08 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by galveston75Galveston, if Matthew 24:9 says that the disciples will be hated by all nations because of the name of Jesus, then why do you insist that Jehovah is the only name you JWs should lift up ?
John 17:14, Matt 24:9. Everytime someone ridicules us and puts us down, these scriptures are being fulfield, Thanks..
It appears that you want to only wrap yourselves in the name Jehovah but borrow Matthew 24:9 for feeling persecuted for the name Jesus, the name which it seems you think is getting WAY too much attention.
Please explain this.
08 Jul 09
Originally posted by jaywillSorry but I have never said that about Jehovah. Jesus was talking about himself in this scripture, so that's who's name this is applying to. See the confusion is because you think their the same person. We preach and follow Jesus's commands about the preaching work we are involved in. He set the examples and told us what to do with that. But he is following his Father's command to lead up this work, be in charge of the Kingdom for a thousand years and for us to follow what Jesus is telling us... After the thousand years he will have completed that task...
Galveston, if Matthew 24:9 says that the disciples will be hated by all nations because of the name of [b]Jesus, then why do you insist that Jehovah is the only name you JWs should lift up ?
It appears that you want to only wrap yourselves in the name Jehovah but borrow Matthew 24:9 for feeling persecuted for the name Jesus, the name which it seems you think is getting WAY too much attention.
Please explain this.[/b]
09 Jul 09
2 edits
Originally posted by galveston75=====================================
Sorry but I have never said that about Jehovah. Jesus was talking about himself in this scripture, so that's who's name this is applying to. See the confusion is because you think their the same person. We preach and follow Jesus's commands about the preaching work we are involved in. He set the examples and told us what to do with that. But he is follow low what Jesus is telling us... After the thousand years he will have completed that task...
Sorry but I have never said that about Jehovah. Jesus was talking about himself in this scripture, so that's who's name this is applying to. See the confusion is because you think their the same person.
===========================================
I do believe that Jesus is Jehovah God.
And you must be mistaken about the rulership of Christ. Daniel's vision was that the one like "the Son of Man" would have an eternal dominion:
"I watched in the night visions, and there with the clouds of heaven One like a Son of Man was coming; And He came to the Ancient of Days, and the brought Him near before Him.
And to Him was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages might serve Him.
His dominion is AN ETERNAL DOMINION, which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one that will not be destroyed. " (Daniel 7:13,14)
Whatever subjection the Son shows to the Father now or forever, it has no effect on the eternal lastingness of the Son's kingly dominion. And even Isaiah 9:6 says that this Wonderful One, the child who is Mighty God, and the Son Who is Eternal Father, has a government that no end -
" ... to the increase of His government and to His peace there is NO END, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom to establish it and uphold it in justice and righteousness from now to ETERNITY." (See Isaiah 9:6,7, my emphasis)
===========================
We preach and follow Jesus's commands about the preaching work we are involved in. He set the examples and told us what to do with that. But he is following his Father's command to lead up this work, be in charge of the Kingdom for a thousand years and for us to follow what Jesus is telling us... After the thousand years he will have completed that task...
====================================
According to the passage I just quoted the task of His upholding His reign upon the throne of David is unto eternity.
You are making some mistake in interpreting a cessation of Christ's kingship. His delivering up all that God may be all and all cannot mean the cessation of His reign.
09 Jul 09
2 edits
Originally posted by jaywill1 Cor 15:24-28 explains in more detail the events that will happen in the future. The Kingdom belongs to his father Jehovah forever. But Jesus will act as ruler for the thousand years then hand it back to his Father Jehovah. It's his Kingdom that will last forever.
[b]=====================================
Sorry but I have never said that about Jehovah. Jesus was talking about himself in this scripture, so that's who's name this is applying to. See the confusion is because you think their the same person.
===========================================
I do believe that Jesus is Jehovah God.
And you mus livering up all that God may be all and all cannot mean the cessation of His reign.[/b]
Notice in the 28th verse it says he, Jesus" subjects himself to the father "Jehovah. Once all that Jesus was to do has been completed, he gives the Kingdom back to his father, not himself. Two completely seperate individuals, not one. Where is the Holy Ghost in all of this if he is the same as Jehovah/Jesus?
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by galveston75I am in the habit of taking in all that the Bible says and not using passages to fight against each other.
1 Cor 15:24-28 explains in more detail the events that will happen in the future. The Kingdom belongs to his father Jehovah forever. But Jesus will act as ruler for the thousand years then hand it back to his Father Jehovah. It's his Kingdom that will last forever.
Notice in the 28th verse it says he, Jesus" subjects himself to the father "Jehovah. Onc ...[text shortened]... ividuals, not one. Where is the Holy Ghost in all of this if he is the same as Jehovah/Jesus?
First Corinthians 15:24-28 therefore does not make Isaiah 9:6,7 not true.
Whatever the word of God mean in 1 Cor. 15:24-28 it does not make Isaiah 9:6,7 not the word of God. And visa versa.
Maybe I can comment on the Holy Spirit's part in eternity tomorrow.
But know this, I advize all students of the Bible to believe whatever is written there even if two portions seem paradoxical.
For centeries Bible readers have gotten into trouble making passages fight against each other. I have to believe them both because both are the word of God.
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by jaywillI completely agree and that one scripture does not contradict the other. The Bible does not do that. The first is saying that this Kingdom will last forever, which it will. But the second clearifies the process and the order that it will happen and the roll that Jesus, his son, plays in it....
I am in the habit of taking in all that the Bible says and not using passages to fight against each other.
[b]First Corinthians 15:24-28 therefore does not make Isaiah 9:6,7 not true.
Whatever the word of God mean in 1 Cor. 15:24-28 it does not make Isaiah 9:6,7 not the word of God. And visa versa.
Maybe I can comment ...[text shortened]... assages fight against each other. I have to believe them both because both are the word of God.[/b]
You do understand why Jesus was given this honor to do this for the thousand years instead of God, Jehovah, ruling the Kingdom himself?
09 Jul 09
Originally posted by galveston75That is my point, exactly!
I could equaly say yours are all wrong too.. So who could prove it by the Bible is the question.
Why should we throw Bible verses at each other, when we both know all of the favourite verses used by both sides, as well as their counter-arguments?! It would be a futile exercise.
The verse that I mainly quote to JWs is Gal 1, 9. Since you invented "another gospel", you are accursed. In which case it begs the question: why should I engage further in debate with you?
:'(
09 Jul 09
1 edit
My previous reply to G75's comments on page 6 has been fully vindicated by the subsequent "debate" between G75 and jaywil on this page.
The trinity is a concept that has baffled the Church for millenia. However, it is clearly indicated by many srciptures, difficult as it is. JWs have taken another road and explained it away. However, there is enough evidence that the early Church and the Apostles preached it - hence Paul's comments about "another gospel". (OK, I readily accept that there were even more "other gospels" around at the time, and the Galatians were also inundated with "Works" gospels, which Paul countered in his letter to the Galatians).
But this does not detract from the fact that JWs preach "another gospel", hence my comments above.
09 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by CalJustHowever, there is enough evidence that the early Church and the Apostles preached it
My previous reply to G75's comments on page 6 has been fully vindicated by the subsequent "debate" between G75 and jaywil on this page.
The trinity is a concept that has baffled the Church for millenia. However, it is clearly indicated by many srciptures, difficult as it is. JWs have taken another road and explained it away. However, there is enough evide not detract from the fact that JWs preach "another gospel", hence my comments above.
i hardly think so, can you imagine the early Christians, who were initially proselytes from Judaism accepting anything other than a strictly monotheistic approach, no neither can i. it did not enter church dogma until at least the fourth century and was even then not accepted by all, therefore this assertion of yours has no basis in scriptures, is not attested to by Christ who on each and every instance declared that he was subservient to God. Why you people cannot see that the trinity is pre Christian and of pagan origin quite frankly is beyond me.
09 Jul 09
4 edits
Originally posted by galveston75===========================================
I completely agree and that one scripture does not contradict the other. The Bible does not do that. The first is saying that this Kingdom will last forever, which it will. But the second clearifies the process and the order that it will happen and the roll that Jesus, his son, plays in it....
You do understand why Jesus was given this honor to do this for the thousand years instead of God, Jehovah, ruling the Kingdom himself?
I completely agree and that one scripture does not contradict the other. The Bible does not do that. ===========================================
The paradoxes in Scripture are often a test to the faith of the hearer of God's word - whether he will embrace one side and trample down the other, or visa versa. So I am glad we agree that both Isaiah 9:6,7 and 1 Cor. 15:28 are the truth of God.
==================================
The first is saying that this Kingdom will last forever,
=================================
Specifically, both Daniel and Isaiah specify that it is the kingdom of one like the Son of Man and the born child who is Mighty God. The eternal government and eternal kingdom are of these designees particularly.
As long as you imagine any kind of competition between the Father and the Son this is foolishness. As long as you harbor some thought that you are doing Jehovah some favor by drawing attention away from Christ, this is really darkness in understanding.
And for God to be "all in all" (1 Cor. 15:2) will be for Christ to be for Christ to have all things headed up in Him [Christ].
Making known to us the mystery of His will according to His good pleasure, which He purposed in Himself, unto the fullness of the times, to head up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens and the things in the earth, in Him ..." (Eph. 1:9,10)
"To Him be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus unto all the generations forever and ever. Amen" (Eph. 1:21)
The glory is unto Christ Jesus for eternity and not just for 1,000 years. So God being all in all cannot mean some kind of suspension of the preeminence of the Son of God to whom be the glory "unto ALL the generations forever and ever".
If there is any thought that the glory being to Jesus through all generations forever and ever causes some kind of concern that Jehovah is being neglected, this thought is really spiritual darkness. The eternal purpose (not temporary purpose) was made in Christ Jesus -
"According to the eternal purpose which He made in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Eph. 3:11)
There is no tension between Jesus and Jehovah. There is no discord between the Father and the Son. And it is of the Devil that man etertains the thought that he is doing God a favor by putting down Jesus a little in order to lift up His Father a little more.
On the contrary, one day God will show us that there is only one reality in this universe. Everything positive is a shadow of this reality. What is God? What is man? What is love? What is power ... Christ is the reality of God, man, love, and power. Every shadow is a description and explanation that point to the reality of the body of shadows, which is Christ (Col. 2:17).
The meals we eat are a shadow; the reality of our meals is Christ. The cloths that we wear are a shadow; the reality of our cloths is Christ. christ is the desire of God's heart and the reality of all positive matters and things.
Christ is even the reality of man. If there were no Christ, even mankind would not be real or genuine. Christ has the preeminence in all things for eternity. For Christ is the mingling of God and man. And for God to be all in all in after the millennial kingdom is only more of Christ having the preeminence in all things.
Any thought of some kind of rivary or tension between God and Christ is spiritual darkness in understanding.
======================================
which it will. But the second clearifies the process and the order that it will happen and the roll that Jesus, his son, plays in it....
You do understand why Jesus was given this honor to do this for the thousand years instead of God, Jehovah, ruling the Kingdom himself?
====================================
The question is mostly nonsensical to me.
I mean the thought of "Jesus" ruling but not God ruling, or Jesus ruling "instead of God" is absolute nonsense.
"The kingdom of this world has become the [kingdom] of our Lord and of His Christ, and He will reign forever and ever." (Rev. 11:15)
If you complain that He is God then you negate what you said before that Jesus reigns in the millennium "instead of God" when the world becomes His kingdom.
If you say that He refers to Jesus, you admit that Jesus reigns forever and ever.
Actually, He refers to the Triune God. For there is one throne - "the throne of God and of the Lamb" (Rev. 22:1). God is in the Lamb on the one throne. This is proved by Revelation 21:23.
God is the light and the Lamb is the lamp from which the indwelling light, God, shines forth for eternity:
"And the city has no need of the sun or of the moon that they should shine in it, for the glory of God illumined it, and its lamp is the Lamb." (Rev. 21:23)
As long as "Jehovah's Witnesses" think they are doing Jehovah some kind of favor by putting down Jesus so they can supposedly uplift Jehovah, they are in abject darkness. And when the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness. And I am not trying to be mean. But I am being honest, faithful, and frank with you.
Jesus is Jehovah. Jesus is God manifest in the flesh.
09 Jul 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Proper KnobYou could benefit by reading -
Pure comedy genius.
"The Twofoldness of Divine Truth" By Robert Govette.
Or consider Ralph Waldo Emerson's famous quip -
" A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. "
The Bible is profound and some paradoxes are there. Joke seems to be on you.