument from THIS verse…
“For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all.”
1 Corinthians 15:27-28 NIV
So be prepared for that to.
That’s crazy showing the trinity with their own Bible. I have a work friend who is a JW 35yrs deep and I spoke to him the other day and told him I was worried about his salvation as he has nothing to worry about as he thinks he is a Christian.. I want to say thank you for helping me to help show some of the flaws for a false religion.
Luni Lunifyd I recommend you to watch Sam shamoon
The only thing that is getting worse is your knowledge probs 3:5. Jesus is not a God by any means he is God like divine nature, Almighty God is only one Jehovah!!!
jehovah's witnesses do not treat Jesus like a God but our savior! again God Almighty Jehovah God ONLY. The Bible is very clear you just refuse to see it all praise goes to Jehovah God
2+2=4
Great video thank you
PERFECTION AT ITS BEST...the truth will ALWAYS be the truth...and its sad that some jw's still wont get it
Since the Bible is from our heavenly Father, you will benefit the most if you have the attitude of a child who is ready to learn from a loving parent. If you have any negative, preconceived ideas about the Bible, try to set them aside so that God can teach you.-Psalm 25:4.
JW’s would argue this point by pointing out - there are various humans and heavenly beings called “gods” in the Bible.
Moses, David, the Angel of YHWH… even the angels of the psalms “assemblies of the gods”
“Ye are gods”
And in John 10 if he called them gods to whom the Word of God came….
They would say God allows the “title” of god to be applied to beings that have a divine office or function as an agent of Jehovah ….
So be aware you then have to contend with that……
Personally it still doesn’t get them out of the True God vs false god argument.
But they would argue “well Jahoveh calls them ‘gods’ !”
have you given a thumbs down to the very God of Jesus?
Polytheism is the worship of more than one god/God. Henotheism is the belief that one God should be worship but they do not deny the existence that others can be called gods.
well done man
Efxaristo eimai poly kala (ευχαριστώ είμαι πολύ καλά). I totally think that this video plus your video about the question JWs cannot answer really ruins this deadly cult. And I would like to see more of these cult devestating videos. And why not make a video about the "light' God created on the first day (Gen. 1,3 Γεννηθήτω το φως). He creates the light on the first day but He creates the sun on the fourth day. So what kind of light of the first day? Ευλογία Κυρίου και έλεος έλθοι επί σε.
Στέφανος Ε Thanks so much for your kind words and suggestions!
@Aubrey Shatner This is very easy to answer. The New Testament was written in Greek, as you know. What puzzles me is that not many people seem to know that Greek at that time was written ONLY in capital letters. "Small" latters came into existance in Greek at about the 9th century along with the Caroligian minuscule. So there is no possib;ility, none whatsoever, that God could be written as "god". It was definately written as GOD. Regards from Greece.
@Aubrey Shatner And who has told you that in ancient Greece there was no indefinite article? Probably somebody who doesn't know Greek like thise guys at Bethel. Ask them please what does 'εις' or "τις" mean?
@@samueltolley the word was a true god but he is not the God
@@Scott48-m7e Sorry, but in the language the Godspells were written (Greek koine) there were now lower case letters.Only capital letters. Small letters were introduced much later. You can easily see this ig you see ancient inscriptions or manuscripts of the time. Trust me I am Greek!!!!
I am a ex jw and I love Jesus Christ so very much
I had some JWs stop by a few weeks ago. I brought up John 1:1. The approach I used was the Logos was a philosophical concept of Greeks and Hellenic Jews including the time the Gospel of John was wrtitten. It was never thought that the Logos was "a god" by those who were familiar with the concept of the Logos. John was speaking to those people and was telling them this concept of the Logos is Jehovah who created the universe and brings order to it. The Logos is a complicated concept and changed from Heraclitus, to Plato to Philo. I don't think they understood.
Neither do you.
@@gerryquinn5578 Funny. I guess you're an expert. Explain it to me since I don't know anything about it. LOL!
@@wfqsfg Jesus is Gods Son that's it Not (God Almighty the Creator) Let's take a Look at the Bible and see what it Says
1. Then why is God head of Christ just as Christ is Head of man? (1st coriethians 11:3)
2.) Then why does Scripture consistently phrase Jesus as a Separate person from God? (John 20:17); (John 14:1); (Mark 10:18); (John 17:1-3), Also in Heaven, (Luke 22:69)
3.) Then how can Jesus have a god? (Micah 5:4), (pslams 45:6, 7; 89:26, John 20:17; (Romans 15:6;2), (Coriethians 1:3, Eph. 1:3; (Col. 1:3) (Mark 15:34); (John 17:1-3) Also in heaven (Rev. 1:6; 3:3, 12)
4. Then why does Scripture say he was born and part of creation? (Colessians 1:15)
5. Then why does (Rev. 3:14) Say that Jesus was the beginning of the Creation by God?
6. Then why is he subject to god like we are subject to him? (1st Cor. 15:27,28); (Eph. 1:17)
7. Then why does (Micah 5:2) say that Jesus Origin was from Early times?
8. Then why does Jesus not know what God knows? (Matthew 24:36,) (Rev. 1:1); (Luke 8:45)
9. Then why is Jesus still subject to (god) when he is as high as he will ever be? (1st Cor. 15:27,28)
10. Then why does (Proverbs 8:22-31) show that the Messiah was created/Produced by God?
11. Then why is he not powerful enough to subject things to himself? (1st Cor. 15:27); (Eph. 1:17,22)
12. Then why would he have to be given any power & authority? (Matthew 28:18; 11:27; (John 5:22; 17:2; 3:35;) (2nd 1:17)
13. Then why did he have to learn anything? (Hebrews 5:8), (John 5:19; 8:28)
14. Then why is speaking against him not as bad as speaking against the Holy Spirit? (Matthew 12:31, 32;); (Luke 12:10)
15. Then why did Jesus Call the Father the Only True God? (John 17:3)
16. Then why did he need to be saved? (Hebrews 5:7); (John 12:27)
17. Then why did he have to be exalted to leader & savior? (Acts 5:31)
18. Then how can he be exalted and (Given) a higher name then he had? (Philippians 2:9-11); (Hebrews 1:2-4)
19. Then why did he have to be given Life in himself? (John 5:25, 26)
20. Then how could his Father be Greater then he and not equal trinity? (John 14:28)
21. Then how could Jesus be tempted by Satan in(Matthew 4:10) when God cannot be tempted by Evil (James 1:13)
22. Then why did Jesus (Worship) the Father (John 4:22)
23. Then why can he not do anything of his own? (John 5:19; 6:38)
24. Then why would Jesus pray to Anybody? (Luke 22:44; ) (John 17:1,2)
25. Then why do John 1:18 and 1st John 4:9 say that Jesus is God's only Begotten Son?
26. Then how can Jesus be God's servant? (Acts 4:26, 27,30)
27. Then how could he receive strength from an angel? (Luke 22:43)
28. Then how could he be the mediator between God & man? (1st Timothy 2:5)
29. Then how could he be with God (ton theon)? (John 1:1)
30. Then how could he be God's image? (Col. 1:15;) (Hebrews 1:3)
Then why is he called the agency (dia) of creation and not the originator (ek)? (1cor. 8:6); (John 1:1-3); (Prov. 8:30) (Hebrews 2:10); (Col. 1:15, 16)
32. Then why did Jesus say God was good in a way that Jesus was not?(Mark 10:18)
33. Then why does Jesus have the voice of the Archangel and not the voice of God? (1st thess. 4:16)
34. Then why is the only worship given to him the same given to humans ? (Heb. 1:6) (Matt. 18:26;); (Rev. 3:9)
35. Then why do many who believe and rely on a few so called proof texts instead of the context of the consisent teachings of the entire Bible?
36.then how can Jesus be commanded to do anything? (John 12:49), (deutronemy 18:18)
37. Then why did Steven see 2 separate entities God & Jesus and not just one god or 3 person's? (Acts 7:55)
38. Then how could Jesus be seen at God's right hand?(Luke 22:69); (Acts 7;55); (Romans 8:34)
39. Then how could Jesus be exalted not to become God himself, but to the position of the right hand of God?(,Acts 2:33)
40. Then why would he have to receive a revelation from God?(rev. 1:1)
41. Then why is he called God's begotten Son before he came to Earth? (John 3:16); (Galations 4:4), (1st John 4:9)
42. Then how could he have a father (John 20:17)
43. Then how could he come in Flesh? (1st Kings 8:27); (Acts 17:24, 25)
44. Then why did Jesus not come in his own Name? (John 5:41-44)
45. Then why did Jesus come down from Heaven to do God's will and Not His Own? (Luke 22:42); (John 6:38) (John 5:30) (John 8:42)
46. Then how could Jesus appear before God when he went back to (Heaven)? (Hebrews 9:24)
47. Then how could Jesus die? Can God die? Can part of God die? (Romans 5:10); (Acts 5:30); (Habbuk 1:12); ,(1st time. 6:16); (Numbers 23:19) (1st Cor. 15:3); (Plsams 90:2); (Daniel 6:25-26)
48. Then why is it that God ressurrected Jesus? (Acts 2:32) (Acts 5:30)
(Romans 10:9,10)
49. Then why can we see him if No Man has seen God at any time? (John 1:18)
50. Then why is there not one clear scripture where Jesus is called God the Son, (Equal to those declaring God the Father)
51. How is it that the Jews rounded up some false witnesses to make up lies to obtain a death sentence for Jesus, but niether the Jewish officials nor even one of those false witnesses made a claim that Jesus was God or Equally god? (Matthew 26:59-67)
52. John summed up his whole Gospel by saying that it was written that we may believe that Jesus is Christ, the son of God. Why is there no mention in that summary of the entire Gospel of what would be the Most important thing of all that Jesus is God? (John 20:31)
@@tiffanywright6653 You know, the only replies I ever get from Jehovah's Witnesses are copy and paste. You don't know the information so you go to JW.Org and copy it and paste it.
@@tiffanywright6653 John 1:1 In the beginning was the Logos, the Logos was with God, the Logos was God. John 1:14 And the Logos (God) became flesh (human). Who is the Logos? Where did that term come from? What is its history?
I guess I'll get another copy and paste answer. LOL!!!!!!!
Brilliant. Im using this on my next cart crash.
Instead of crashing other people, if you have anything worthwhile to say, why not set up your own cart or go round the doors yourself.
@@gerryquinn5578 because im not part of a cult.......
@@brickbybrick6516 No. Your love for God and people is so great that you ignore the command of Jesus. You are just a JW Hater.
@@brickbybrick6516 What about Catholics.? They have a man in the Vatican. Or Mormons, they have a President. Do you make videos for them too? if not, what does that say about you.
@@gerryquinn5578 Oh I agrer completely watchtower is litteraly just another religion. You have the same power structure, same money making mentality, same child abuse problems.
The difference is that other religions dont control their members in the same authoritarian way. Ie. Shunning ex members, dying for blood policy, child abuse cover up being hidden from members, 2 witness rule. (All of these can be ruled out with scriptures btw) Splitting up families, proffiting from weapons companies, etc.
Also the fact tgat watchtower uses the BITE method almost to the letter to control its members. If you dont know what the BITE method is, its a checklist of mind control techniques commonly used by well known cults around the world. Scientology, watchtower, and Mormons (LDS) are the worst offenders. But its a scholarly work about mind control/ behaviour modification etc. Its not aimed at watchtower, nor does it mention jws but if you read the list *we all know you wont* then you will see how your life is also tightly controlled. Btw, yes I do call out Mormons for their bizarre take on the bible, and their shunning practices etc. As a point of fact Mormons and watchtower are identical apart from doctrine. Same with scientology.
I suppose if my family had not been completely destroyed by watchtowers false teachings, I wouldnt care so much. But they did. So I do.
I know you wont answer any of the points iv mentioned. You will veer off on some unrelated topic like Catholics or whatever. Or claim that what im saying is wrong without providing one shred of evidence. The sad thing is, your not even allowed to look up anything iv told you in case its "apostate". Seriously look up bite mehod mind control. Read the list and tell me watchtower doesnt do almost every single thing on that list.
Well done
You have a problem Samuel Tolley. The Bible shows the angels are called gods. God said Moses was God to Pharaoh. The judges of Israel are called gods, by God Himself. These things are all true, and the Jews knew these verses, yet they were strictly monotheists. In that they worshipped only one God. So your understanding is inaccurate.
(Deuteronomy 10:17) For Jehovah your God is the God of gods
The first bit "in the beginning was the word, is in-reference to the verse 2 and 3 that being Jesus was the beginning before God who had made him and anything after occurs after the begging of Jesus. "And the Word was with God", refereeing to Jesus separate from God but there with God at the dawn of creation. John 14:28 latter clearly states that Father (God) is greater and Ephesians 1:20 shows that. Also note the 'Word was **with** God'. This would mean that God and Jesus are separate not the same being.
There's a problem with you using Ephesians 1:20 to illustrate God is greater. In John 2:19 Jesus says he is the one who would raise the temple of his body again. So either Jesus is lying or the Son and the Father are the same God.
@@rts876 In regards to Ephesians 1:20, this passage clearly shows that Jesus and God being separate as it states that God raised up Jesus and God put Jesus on his right hand. Further more noted in Psalm 110:1 and Acts 7:55.
In regards to 2:19, its further explained in Mark 14:57 and 58. The power to do such acts is explained in Acts 10:34-43. Jesus did not resurrect himself but Jehovah did.
Just remember that your trinity, the holy spirit, has no form but is always explained as a force. Mat 28:19, Ac 1:8, Ac 15:28 and especially Luke 1:35. The holy spirit is a force that Jehovah uses to guide and exercise his will.
@@DUSAbruddah Right but then why did Jesus claim in John 2:19 the he himself would be the one to raise himself up?
@@rts876 There puts a conundrum. Acts 10:40 clearly states Jehovah raised up Jesus. Verse 38,40-42 clearly mentions 'with him' and not is him. This, IMO, is a form of separation. Also remember that holy spirit is part of trinity. Romans 9:1, 14:17 and 2 Peter 1:21. I've got tons of example showing that the holy spirit is a force, Gods will, that gets his will done. Holy spirit is doesn't have a humanoid form or is an entity like a life. 1 con 12:8-11 gives some further examples of how holy spirit works.
Back on the conundrum:
Either Jesus was talking about the power of Jehovah that actually raised him up
or
Somehow Jesus died then as God brought himself back then went about proclaiming about doing Gods will shortly before he returned to heaven to reconnect with himself (as himself since God=Jesus).
Its as If God made a human character of himself that constantly kept glorify himself in third person.
Please read the whole chapter not just one verse, so everyone seeing this video can reason based on the entirety of the whole chapter and not just one verse.
Please explain the whole chapter the context of it . Why Isaiah was inspired to penned this words
Let see, verse 24 Jehovah God is appealing to the Jews. Which Jews ?
The ones living in Jerusalem in the moment when Isaiah by inspiration wrote those words or perhaps to the future exiled Jews in Babylon or perhaps both ?
I know you know the reason why the Jews were exiled to Babylon.
As a nation they stop worshiping The only true God, Jehovah God and they followed human traditions as well as worshiping the man made false ( gods). Also they deteriorate their special relationship with the truth God, when they started acting even worse than their neighbors yes by abandoning Jehovah their God, they were exiled to Babylon. One of the reason of the strong reprove in chapter 44 that explain why Jehovah is asking who is equal to him where are all those false gods and what can they do about it, that is Man made false gods = idols= idolatry. Please explain verses 14- 28
Where in the Bible says that is ok to represent Jesus with a symbol or cross , where explain that as well, Let me see. Verse 14- 18
14 There is one whose work is to cut down cedars.He selects a certain type of tree, an oak,And he lets it grow strong among the trees of the forest. He plants a laurel tree, and the rain makes it grow. 15 Then it becomes fuel for a man to make fires.He takes part of it to warm himself;He builds a fire and bakes bread. But he also makes a god and worships it.He makes it into a carved image, and he bows down before it. 16 Half of it he burns up in a fire;With that half he roasts the meat that he eats, and he is satisfied. He also warms himself and says:“Ah! I am warm as I watch the fire.” 17 But the rest of it he makes into a god, into his carved image.He bows down to it and worships it.He prays to it and says:“Save me, for you are my god.” 18 They know nothing, they understand nothing,Because their eyes are sealed shut and they cannot see,And their heart has no insight.
Lets make the same exercise, why don’t you pray for holly spirit as well,
Perhaps verse 19 -20 would make more sense.
Then perhaps we can “reason” not argue verses 21-28
Does the author of the Holly Bible didn’t make it clear enough that it is detestable to him when individuals use physical forms made from human hands to worshiping him.
Please explain that from the Bible not from human theology or some sort of experience or story.
Why is your real motive to make these type of videos,
Are you a judge? Or you alone came to understand the Bible in a level that other professed Christians haven’t achieved? 2 peter 3:16
Please don’t worry the Lord Jesus Christ is well aware of the situation.
John 15:1-5. According to these verses Who acts as judge and executor yes I know it doesn’t say that, But we can see that the cultivator or. The only true God is the one who takes away the branches not producing fruit.
Isaiah 44:6-7
“This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and BESIDES ME THERE IS NO GOD. 7 And who is there like me?
.
A question! And who is there like me?
.
Answer: NO ONE!
,
But hold on:
.
Revelation 2:26-27
26 And to him that conquers and observes my deeds down to the end I will give authority over the nations, 27 and he shall shepherd the people with an iron rod so that they will be broken to pieces like clay vessels, THE SAME AS I have received from my Father,
.
Mere men can become THE SAME AS Jesus Christ!
.
But there is NO ONE like God!
.
Romans 8:28-29
Now we know that God makes all his works cooperate together for the good of those who love God, those who are the ones called according to his purpose; 29 because those whom he gave his first recognition he also foreordained to be patterned after the image of his Son, that he might be the FIRSTBORN AMOUNG MANY BROTHERS.
.
The righteous question here is; who will be the second born?
.
Patterned after the image of HIS SON. In other words; JUST LIKE JESUS CHRIST!
.
Now go back to Isaiah 44
.
Isaiah 44:6-7
“This is what Jehovah has said, the King of Israel and the Repurchaser of him, Jehovah of armies, ‘I am the first and I am the last, and besides me there is no God. 7 And who is there like me?
.
And who is there like me?
.
Answer: NO ONE!
.
Jesus Christ is NOT Almighty God
.
Frustrated?
.
Isaiah 44:25
[I am] frustrating the signs of the empty talkers, and [I am] the One that makes diviners themselves act crazily; the One turning wise men backwards, and the One that turns even their knowledge into foolishness;
.
.
.
.
.
Try reading Revelation 1:16-17 and Revelation 2:8.🤔 Who died the Father or Jesus Christ? Frustrated?
What do all the other verses say about the relationship and positions of Jesus Christ the Son and God the Father. John 1:1 says “in the beginning” the Word had a beginning because he was and is the Son of God
God the Father had no beginning and has no end. The Word the Son had a beginning and has no end. The translation of John 1:1 seem to imply that the Word is God but at the same time it says the the Word was with God. However, the translation of other Bible verses clearly show the Word is the Son and the eternal God is the Father whose will the Word obeys.
2- to understand the roles in creation, read 1 corinthians 8:6. There is only one God, the Father. *From* whom all things are, and we for him. And one lord, Jesus Christ *through* whom all things are, and we through him.
All things were created FROM the father THROUGH the son. God spoke and his Word made it so.
Speaking of his "Word." We agree that "the Word" in John 1:1 is Jesus... you might want to revisit the book of Zechariah. Where "The Word" speaks to the prophet. Again, messages FROM God, Through his Word. ... yet "The Word" is quite clearly referred to as the "Angel of Jehovah."
Although the Scriptues are extremely powerful, they are extremely conflicting, which is why the only conclusion brought by Christians is to understand that Jesus is one in the same with God.With a healthy perspective now from the outside, I stopped arguing these points, years ago, as I realized the conflicts in Scripture. Yet people stand so firmly with seemingly no fear or healthy concern over disregarding the Father, although the Scriptures state clearly that THE FATHER is the entity that we truly worship, including Jesus, and also that the JWs are absolutely crazy for giving reverence the God The Father and the glorification of His Name which was the pronouncement from Jesus. Then in this video there is dialogue to argue over the JWs creating a "two God" dynamic as if the concept of God on the throne with "The :Lamb" seated next to him is not totally "drummed in one's head" from Revelations. NOTHING from the JWs is far reaching and ever some radical a concept from what is plainly said in the Scriptures. In an attempt to make the New Testament Scriptures "pure and cohesive", however, Christian folks had to morph the forever understood monotheistic nature of God into a multi-faced, and EXTREMELY schizophrenic God while on Earth that spoke 98 percent of the time of being beneath, just a vessel, always of honoring The Name of his Father, praying to and asking that the burden of his plight be taken away from him by said Father and somehow accepting that God is a Trinity with only The Son being the one having a name. The Witnesses, even though they want to keep to the same thought that the Scriptures are "all pure", treat the matter like a court case and see it that 99.9 percent of the dialogue should not be defined by .1 percent of the Scriptures. It would not work in a court case, so why does it work for modern Christianity? if Jesus spent so much time making blatant and simple statements , why is it that all of his statements are now being explained in modern times as if he was talking 99 percent of the time in the abstract in some Bible scholar-like, "to be interpreted" language when he was speaking to simple people who he wanted to take simple action? Forget about the JW missed prophesies and what not and analyze Scripture for Scripture and stop thinking that people are some kind of voodoo cult, it breeds ignorance on both sides. As for John 1, think about the fact that the discovered Sahidic Coptic manuscripts from the 2nd century (the first translations from the Greek by those fluent in Greek) that the original wording was "a god" and the Christian world has tormented the Witnesses while that same Bible used in the video, was the only one in print that had it right from day one. and knowing these facts the Christian world have been absolutely silent to their congregants on the matter. The point is , stop the name calling and pious attitudes because God works in ALL of us and translations of Scriptures and opinions you may have lived by may be bogus upon actual research.
I love your teaching.You make so much sense. Thank you!
@Gino Losoya Usually I just avoid them, or tell them (like Morman's , 7th day Adv etc) "let me tell you about Jesus, but I want to pray for you first" & then ask God to touch them so they will know the truth. Usually that sends them scurrying away. But so interested to know rebuttals to hopefully open their eyes. They Are Brainwashed & so deceived. I'm a new sub & want to know so much more. I have never argued with them, or tried to point out their deceptions. Great to learn, & maybe bring some to the truth. I never let them in my home-no need to invite that spirit in.
Jennifer- they don’t pray with you first, because they have already prayed before the visit people, second because you believe in a different god then they do.
@@filipesantos8730 Dr. James White explains through scripture why Jesus is Jehovah in this short clip. And all this through The new world bible translation: th-cam.com/video/8VHfZBde2j4/w-d-xo.html
Jesus is not Jehovah, sorry. . Jesus said that the Father is greater then he is
@@filipesantos8730 Yes in ranking like I said not in essence.
WE believe and serve one God (Isaiah 44:6 and 42:8 ) An Almighty God didn't live on the earth for 33 1/2 (John 3:16)
People who are desperate to make Jesus into God fail to understand what John 1:1 is about.
'In the BEGINNING' would indicate that TIME had begun. How would time begin? Obviously with God CREATING SOMEONE OR SOMETHING. Jesus is called the FIRSTBORN of all Creation (Col 1:15).
This Created being would logically be WITH God when time began.
If Jesus was God, there is nothing called a beginning.
Aside from 'and the Word WAS God' translation making no sense.
WAS the past tense means Jesus lost being God.
Jehovah's Witnesses are Biblically correct in their assessment that Jesus is a god both from a grammatical point of view of the Greek text that is properly translated "a god" in John 1:1 _(I can prove that by using non JW sources from trinitarian scholars)_ and from the rest of Bible including Isaiah.
Trinitarians are preprogramed to read into the text information that is not there
The Bible *_IS_* truly a polytheistic book. It teaches that there are many gods but 9only one is to ever receive religious type worship. The original language of the OT shows that there are 4 types of gods
1)The one true God how alone is to be worshiped in a religious manner
2) false gods that should never be worshiped in a religious manner
3) true gods approved of by GOD ( _but never worshiped_ )
4 ) other non living creations of GOD that the Hebrew uses the word god for
The ancient word for god/God simply means a mighty one. that description can fit so many people and things.
The texts in John 1: 3 and the ones you use in Isaiah actually do prove that Jesus is a god. If only you would take the time to properly examine them
There are no texts in the original languages of the Bible that hint at Jesus being GOD. Some poorly translated verses in many Bibles do give that impression.
You speak as Ephesians 4:14 warns against, with the trickery of men. Jesus is mediator between God and man. (1 Timothy 2:5) In ancient Israel the people served the King, but they worshipped God. They did not sacrifice or pray to the King, they did recognize the kings authority. The same is with Jesus. God has appointed Jesus and gave him all authority, so we recognize that. But our prayers and worship and sacrifices still go to God. Where did one of the Apostles pray to Jesus? The confusion here is that the KJV many times renders Jesus as coming out of God. This is false. The Greek to English translation renders Jesus as 'beside of the Father I came out'
Its immaterial and unnecessary whether the Jews were polytheists why? Because Jesus while he was on earth directed that religious worship (Gk- proskyneo) must only be given to his Heavenly Father and not to anyone else. - see John 4:24 and Matthew 4:10. Jesus made it clear at Matthew 4:10 that True Christians must only Jehovah the True God.The Jews were strictly a monothesitic faith so its moot and immaterial to claim that the Witnesses by making Jesus 'a god' are polytheists...even the Bible says at 1 Corinthians 4:4 that Satan the Devil is the god of this system of things, which means he controls and rules our visible world.
I'm not a JW but they are actually correct in this. There are no indefinite articles in koine Greek so the translator has to put them in where he thinks they are needed. The very first translation from the Greek scriptures to another language was in the Coptic language by FLUENT speakers of Koine Greek and this very first translation has John 1:1 as "a god". Many modern translations have the same or similar renderings.
Regardless, the fact is that if the verse is not in harmony with the rest of scripture then something is wrong. People would rather deny Christ's very own words that he has a God at John 20:17 and at Rev 3:12 He says 4 times in one verse that he HAS a God.
Going back to the translator having to add in the articles a and an where needed, why does no one see it to be a problem at Acts 28:6 but freak out when its added at John 1:1?
Paul was shipwrecked on the island and when the viper bit his hand and nothing happened to him the locals thought he was "a god". But in the original Greek it would have said "they thought he was God" the translator has no problem adding the "a god" there.
There are always biases of translators that creep in when translating scripture and the KJV is no exception. The KJV has added an entire verse in scripture that is not in a single manuscript. 1st John 5:7
Just answer this one question. If John 1:1 is saying that Jesus is God Almighty, then why does the rest of the book of John completely contradict this? Why did John summarize his whole writing at the end of it and say "so all will know that Jesus is the son of God" rather than saying "so all will know that Jesus is God"?
And why would Jesus say he HAS a God if he IS God?
When is the son ever called the Father? When is the Father ever called the son? When is the holy spirit ever called either one?
mojo jojo Firstly the wts translators weren't qualified greek scholars. Secondly the definate article argument is flawed because john 1:6 also doesn't have the definate article yet they don't translate it a god . They're clueless.
mojo jojo asks: "[...] why does no one see it to be a problem at Acts 28:6 but freak out when its added at John 1:1? Paul was shipwrecked on the island and [...] the locals thought he was "a god". But in the original Greek it would have said "they thought he was God" the translator has no problem adding the "a god" there. [...]"
At first sight, it is a good question. The Greek in the New Testament has two different ways to render two different kinds of thoughts. Let me explain.
Way 1: "Marylin (subject) is [a] mother (object)". That means that Marylin is a mother among many other mothers.
Way 2: "[A] mother (object) is Marylin (subject)." That means that Marylin has all the required qualities to be called a mother, because she has born a child.
As you see, the place of the subject and of the object is different.
Another example:
Way 1: "Peter (subject) is [a] king (object)". That means that Peter is a king among many other kings. He could also be an incompetent king.
Way 2: "[A] king (object) is Peter (subject)." That means that Peter has all the required qualities to be called a king, because he has the power and the authority of a king.
Way 1: Act 28:6: "[...] he (subject) was [a] god (object)." That means that the people believed that Paul was one of the many gods.
Way 2: John 1:1: "[a] god (object) was the Word (subject)". That means that the Word has all the required qualities to be called god, because he made/created all things.
[...] because he made/created all things.
To us, God is God because he created all things, as Revelation 4:11 says: "You are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being."
So both, Almighty God and the Lamb (Jesus Christ) are worthy to receive "power and riches and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and blessing!” [...] “To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be praise and honor and glory and power forever and ever!" (Revelation 5:12-13)
The Bible makes no more difference in the worship of God, no matter if it is the Father, or if it is the Son. The Father is not jealous of his Son, because he wants "that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father" (John 5:23a). JWs do "not honor the Son [just as they honor the Father, therefore they do] not honor the Father who sent Him." (John 5:23b)
In John 1:1it says Ho Theos compared to theos ,He Ho Theos is his daddy or (Abba) God is a title just like lord or mr.It says in the scriptures there are many gods but only one true God he was the only begoten god
God is true every man a liar
Seems someone is stuck in their programming if they can’t get it.
People need a quick lesson in basic vocabulary.
Eloh. Mighty, exhaulted one. Eloheim , the amplified version of Eloh, the mightiest of mighty ones. Totally exhaulted.
From these words came ,god. Mighty one. Biblical judges, even foreighn kings were gods. To refer to almighry God. ,,,the god. You have know , there was no capital letter to use to didtinguish at that time. John 1: 1. The word was with the ( that right folks , trinitarians just overlook this tiny word ,,the ) god. (GOD) AND the word was ,(a) god.
GOOGLE. Coptic koine greek john 1:1. There are several articles. Further , multiple researchers and scholors use ,a god, or similiar. I heve listed just few here.
Well Jacob in Isaiah 10:21 worships the MIGHTY God described in Isaiah 9:6. Isaiah 1:24 in the New World Translation in a contradiction. In their Insight which is like an Encyclopedia defines Worship as Rendering homanage in Matthew 2:2, so they Worship Kristos and dont even know it.
The amazing thing is, in the NWT they cross reference verses that contradict their beliefs. For example, Isaiah 43:11 says, "I, I am Jehovah and besides me there is no savior." It is cross referenced to Titus 2:13, which says, "while we wait for the happy hope and glorious manifestation of the great God and of the savior of us Christ Jesus..." Also, John 1:1 is cross referenced to Revelation 19:13, regarding the Word of God that is sprinkled with blood! There are so many passages like this, whereby the JWs even cross reference them!
Predicate nominatives usually omit a definite article, so you wouldn't expect there to be a definite article for theos there! Besides, John doesn't always use a definite article for theos anyway, even in the prologue. If it has to mean "a god," then John the Baptist was sent by "a god" in John 1:6. The JW position on this is sheer nonsense!
John 1:1 is, indeed, a very popular Trinitarian proof-text, but it's actually full of holes and contradictions. First of all, both in verses 1 and 2, John writes that the Word was with God. You cannot be God and be with him, that's makes no sense. Also, if that were the case, that would mean there are two true Gods and that would contradict Scripture. (Deuteronomy 6:4)
Secondly, when one examines the Greek grammar, it's quite obvious that an alternate translation is also permissible. At the final clause in the first verse, the Greek word "Theos" (god) is without a definite article (ho). Bible scholars agree that 'Theos' by itself can be translated not only as 'God,' but also 'a god' (lowercase 'g') and even 'divine'. The Moffat Bible translation reads, "and the Word was divine".
Thirdly, even with the definite article in the Greek, 'God' (uppercase 'G') isn't really always the best translation either. At 2 Corinthians 4:4, the Bible refers to Satan as the "god" of this age. The definite article is there in the Greek, yet not a single Trinitarian translator renders it 'God,' but 'god' (they use a lowercase 'g' to denote a lesser god).
A better translation of John 1:1 is, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god (or divine)." John here is simply stating the divine nature of the Messiah and also bringing to light his preexistence in heaven. The Bible makes it quite clear that Jesus is Jehovah God's first created son and that he is the image of the invisible God. (Colossians 1:15; John 1:18, Revelation 3:14) This is why at John 1:2, John writes that he was with God, not God.
5:34 Isaiah was God comparing Himself to the gods the nations worshipped. None of the nations gods were there. They were created by men. You cannot take that context and apply it to, for instance the angels who were there.
I listen to JWs they are good people doing what is commanded in the Bible acts 20:20 I think everyone thinks there right depending on what.you we're raised in God knows your heart.psalms 83 18 says God's name is Jehovah Jesus says I will sit at the right hand ofy father. peace
Is Mr Tolley correct? Is he correct in calling the JWs polytheists because of their translation "a god.? Is there more than One God? Is he not aware that in scripture angels, judges and Moses are called God? Yet this is from the OT. The Jews are viewed as monotheists but they saw nothing wrong with these passages and it did not conflict with their biblical monotheism. So, if angels, judges and Moses can be called God/god, then surely the Son of God can be viewed as a god. This is in harmony with the Jewish biblical world view. But perhaps Mr Tolley gave the game away with his comments at the start when he talked about looking at the bible through his Christian perspective. He has assumed that his take is true and is forcing it on the text, rather than let the text form his view. Mr Tolley believes it is wrong for others to do this, but clearly not for him.
I hate to say it, but your watchtower tunnelvision is going into overdrive. Are you aware that watchtowers "translation" is not reffered to as a bible by Greek scholars, because it has been deliberately altered in so many places.
You can never gain truth from a fake interpretation of the bible. Feel free to prove me wrong by providing the names of any Greek scholars that agree with it. Or the names/ qualifications of anyone involved in writing it.
The bible very clearly states who Jesus is. watchtower have dobe their best to alter these passages. (Collosians chapter one "other")
You cant make sense of watchtower dogma, without their "version" of the bible.
@@brickbybrick6516 Really? Are you aware the JWs had their theology in place BEFORE they had their NWT. They used and published the same bibles as everyone else. They took their beliefs from the Bible, not the settled religious controversies of the second to fourth centuries. I recommend the book "Truth In Translation."a modern comparison of some modern bibles. This scholarly work may disabuse of your anti-WatchTower hysteria. You should be able to get it online. Why not read it. You nothing to fear but the truth.
@@gerryquinn5578 yes I know all about the masonic origins of your religion. I have c t russels studies in the scriptures vol 1-7 including finished mystery. The original version. Including all the parts about measuring pyramids to come to the date 1914.
I have the millions now living will never die book by rutherford, saying that abraham and the "bible worthies" would be resurrected and live with rutherford in a purpose built mansion in san diego (beth sharim).
I know all about their false prophecies. And much more about their corrupt history. A history which your nit allowed to look into because its "old light" 🤣🤣🤣
Sorry for laughing. Its just the entire religion is so comical from the outside.
Getting onto the disgraceful book (NWT)
I could start quoting Metzger, Rowley, Barclay or half a dozen other top Greek scholars who flatly refuse to call it a bible. But il just quote Julius R Mantey, because he is quoted as a scholarly reference i your purple interlinear.
He says, (you can watvh him speak on youtube) that after taking legal action to remove his name from watchtower publications. He read the nwt, and concluded it was a "disgusting and deliberate mistranslation, that has been alters in scoresand scores of passages, its not a bible"
Hes the guy watchtower quoted.
The only dcholar you csn bring up is called Bahrum. He is respected, and does support the JW John 1.1 definate article. But then later in the same paper, says that inserting the name Kehovah into the New Testament is wholly unacceptable.
I know more about your religion than you ever will.
Again, prove me wrong by quoting ANY greek scholar that agrees. Or naming ANY of the writing team.
Should be easy, right?
@@brickbybrick6516 Then you know that you don't judge the past by the standards of the present.
@@gerryquinn5578 no idea what you mean by this. Please clarify.
There was no other Almighty God alongaside him and there never will be...that is what is meant in the text in Isaiah you mentioned about.
Why does it say in verses 3 and 4 'him' and not 'them'?
@Unashamed Workman Yes but in context John is speaking of one person not three distinct persons in John chapter 1
God is Jesus; Jesus is God; the name of [your] God is Jesus; Jesus is the name of [your] God. You are worshiping God Jesus. What to do with the God of Abraham, Isaac, Yaakob, Moses, David, and Yeshua, and Paul, etc. whose name is replaced with 'the LORD' in OT, making a nameless God. Pre-human Jesus was God, Jesus born was God, Jesus died on the cross was God, praying to his Father, O God. What the heck is the word God you are using? God of Catholics, God of Protestants, God of Mormons, God of Pentecostals, God of hell-fire preachers, God of prosperity peddlers, etc. etc.
John 8:17,18. Jesus speaking. 'In your own law it is written 'the witness of 2 MEN is true. I am ONE who bears witness about MYSELF, and the Father who sent me bears witness about me'. You are taking one Scripture and using it to say Jesus is God. There are over 30 scriptures that say Jesus is the son of God. There are 17 scriptures that say Jesus is/ will be at God's right hand After his ascension to heaven. You are distorting the truth about God and about Jesus. Now you have twice the judgement, from God and from Jesus.