3 “Look! I am sending my messenger[malakh], and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord [ha adhohn], whom YOU people are seeking, and the messenger[umalakh] of the covenant in whom YOU are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,” Jehovah of armies has said.
What do you think about the WT placing Jehovah's name where the bible is talking about Jesus in Romans 10?Som epassages applied to Yah in the OT are applied top Jesus in the New in different fulfillments like those about David,Solomon etc...As you and I both know this doesn't mean Jesus is Yah but what would this mean for a JW who can easily see in context Romans is talking about Jesus who sees the name Jehovah?
Ivan, if anyone is guilty of misrepresentation and has proven that s/he is incapable of dealing with the facts it is you. There is a place in the Old Testament where Ha Adon is applied to Jesus so you are mistaken. However, I will let you discover it and see what lame explanation you come up with.
@MagusGod If you have the 1984 reference edition of the New World Translation and check out their appendix on ha adohn you will see it listed there. Let's see if you figure out which one it is.
@MagusGod Ok Magus. Can I ask you about Malachi 3:1 According to the NT who is the messenger who was sent before Yahweh's face and who is the Lord who came to his temple?
As far as your second question is concerned it all depends on what you mean by Jesus being God. How do you define and understand the term God in respect to Christ?
@MagusGod "Jesus is God's son. Jesus is God's appointed king. That is what that scripture means."
Malachi 3:1 shows Jesus Christ to be the same divine being as the Lord. A question for you, Magus, if John the Baptist is the messenger (not Malachi in this context) who prepares the way, then who is the Lord and the messenger of the covenant? Are they not one and the same? This is a synonomous poetic parallel. Vs 2-4 also demonstrate His divine nature. You didn't answer his point - you missed it.
All the more reason to reject the WT's unscholarly use of the "J" documents, as if they have any credibility at all as a guide in translating the Christian Scriptures. In fact, the WT uses the "J" documents *over and against* our best and most reliable Greek manuscripts. This is very poor scholarship and very few, if any, would take this practice seriously.
@theapologeticfront Well you can feel as you wish with respect the the Society's use of the J Documents as "unscholarly", but this particular video has to do with MCO4Help's misrepresentation of the Society's publications on this one, specific point. It appears MCO4Help didn't differentiate between the Hebrew Scriptures & the J Documents as it related to "Ha'Adohn", thus his video and argument were in error.
@IvanDefendingTruth yeah, i'm actually going to have to agree with you on that one. I don't think Bill's argument is a solid case and probably shouldn't be used, hence the reason I took a video down I made on the very same issue.
@IvanDefendingTruth Your own video is in error, anyway, as it is clear that Jesus is the Ha' adon of Malachi 3:1. Christ is God almighty. Praise the Lord. ;).
malakh = umalakh = angelum = messenger = Jesus
ha adhohn = kyrios = lord = Jehovah
3 “Look! I am sending my messenger[malakh], and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord [ha adhohn], whom YOU people are seeking, and the messenger[umalakh] of the covenant in whom YOU are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,” Jehovah of armies has said.
Simple!
IMJW1000 9 months ago
Solid
-D-
DarkShadowM99 1 year ago
What do you think about the WT placing Jehovah's name where the bible is talking about Jesus in Romans 10?Som epassages applied to Yah in the OT are applied top Jesus in the New in different fulfillments like those about David,Solomon etc...As you and I both know this doesn't mean Jesus is Yah but what would this mean for a JW who can easily see in context Romans is talking about Jesus who sees the name Jehovah?
howdytheresir 1 year ago
Ivan, if anyone is guilty of misrepresentation and has proven that s/he is incapable of dealing with the facts it is you. There is a place in the Old Testament where Ha Adon is applied to Jesus so you are mistaken. However, I will let you discover it and see what lame explanation you come up with.
shamounian 1 year ago
@shamounian Oh really, care to share it then?
MagusGod 1 year ago
@MagusGod If you have the 1984 reference edition of the New World Translation and check out their appendix on ha adohn you will see it listed there. Let's see if you figure out which one it is.
shamounian 1 year ago
@shamounian I do not have it.
But are you honestly suggesting that Jesus was God?
MagusGod 1 year ago
@MagusGod Ok Magus. Can I ask you about Malachi 3:1 According to the NT who is the messenger who was sent before Yahweh's face and who is the Lord who came to his temple?
As far as your second question is concerned it all depends on what you mean by Jesus being God. How do you define and understand the term God in respect to Christ?
shamounian 1 year ago
@shamounian Jesus is God's son. Jesus is God's appointed king. That is what that scripture means.
I'm not even familiar with the bible, but I know the scriptures that prove the points I know to be true.
Try me.
MagusGod 1 year ago
@MagusGod I am trying you. That is why I asked you about Malachi 3:1 and its application in the NT. Can you answer that?
shamounian 1 year ago
@shamounian I just answered you, see the first clause on my previous comment.
MagusGod 1 year ago
@MagusGod "Jesus is God's son. Jesus is God's appointed king. That is what that scripture means."
Malachi 3:1 shows Jesus Christ to be the same divine being as the Lord. A question for you, Magus, if John the Baptist is the messenger (not Malachi in this context) who prepares the way, then who is the Lord and the messenger of the covenant? Are they not one and the same? This is a synonomous poetic parallel. Vs 2-4 also demonstrate His divine nature. You didn't answer his point - you missed it.
athlete117 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All the more reason to reject the WT's unscholarly use of the "J" documents, as if they have any credibility at all as a guide in translating the Christian Scriptures. In fact, the WT uses the "J" documents *over and against* our best and most reliable Greek manuscripts. This is very poor scholarship and very few, if any, would take this practice seriously.
theapologeticfront 1 year ago
@theapologeticfront Well you can feel as you wish with respect the the Society's use of the J Documents as "unscholarly", but this particular video has to do with MCO4Help's misrepresentation of the Society's publications on this one, specific point. It appears MCO4Help didn't differentiate between the Hebrew Scriptures & the J Documents as it related to "Ha'Adohn", thus his video and argument were in error.
IvanDefendingTruth 1 year ago
@IvanDefendingTruth yeah, i'm actually going to have to agree with you on that one. I don't think Bill's argument is a solid case and probably shouldn't be used, hence the reason I took a video down I made on the very same issue.
theapologeticfront 1 year ago
@IvanDefendingTruth Your own video is in error, anyway, as it is clear that Jesus is the Ha' adon of Malachi 3:1. Christ is God almighty. Praise the Lord. ;).
athlete117 1 year ago