Jump to content
The World News Media

JW's mistaken claim...


Cos

Recommended Posts

  • Member
6 hours ago, DeeDee said:

Colossians 1:13-16

13 He [Jehovah] rescued us from the authority of the darkness [Death] and transferred us into the kingdom of his beloved Son [Jesus], 14 by means of whom we have our release by ransom, the forgiveness of our sins. 15 He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God [Jehovah], [Jesus is] the firstborn of all creation; 16 because by means of him [Jesus] all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him [Jesus] and for him [Jesus].

 

10 minutes ago, Cos said:

Even though Jesus is not the Father, nonetheless, He is God, just as the Father is God. <><

 15 He [Jesus] is the IMAGE of the invisible God [Jehovah]...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 16k
  • Replies 252
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Ding Ding Ding Ding, I take "what we are allowed to read and what is forbidden" for three hundred Alex.    Hey, isn't that why the WT pulled the Trinity book in the first place? Something

but it is a practice that the jws/bible students participated in prior to 1935 or so. So what this means is, your claim  "they are the ones who did not follow the false teachings........" cannot be tr

Hi! Last explanation in WT magazine say how GB and FDS are the same. FDS task is to spread "spiritual food". GB spreading food, so GB is FDS. FDS have its beginning in 1 century in form of apostl

Posted Images

  • Member
15 minutes ago, DeeDee said:

 

 15 He [Jesus] is the IMAGE of the invisible God [Jehovah]...

Ms DeeDee,

  

Let me first of all say that the expression “image of” entails identity of nature and essence.

 

The Greek word eilon (“image”) according to Vines Expository Dictionary,  “involves the two ideas of representation and manifestation” (see also Vincent, Word Studies in the N.T). “Image” does not suggest a mere likeness to God or a paradigm of His person, but a real manifestation of true Deity in body form.

 

I’d like to show you, from the scriptures, how this word eikon can be used to convey the reality; turn to Hebrews 10:1, here we see the  “shadow” (or picture) and how it is contrasted with “the very image” (eikon), which is the reality of Christ’s ultimate sacrifice. I hope this helps you to understand, if not let me know and I will expound on this further. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
52 minutes ago, DeeDee said:

Cos,

Would the expression, "Like Father, Like Son" be in line with what you are explaining?

...as in when a Son has a similar "nature and essence" to his Father?

 

Ms DeeDee,

 

What has to be understood is that even thought Jesus by nature is God, He, however, is not the Father. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

Arians/Unitarians such as JWs claim that Jesus is the first (in chronological sequence) to be born? And they site for support Colossians 1:15, claiming that the Son is a member of creation. The Watchtower also add the word “other” to the passage in their bible version to give that impression.

 

Guys, if the reference to "firstborn" in Scripture primarily means being the first to have been given life, then that title could never be lost because it would refer to a factual event, the first birth.

 

Further, the title could never be applied to someone that was not truly the first in sequence.

 

But the Bible shows that the title of "firstborn" can be removed or gained independently of whether a person is the first one to be born. 

 

1 Chronicles 5:1-2 shows that Reuben was the first one born to Isaac and yet he lost this position due to bad conduct. The position of "firstborn" passed to Joseph. 

 

David was called "firstborn" yet he was the youngest in the family (Psalm 89:27, 1 Samuel 16: 11-13). 

 

Ephraim was called the "firstborn" even though he was the second born (Jeremiah 31:9, Genesis 41:51-52). 

 

Thus we can see that the term "firstborn" can be used as a title. And it is in this sense that it is used in connection to Jesus in Colossians 1:15, it has nothing to do with sequence of birth or creation, but rather it is to do with authority.

 

If Paul was saying that Jesus was the first one created then why didn’t he use the Greek word “protoktisis” (first-created) a term which is never used of Christ in the Scriptures?

 

From the context we can know whether the Greek word prototokos in Col 1:15 means "first one born" or "the first in authority".

 

In Col. 1:18 we read of Jesus, "so that He Himself might come to have first place in everything”, this clearly shows the way prototokos should be understood in the preceding verse.

 

So from the context, the Greek word prototokos affirms Christ’s supremacy and sovereignty over all things and does not signify first in chronological sequence. <><

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
9 hours ago, DeeDee said:

Would the expression, "Like Father, Like Son" be in line with what you are explaining?

...as in when a Son has a similar "nature and essence" to his Father?

GB of JW promoted for many decades worshiping of Jesus (perhaps only in theological, doctrinal way of how they view Jesus position. This fact was incorporated in Charter of WT Company until the end of 20 century. With few words in one sentence that said that very clearly. 

In Articles of Amendment (on WT Charter) in January 1945 they stated: 

Purpose of Society is ..........for public Christian worship of Almighty God and Christ Jesus.

It is notable how God is not named by his personal name! This is one sort of prove how Jesus and God are equal. Because they both are deserved to be worshiped according to PURPOSE OF WT SOCIETY. That was stance of Company for some half of century even JW members didn't been aware of this little detail :)))

If i was memorized correctly  in 1993 Amendment this sentence was thrown out from Charter. They not even using word WORSHIP any more.

So, WT Society and JW members for decades was standing behind Charter and worshiping Jesus, without any knowing they did that. It was just in theoretical sense, by supporting Charter. But black and white prove existing. :))

Problem with Father and Son teachings and interpretations on that, is just one of many that burdening this religion and their leadership from past until today.

source; http://watchtowerdocuments.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/1-1884-Charter-Handwritten-WM-R-BM-S-SEC-1.pdf

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
11 hours ago, Cos said:

Folks

 

Isaiah 9:6 is a prophetic description of Christ. The phrase “his name” in Isaiah 9:6 is a Hebrew idiom ......

Hi Cos,

is this opens new angle on looking about all others IDIOMS, not only about prophetic description of Messiah but also about all other characters in OT; angels, JHVH, humans who acted in this and that role .... ? All in all, Bible giving various possibilities for different interpretations, and that is reality. Not only devils bad influence but humans wishes to give answers on things that are above idea, imagination how our  view on matter is only one correct.

You explained very good about term "firstborn". And that is something what WT scholars looking in different way. So here is so many Idioms :))))

greetings!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
12 hours ago, Cos said:

claim that Jesus is the first (in chronological sequence) to be born? And they site for support Colossians 1:15, claiming that the Son is a member of creation. The Watchtower also add the word “other” to the passage in their bible version to give that impression.

 

12 hours ago, Cos said:

If Paul was saying that Jesus was the first one created then why didn’t he use the Greek word “protoktisis” (first-created) a term which is never used of Christ in the Scriptures?

John chapter 17 is Jesus praying to his Father Jehovah. At verse 5, Jesus says these words:

       “So now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory

        that I had alongside you BEFORE the world was.” – Jesus

That is why Jesus is rightly called the "firstborn." As Cos states below, "that title could NEVER be lost":

12 hours ago, Cos said:

Guys, if the reference to "firstborn" in Scripture primarily means being the first to have been given life, then that title could never be lost because it would refer to a factual event, the first birth.

 

Then God said: “Let US make man in OUR image, according to OUR likeness,… (Gen. 1:26)

 

P.S. The Scripture above shows that Jehovah and Jesus are two different people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I would also like to share this Scripture at Philippians 2:5-11:

 

…Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in God’s form,

gave no consideration to a seizure,

namely, that he should be EQUAL to GOD.

 

No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and became human.

More than that, when he came as a man, he humbled himself

and became obedient [to GOD] to the point of death…

 

For this very reason, GOD [Jehovah] exalted him [Jesus] to a superior position

and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name,

so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend—

of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground—

and every tongue should openly acknowledge

that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of GOD the FATHER.

 

13 hours ago, Cos said:

What has to be understood is that even thought Jesus by nature is God, He, however, is not the Father. <><

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member
On ‎1‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 2:41 PM, Srecko Sostar said:

What Lord? Lord Jesus? or Lord JHVH?

@Srecko Sostar Note this Scripture (Philippians 2:9-11) below about the title "Lord"

1 hour ago, DeeDee said:

...GOD [Jehovah] exalted him [Jesus] to a superior position

and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name,

so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend...

and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord

to the glory of GOD the FATHER [Jehovah].

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

 

1 hour ago, DeeDee said:
  14 hours ago, Cos said:

What has to be understood is that even thought Jesus by nature is God, He, however, is not the Father. <><

 

Cos, note this Scripture (Philippians 2:9-11) below about the word "GOD":

41 minutes ago, DeeDee said:
  47 minutes ago, DeeDee said:

...GOD [Jehovah] exalted him [Jesus] to a superior position

and kindly gave him the name that is above every other name,

so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend...

and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord

to the glory of GOD the FATHER [Jehovah].

...just as "LORD" is the title of authority given to Jesus in the Scripture above, "GOD" is simply the title of authority for Jehovah. In other words, your quote above says "Jesus...is God." But, the Scripture says that "Jesus Christ is LORD to the glory of GOD the FATHER" so this means Jesus was given the title Lord and Jehovah is given the title God. To say "Jesus is God" is like saying a "Vice-President is President."

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

  • 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.