Jump to content
The World News Media

The trinity and it’s false theology.


BroRando

Recommended Posts

  • Member
On 6/28/2018 at 7:43 AM, Anna said:

I think the biggest problem with this reasoning is that it assumes that Jehovah's Witnesses, who believe Jesus and God are two separate beings,

 

Hang on, Christians also believe this.

 

On 6/28/2018 at 7:43 AM, Anna said:

 

somehow designate Jesus to a low position. But that is not the case at all. I will not deny that Jesus (when not in human form) is god-like.

Nope, He was still God, but He was also MAN. 

 

On 6/28/2018 at 7:43 AM, Anna said:

A powerful spiritual being like God. This position allows perfectly for a son father relationship. The father was first and the son was second. Just like it is with humans who have a family, with the father being the head, so it is with the spiritual heavenly family also. God is the head over all the other spiritual beings including his only begotten son, who he created exclusively by himself before anything else was created. Indeed a very lofty and special position for Jesus. All the other spiritual beings were also called sons of God, as are even humans, but only Jesus had a unique beginning, that being personally created by his father. The point is he had a beginning, whereas God did not. Also Jesus is able to think and act independently of God. Jesus is god, or if you like, even god the son. But he is not Almighty God. He is not one half of a Siamese twin nor clone with Almighty God. I do not see the Bible teaching that. God did not disembody himself and send one part, the "Jesus" part, to the earth. I do not see the Bible teaching that either. What I do see the Bible teaching is that, at great pain to himself, he sent his most precious son to the earth, to become a human, so that he could buy back what Adam and Eve lost. Because Jesus is able to act and think independently of God, the sacrifice had validity. If Jesus was God, then how would the sacrifice even work? It would make no sense at all....

"f Jesus was God, then how would the sacrifice even work? It would make no sense at all...."

 

Because God only is sinless and ONLY a sinless sacrifice would work

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 9k
  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is where trintarians reject that Jesus was Begotten, they then reject that Jesus is Firstborn.  They also reject Jesus is Pre-eminent.  Notice the feminine nouns that are attributed to Christ to

@ShariKind He will not answer. Trinitarians like @Jesus.defender are known to tap-dance around such things, like football players with butter fingers cannot catch a ball at all. They say things they c

Posted Images

  • Member
2 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

Because God only is sinless and ONLY a sinless sacrifice would work

What makes you think Jesus wasn't sinless?

 

2 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:
On 6/27/2018 at 3:43 PM, Anna said:

I think the biggest problem with this reasoning is that it assumes that Jehovah's Witnesses, who believe Jesus and God are two separate beings,

 

Hang on, Christians also believe this.

Attempts have been made to define the trinity, but they sound so alienated from what the Bible says, it's almost sounds like trying define a multiple personality disorder. In fact reading some explanations of what the trinity is supposed to mean really puts my brain in a pretzel.

Here is one: " What we do mean by Person is something that regards himself as “I” and others as “You.” So the Father, for example, is a different Person from the Son because he regards the Son as a “You,” even though he regards himself as “I.” Thus, in regards to the Trinity, we can say that “Person” means a distinct subject which regards himself as an “I” and the other two as a “You.” These distinct subjects are not a division within the being of God, but “a form of personal existence other than a difference in being”  and " The relationship between essence and Person, then, is as follows. Within God’s one, undivided being is an “unfolding” into three personal distinctions. These personal distinctions are modes of existence within the divine being, but are not divisions of the divine being. They are personal forms of existence other than a difference in being". I have no idea how someone could have come up with something like that from reading the Bible.

I think I would rather go and solve abstract algebra than attempt to logically understand this gobbledygook....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
3 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

Nope, He was still God, but He was also MAN. 

What scripture teaches that?  The Scripture I found says the Opposite...

"God is not a man" (Numbers 23:19 KJV)   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
5 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

Hang on, Christians also believe this.

 

You sure about that? The comments you make at times seem to contradict each other, over and over again.

5 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

Nope, He was still God, but He was also MAN. 

 

God is not a man, it says that several times in the Old Testament (Numbers 23:19, 1 Samuel 15:29) for the molder is not like his mold (Isaiah 45:9, Romans 9:20), moreover, even Job himself even stated God is not like us men (Job 9:32-34). God is also incorruptible, cannot succumb to what us humans succumb to, one of them being death, for God's nature is incorruptibility (1 Timothy 1:17, Romans 1:23), he cannot die nor taste death (Habakkuk 1:12), he is the very source of life itself, for He is the living God, the one who is the fountain of life, and he has no beginning or end of existence. (Jeremiah 10:10, 17:13, Daniel 6:20, 26, John 6:57, 2 Corinthians. 3:3, 6:16, 1 Thessalonians. 1:9, Psalms. 36:9).

No where in the Bible does it states that God suddenly out of the blue becomes corruptible/moral. To think of someone who is that great to which nothing can contain him, would become visible flesh, that is somewhat absurd to conclude he could become a man.

5 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

"f Jesus was God, then how would the sacrifice even work? It would make no sense at all...."

Because God only is sinless and ONLY a sinless sacrifice would work

Granted that God himself was known to have been offered sacrifice than you have Jesus' sacrifice which in turn enabled amnesty of sin an allowing us to be forgiven allow us a way to receive eternal life, in addition to the New Covenant, it should be pretty obvious as to how such works.

As for the rest of your comment, do you realize what you are saying?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Trintarians make the claim that 'Jesus is God".  If that was true, wouldn't Jesus and God be interchangeable in the scriptures?  Insert God into the scripture when it is talking about Jesus and see what happens.

Let's try it. "So he has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs." (Hebrews 1:4)  If Jesus is God, can we conclude that God has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs?  

How is it that God was worse than the angels until God has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs?  

Sounds something like Satan would say....   If Jesus is God, can we conclude that God is the Lamb of God?  Did God die for our sins?  Does he even realize the trinity replaces Christ with a false gospel.   Who did Satan tempt with Evil???  Jesus or God?

Can God be tempted with Evil??   

1 Corinthians 15:3
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,

Rejecting Christ does not beget salvation.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 6/30/2018 at 12:45 PM, Brother Rando said:

What scripture teaches that?  The Scripture I found says the Opposite...

"God is not a man" (Numbers 23:19 KJV)   

 

 

Wow, ONE verse.Good on you!

 

Yes, in the OLD TESTAMENT times, Jesus was not on the earth in BODILY form.

 

So, at that time, correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 6/30/2018 at 4:14 PM, Brother Rando said:

Trintarians make the claim that 'Jesus is God".  If that was true, wouldn't Jesus and God be interchangeable in the scriptures?  Insert God into the scripture when it is talking about Jesus and see what happens.

Let's try it. "So he has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs." (Hebrews 1:4)  If Jesus is God, can we conclude that God has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs?  

How is it that God was worse than the angels until God has become better than the angels to the extent that he has inherited a name more excellent than theirs?  

Sounds something like Satan would say....   If Jesus is God, can we conclude that God is the Lamb of God?  Did God die for our sins?  Does he even realize the trinity replaces Christ with a false gospel.   Who did Satan tempt with Evil???  Jesus or God?

Can God be tempted with Evil??   

1 Corinthians 15:3
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,

Rejecting Christ does not beget salvation.    

anti-Christians DENY that Jesus is God, DENY the cross, DENY hell, DENY the bodily resurrection and yet still have the nerve to call themselves "Christian".

 

JEHOVAH’S NAME or JESUS CHRIST’S NAME.


The Watchtower teaches that God’s true Name is Jehovah. They teach that:

‘Sometime during the second or third Century CE, the scribes removed the tetragrammaton (JHWH) from both the Septuagint and the Christian Greek Scriptures and replaced it with κυριος (Lord) or θεος (God)’. Reference Edition of NWT, 1984, p 1564.

The Watchtower’s Kingdom Interlinear Translation (KIT) proves that Jesus is Jehovah God.

On page 10,11 of the 1985 KIT, under the heading ‘Restoring the Divine Name, Jehovah’ we read: ‘the evidence (what evidence?) is that the original text of the Christian Greek Scriptures has been tampered with (no proof) . . . Sometime during the second or third centuries CE, the Tetragrammaton (YHWH) was eliminated from the Greek texts by copyists (no proof).

Instead of YHWH they substituted the words Kurios (‘Lord’) and Theos (‘God’).’

Note: This is a lie. There is no historical or manuscript evidence or evidence of protest to support this claim. Somebody would have protested such a change.No one did. It never happened.

The New World Translation (NWT) is the JW perversion of the Bible made to support their false doctrines. It inserts the name ‘Jehovah’ in the New Testament in the place of God (θεος=theos) or Lord (κυριος =kurios) on 237 occasions, where they believe it refers to God the
Father. They often refer to Hebrew translations of the NT to see where this has been done.

These are footnoted as J1 to J27. Their dishonesty and deceit is shown by their failure to translate these words as ‘Jehovah’ when it refers to Christ. (eg: Philippians 2:11; Hebrews 1:10).

JWs say that the proper use of God’s ‘correct’ name (Jehovah) is absolutely essential to one’s salvation. They quote from their NWT: 

‘Everyone who calls on the name of Jehovah will be saved.’ Romans 10:13 (NWT).

‘People will have to know that I am Jehovah.’ Ezekiel 39:6 (NWT).
JWs believe that because they are the only group who refer to God by His ‘true’ name, Jehovah, they are the only true followers of God.

Their claim is false for these reasons:

1) Jehovah is not a Biblical term. It is a man-made term. The Old Testament has YHWH because the original Hebrew only had consonants. Jews feared taking God’s name in vain, so when they publicly read YHWH, they would pronounce it ‘Adonai’ (Lord).
Later they inserted the vowels from Adonai (a-o-a) into the consonants YHWH to give YAHOWAH, which became Jehovah. Hence, the word Jehovah comes from a consonantvowel
combination from YHWH and Adonai.

2) No-one knows for sure the original correct pronunciation of YHWH. Hence we cannot insist on ‘Jehovah’ as being correct.
3) Jesus never addressed the Father as Jehovah in the New Testament. If JWs are correct that God must be always called Jehovah, then Jesus was sinning by not calling God ‘Jehovah’. When the NWT puts Jehovah in Jesus’ mouth in the NT, it contradicts all the NT manuscripts which don’t have it.

QUESTION: Since Jesus never in the NT addressed the Father as Jehovah, why should we?

4) Jesus and the Apostle Paul tell us to address God as ‘Father’:

a) Jesus taught us to pray to God as ‘Our Father’, not ‘Our Jehovah’: ‘After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father.....’ (Matthew 6:9).

b) Jesus addressed God as Father in His own prayers:

‘I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth’. (Matthew 11:25).
‘O my Father, if it be possible.......’ (Matthew 26:39,42).
‘He said, Abba, Father.......’ (Mark 14:36).
‘ I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven.......’ (Luke 10:21).
‘Saying, Father, if thou be willing.......’ (Luke 22:42).
‘Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them;.......’ (Luke 23:34).
‘Father, the hour is come......’ (John 17:1).

c) Paul said, ‘we cry, Abba, Father.’ (Romans 8:15).

d) The Holy Spirit through Paul said, ‘God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father’. (Galatians 4:6).
Here the Holy Spirit of God tells us to call God ‘Abba, Father’, not ‘Jehovah’

QUESTION: If Jesus, the Holy Spirit and Paul all address God as Father nine times (and never as Jehovah) then shouldn’t we call God ‘Father’?

5) No Ancient NT manuscripts contain the tetragram (YHWH) to translate as Jehovah.

The Church writers before 325 AD only mention Jehovah once in passing. JWs tell us that most Bible versions deceive people because they omit Jehovah as God’s Name, so
the JWs dishonestly add the word ‘Jehovah’ to the NT text, even though it is not in any NT Greek manuscript, ancient version, papyri or lectionary.

The WT’s claim that ‘Jehovah’ as God’s name was removed from the NT by superstitious scribes, is a total lie with no supporting historical or manuscript evidence.

6) Whose Name did the early Christians identify themselves with? Was it Jehovah or was it Jesus Christ? Always Jesus Christ, never Jehovah.

Who knows more, the Apostles or modern JWs? Consider these examples:

a) The Apostles never used the name ‘Jehovah’.

b) The Apostles and first century Christians were never called ‘Jehovah’s Witnesses’. ‘The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.’ (Acts 11:26).

c) There is no proof that Jesus or his disciples ever pronounced the tetragram YHWH. 

JWs claim that when Jesus read from Isaiah 61:1 ‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me....’ as quoted in Luke 4:18,19, that Jesus pronounced the word ‘YHWH’.

This is most unlikely. JWs assume that the religious leaders endorsing Christ’s ‘gracious words’ in verse 22 was because He uttered the name YHWH?

Historical records in the Mishnah, from Josephus, and from other sources show the Jews were loathe to allow the name YHWH to be used. The Jews would not have tolerated it being used by anybody but the High Priest.Jesus would have read ‘Adonai’

7) 119 Bible passages referring to Jehovah, are quoted and applied to Christ in the New Testament (Proof Available)

QUESTION: In view of 119 Bible verses applying ‘Jehovah’ to Christ in the NT, what does this tell you about who Christ is?

? The New Testament tells us to name the name of Jesus Christ, not the name of Jehovah. Consider these examples:

1. ‘Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.’(II Timothy 2:19)

2. ‘I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ . . .’ (I Cor 1:10)

3. ‘Ye are washed,....sanctified,... justified in the name of the Lord Jesus ’ (I Cor 6:11)

4. ‘Whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.’ (Col 3:17)

5. ‘That the name of our Lord Jesus Christ may be glorified in you....’ (II Thess 1:12)

6. ‘Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves.....’ (II Thess. 3:6)

7. ‘all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours.’ (I Corinthians 1:2)

8. ‘Thou holdest fast my name....’ Jesus said to the Pergamos church. (Revelation 2:13).

JWs have not held fast Christ’s name, nor have they called upon Christ’s name, nor do they name the name of Christ, nor is Jesus Christ precious to them, because they do not have saving belief in Him. ‘Unto you . . . which believe He is precious’.(I Peter 2:7).

QUESTION: Where does the NT tell us to name the name of Jehovah?

9) The New Testament always lifts up Jesus Christ’s name, not Jehovah’s name. Why?

Because Jesus Christ is Jehovah God on earth. Christ is 100% God and 100% man.

Q1: In whose name should we meet together?
‘Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.’ (Matthew 18:20)

Q2: Demons were cast out by the authority of whose name?
‘Paul.....said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her.’ (Acts 16:18)

Q3: In whose name should we preach repentance and forgiveness of sins? ‘And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations. And ye are witnesses of these things.’ (Luke 24:47,48)

Q4: In whose name are we to believe and receive forgiveness of sins? ‘....through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.’ (Acts 10:43, John 1:12)

Q5: By whose name, and no other, do we obtain salvation? Acts 4:10,12 says: ‘by the name of Jesus Christ ... Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.’

Q6: In whose name should we pray? John 16:23,24; 14:13,14; 15:16 says: ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.’

Q7: In whose name is the Holy Spirit sent?
‘But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name......’ (John 14:26)

Q8: In whose name and authority did the disciples heal the sick?
‘His name through faith in his name hath made this man strong’ (Acts 3:16; 4:30)

Q9: Whose name did Paul say that we are to call upon?
‘ all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.’ (I Cor 1:2)

Q10: Whose name is above every name?
‘God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name .... that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.’(Phil 2:9-11)

Paul’s quote about Christ is from Isaiah 45:22-24 where every knee will bow to Jehovah. What is true about Jehovah, is also true of Christ, the Lord of all mankind

Q11: According to Acts 1:8, of whom are we to be witnesses?
‘Ye shall be witnesses unto me (Jesus)’

Q12: In whose name were believers baptized?
‘they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus’. (Acts 8:16; 2:38)

Q13: In whose name were believers designated?
‘the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch’. (Acts 11:26)

Q14: In whose name did the apostles speak?
‘Commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus’ Acts 4:17,18

Q15: In whose name did early Christians suffer? Acts 15:26 says:
‘Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ ‘rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for his name’Acts 5:41;9:16

Q16: Whose name was Paul to carry?
‘Lord said: He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.’ (Acts 9:15)

Q17: In whose name did Paul deliver a man to Satan?
‘In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ...to deliver such an one to Satan.’ I Cor 5:4,5

Q18: In whose name did the apostles teach? Acts 5:28; 8:12 says:
‘Did we not straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?’

10) Why does WT break their own rule (where the OT speaks of Jehovah), that they do not insert Jehovah in the NT, when the quote clearly refers to Christ?

Peter quotes from Joel 2:32 (spoken of Jehovah) and applies it to Jesus in Acts 2:21 and 38.

Calling on the name of Jehovah for salvation equals repenting and being baptised in the name of Jesus Christ because of the forgiveness of sins.

Conclusion: Jesus shares the nature of His Father and His Name. The absence of YHWH in any NT manuscript demolishes the WT case of introducing the word ‘Jehovah’ into the NT.

Question: If God was so concerned about preserving His covenant name, why did the apostles not preserve it in their writings?

Question: To imply that the name ‘Jehovah’ is the main name of God that we are to use, contradicts the continued NT use of the name ‘Jesus’ on 900 occasions, while the tetragram YHWH is used nowhere in the NT.

QUESTION: Why does the WT not translate ‘Jehovah’ into Hebrews 1:10, I Peter 3:15 andPhilippians 2:11, when the OT passages from which these are quoted refer to YHWH?


We are to make the name of the Father known as Jesus emphasized (Matthew 6:9; John 17:26). How do we do it? By recognizing that Jesus Christ was chosen by the Father to embody all the glory and important reputation of that Name.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 6/30/2018 at 12:44 PM, Anna said:

What makes you think Jesus wasn't sinless?

When YOU see the word "God", you automatically in your mind that word is translated to "God the father".

 

To a Christian, "God" means the Godhead.

 

On 6/30/2018 at 12:44 PM, Anna said:

Attempts have been made to define the trinity, but they sound so alienated from what the Bible says, it's almost sounds like trying define a multiple personality disorder. In fact reading some explanations of what the trinity is supposed to mean really puts my brain in a pretzel.

 

Oh, i know.

 

If i could understand HOW God IS God, i would BE God.

We are never told HOW God is a trinity ( for want of a better phrase ). Just because WE cannot understand it with our limited brains does not make it false.

I dont understand exactly HOW my computer words. Electrical signals make these words appear on my screen. I dont understand it.

Therefore, it  is not true?

Ignore the word "trinity". its not important.


God is everlasting, eternal, without beginning or end. God is unchanging, infinite,  omnipresence, omniscient , self-existent, self-sufficient, immaterial and omnipotent.


The Bible says that God the father is referred to as God.

The Bible says that Jesus is referred to as God. John 8:58, John 1:1, John 20:28, Hebrews 1:8, Isaiah 44:6 ( crossreference  Revelation 1:17 )
The Bible says that the Holy Spirit is referred to as God. Acts 5:3,4. Romans 8:11

The Bible also says there is ONE God. DEUTERONOMY 6:4, DEUTERONOMY 4:35,39, DEUTERONOMY 32:39, 2 SAMUEL 7:22, 1 KINGS 8:60, 2 KINGS 5:15 , 2 KINGS 19:15,  NEHEMIAH 9:6,  PSALM 18:31 ( Which also states Jesus is God ),  PSALM 86:1, ISAIAH 37:16,20, ISAIAH 43:10,11, ISAIAH 44:6,8, ISAIAH 45:21, ISAIAH 46:9, HOSEA 13:4, MARK 12:29-34, ROMANS 3:30, 1 CORINTHIANS 8:4-6, 1 TIMOTHY 2:5.

Therefore, somehow, these three entities constitute the one, eternal, everlasting God.

We are not told HOW God is God, that is not important. God just tells us that's the way it is.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

@Jesus.defender It's also alluded to in the New Testament, whereas Jesus made mention of God not having much of a form at all, since he is a Spirit after all. Indeed one verses, but there are several.

1 hour ago, Jesus.defender said:

When YOU see the word "God", you automatically in your mind that word is translated to "God the father".

To a Christian, "God" means the Godhead.

3068 says otherwise.

And nowhere in the bible does it say there are 3 who consist of being one God. The bible is explicit, that the only God is the Father, even God's own testimony makes such even true in addition to the very laws upon laws that consist of such that has been brought forth in Moses' day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
14 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

God is everlasting, eternal, without beginning or end. God is unchanging, infinite,  omnipresence, omniscient , self-existent, self-sufficient, immaterial and omnipotent.

Yes. God is everlasting, eternal, without beginning or end. "O Jehovah, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations.
  Before the mountains were born Or you brought forth the earth and the productive land, From everlasting to everlasting, you are God." (Psalms 90:1-2)

Notice that scripture doesn't state "Jesus".  Jesus wasn't always eternal since the Scriptures show the Father granted life to his Son. "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted also to the Son to have life in himself." (John 5:26)

Jesus was the Firstborn that was Born Again or Brought Forth Again:

 Douay-Rheims Bible
And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. 

(1 Peter 3:21) The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 22Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On 7/2/2018 at 7:22 AM, Brother Rando said:

Yes. God is everlasting, eternal, without beginning or end. "O Jehovah, you have been our dwelling place throughout all generations.
  Before the mountains were born Or you brought forth the earth and the productive land, From everlasting to everlasting, you are God." (Psalms 90:1-2)

Notice that scripture doesn't state "Jesus".  Jesus wasn't always eternal since the Scriptures show the Father granted life to his Son. "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted also to the Son to have life in himself." (John 5:26)

Jesus was the Firstborn that was Born Again or Brought Forth Again:

 Douay-Rheims Bible
And again, when he bringeth in the first begotten into the world, he saith: And let all the angels of God adore him. 

(1 Peter 3:21) The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 22Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

Jesus also has those attributes.

Why quote the douay rheims Bible? Is that your Bible of choice?

Yes, Jesus is the firstborn.

Firstborn’ (Greek: prototokos) does NOT mean ‘first-created’ (Greek: protoktisis). First-created (Protoktisis) is never used of Christ in NT.

firstborn means ‘Pre-eminent, Ruler, Sovereign, First in rank’.


It is used in other passages which refer to Christ:

i. Romans 8:29 ‘that he might be the firstborn among many brethren’. ‘Prototokos’ presents Christ as the pre-eminent member of the group (S. Zodhiates NT, p 1249).

ii. Colossians 1:15. ‘The firstborn of every creature’ Christ is the one pre-eminent and supreme ruler over all creation (S Zodhiates NT, p 1250). v.16 ‘By him were all things created’ means that Christ Himself is not part of Creation (John 1:3).

iii. Colossians 1:18 ‘He (Christ) is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning (arche), the firstborn (prototokos=Ruler) from the dead; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence (proteuon)’. ‘Arche’ means ‘first cause’ (Revelation 3:14, Colossians 1:18) and is parallel to ‘prototokos’ in Colossians 1:15,18, both asserting Christ’s pre-eminence.
Note: ‘Proteuon’ (pre-eminence) present tense is used only in Colossians 1:18 and indicates not an acquired right to be ruler and pre-eminent, but an inherent right by virtue of His nature. Christ, being the Creator, deserves to have pre-eminence.


iv. Hebrews 1:6 ‘And again, when he bringeth the firstbegotten (prototokos=Ruler) into the world, he saith ‘And let all the angels of God worship Him’. Alternately, translate this as ‘And when He again brings the firstborn into the world’, refers to Christ’s second coming when Christ as King will be worshipped by the angels. Christ is exalted even above all the angels.


v. Revelation 1:5 ‘And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the firstbegotten (prototokos=Ruler) of the dead, and the prince (arche = chief) of the the kings of the earth.’ Here ‘prototokos’ means that Christ is first of those to be resurrected, and prince (arche) means ruler of earth’s kings at His second coming.

Note: JWs compare Christ as the firstborn of all creation with the firstborn son of Pharaoh. This is nonsensical, because it is true that Pharaoh parented his son, but it is not true that ‘all creation’ parented Jesus.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It appears to me that this is a key aspect of the 2030 initiative ideology. While the Rothschilds were indeed influential individuals who were able to sway governments, much like present-day billionaires, the true impetus for change stems from the omnipotent forces (Satan) shaping our world. In this case, there is a false God of this world. However, what drives action within a political framework? Power! What is unfolding before our eyes in today's world? The relentless struggle for power. The overwhelming tide of people rising. We cannot underestimate the direct and sinister influence of Satan in all of this. However, it is up to individuals to decide how they choose to worship God. Satanism, as a form of religion, cannot be regarded as a true religion. Consequently, just as ancient practices of child sacrifice had a place in God's world, such sacrifices would never be accepted by the True God of our universe. Despite the promising 2030 initiative for those involved, it is unfortunately disintegrating due to the actions of certain individuals in positions of authority. A recent incident serves as a glaring example, involving a conflict between peaceful Muslims and a Jewish representative that unfolded just this week. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/11/us-delegation-saudi-arabia-kippah?ref=upstract.com Saudi Arabia was among the countries that agreed to the initiative signed by approximately 179 nations in or around 1994. However, this initiative is now being undermined by the devil himself, who is sowing discord among the delegates due to the ongoing Jewish-Hamas (Palestine) conflict. Fostering antisemitism. What kind of sacrifice does Satan accept with the death of babies and children in places like Gaza, Ukraine, and other conflicts around the world, whether in the past or present, that God wouldn't? Whatever personal experiences we may have had with well-known individuals, true Christians understand that current events were foretold long ago, and nothing can prevent them from unfolding. What we are witnessing is the result of Satan's wrath upon humanity, as was predicted. A true religion will not involve itself in the politics of this world, as it is aware of the many detrimental factors associated with such engagement. It understands the true intentions of Satan for this world and wisely chooses to stay unaffected by them.
    • This idea that Satan can put Jews in power implies that God doesn't want Jews in power. But that would also imply that God only wants "Christians" including Hitler, Biden, Pol Pot, Chiang Kai-Shek, etc. 
    • @Mic Drop, I don't buy it. I watched the movie. It has all the hallmarks of the anti-semitic tropes that began to rise precipitously on social media during the last few years - pre-current-Gaza-war. And it has similarities to the same anti-semitic tropes that began to rise in Europe in the 900's to 1100's. It was back in the 500s AD/CE that many Khazars failed to take or keep land they fought for around what's now Ukraine and southern Russia. Khazars with a view to regaining power were still being driven out into the 900's. And therefore they migrated to what's now called Eastern Europe. It's also true that many of their groups converted to Judaism after settling in Eastern Europe. It's possibly also true that they could be hired as mercenaries even after their own designs on empire had dwindled.  But I think the film takes advantage of the fact that so few historical records have ever been considered reliable by the West when it comes to these regions. So it's easy to fill the vacuum with some very old antisemitic claims, fables, rumors, etc..  The mention of Eisenhower in the movie was kind of a giveaway, too. It's like, Oh NO! The United States had a Jew in power once. How on earth could THAT have happened? Could it be . . . SATAN??" Trying to tie a connection back to Babylonian Child Sacrifice Black Magick, Secret Satanism, and Baal worship has long been a trope for those who need to think that no Jews like the Rothschilds and Eisenhowers (????) etc would not have been able to get into power in otherwise "Christian" nations without help from Satan.    Does child sacrifice actually work to gain power?? Does drinking blood? Does pedophilia??? (also mentioned in the movie) Yes, it's an evil world and many people have evil ideologies based on greed and lust and ego. But how exactly does child sacrifice or pedophilia or drinking blood produce a more powerful nation or cabal of some kind? To me that's a giveaway that the authors know that the appeal will be to people who don't really care about actual historical evidence. Also, the author(s) of the video proved that they have not done much homework, but are just trying to fill that supposed knowledge gap by grasping at old paranoid and prejudicial premises. (BTW, my mother and grandmother, in 1941 and 1942, sat next to Dwight Eisenhower's mother at an assembly of Jehovah's Witnesses. The Eisenhower family had been involved in a couple of "Christian" religions and a couple of them associated with IBSA and JWs for many years.)
  • Members

    No members to show

  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      158.9k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,669
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Miracle Pete
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.