@JeanetteLTorres You seem to be picking out what you want to see rather than what is said. This is how it is with most anti JWs.
As I have explained as clear as possible, the WBTS only have 1 Greek book, the KIT. They only printed the Diaglott.
Page 9 "Our endeavour throughout has been to give as literal translation as POSSIBLE where the modern English idiom allows....as NEARLY AS POSSIBLE word for word"
Liars? I would say not. Although someone has been lying to you Jeanette and its not the WBTS
JeanetteLTorres Thomas Winter, instructor of Greek at University of Nebraska said of the KIT. "Highly useful toward mastery of Koine Greek. It is up-to-date and consistently accurate"
I could go on with many more but I think that's enough to make my point.
Could men with no knowledge of bible languages produce a bible that garnishes such praise from independent, unbiased, non JW, experts? It is obvious that the problem is not with the scholarly work, but rather the theological differences.
@steveparadise1 Then have him explain the contradictions in both of the Watchtower own greek books. Have him explain why they lie when they say it is a word for word translation from the Greek into English.
@steveparadise1 Thomas Winter's review was on the KIT ONLY, not on the NWTS. In fact using the KIT only helps reinforce the lies found in the NWTS. Mr. Winter is not a biblical scholar but he is a scholar on classical Greek. Anyway, his review was done in 1974 and in 1980 he stated and I quote....
@steveparadise1 "I am not happy with the use now being made of the review," and he went on to note a few problems, such as Jesus' words in John 8:58 (which NWT translates as "I have been"). Winter commented, "No way to go here but 'I am'" (Thomas N. Winter, in a letter to M. Kurt Goedelman of Personal Freedom Outreach, dated 3 October 1980).
@JeanetteLTorres "The NWT was written to reflect their own peculiar doctrines" according to Cetner.Is this the view of Associate Professor of Religious studies at N. Arizona University Jason Beduhn ? After comparing 9 of the most popular bibles, including the NWT, for his book "Bias in Translation" he concluded that the NWT was the most accurate compared, and is a remarkably good translation". Although he was stunned by the reaction from anti JWs he stood by his position.
@JeanetteLTorres Bruce Metzger. speaking of the "supposed scholarship" of the NWT that it was a "sham and perversion of Gods word, particularly with reference to the person of our saviour Jesus Christ". Strange, as he also said "On the whole, one gets a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators".
We can conclude from this then? He appreciates the "scholars" behind the NWT except when they call into question the person of Jesus.So hat is it Bruce a "sham", or "good"?
@JeanetteLTorres On the video we have disgruntled ex JW Joan Cetnar saying " They were not telling the truth when they claim it (NWT) is a fresh translation"
Edgar J Goodspeed who taught Koine Greek at the Uni of Chicago and translator of "An American Translation" commented on the NWT " A frank, free, vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound, serious learning. As I can testify".
She obviously didn't know the translators of the NWT, as she claims, as well as she thinks.
@JeanetteLTorres Do you accept what I said concerning the Emphatic Diaglott?
You could Google it I suppose.
The vitriolic attacks on the scholarship of the NWT I find particularly unwarranted.
I do not speak Greek or Hebrew so I must rely on what the experts have to say as well as what makes sense to me in the English. I also realized that it is not the NWT against the scholarly world and there is much support in other translations and scholars for the more controversial passages.
@JeanetteLTorres These attackers of the WBTS sound very convincing as they go through their spiel on how you can catch out the "dumbed down" JW by using this verse or that. It is an entirely different matter when you are faced with a JW.
Two of the main antagonists James White and Rob Bowman with their "Listen to us sort out the pesky JW attitude" debated one of Jehovah's Witnesses at different times. They got a bit of a surprise when they had to "walk the walk".
@JeanetteLTorres No matter who told who what, who told somebody else, the identity of the translators of the NWT is still not known. The accusation that these men are "unlettered and ordinary" kind of rings a bell Acts 4:13. Nevertheless, proof of a scholarly translation is not who wrote it, but how accurate it is.
Do you honestly feel an organisation that prints in 194 different languages would have no scholars capable enough to translate from Hebrew,Aramaic and Greek?
@JeanetteLTorres As you would expect there would be some differences between the KIT and the Diaglott. There are differences between all 4 interlinear's that I have. So, it is not laughable, it is to be expected.
The WBTS have no control of what is in the Emphatic Diaglott but accept it as a valuable contribution to NT scholarship.
Interesting that he translated John 1:1 in his literal Greek to English as "a god was the Word" but in his version "Logos was God".
The Emphatic Diaglott was a work by Benjamin Wilson first published by Powler and Wells Ltd. New York in 1865. He was a Christadelphian as can be seen by his translating Satan as "Enemy".
The WBTS acquired the rights and printed unchanged in 1902. The Diaglott is now in the public domain. It was not unusual for the Watchtower to publish non JW bibles.
The KJV. American Standard Version, Bible in Living English (Byington)
@JeanetteLTorres What is it exactly that got up your hump about the JWs?
The very thing you accuse JWs of, being controlled by the Watchtower, you seem to be doing with these anti JW so called scholars. Every thing they say, with little or no evidence, you accept as gospel then repeat as fact. You are the one being controlled not me.
I repeat. What bible (or bibles) do you prefer to use and could you explain what your belief in the trinity? Why are trinitarians reluctant to answer this?
@JeanetteLTorres Their comments on the NWT are laughable. Greek scholar and professor of languages at Idaho university studied the 10 different translations of the bible for bias in the text. His conclusion as a non JW independent expert ! The NWT is the most faithful to the original Greek. He is not alone in this.
These men twist things and anti JWs eat it up.
To much here to deal with like this.
You tell me what you believe, what bible you prefer and we can move on. Or not
@steveparadise1 Your own greek books, the Diaglott and the Kingdom Interlinier both contradict each other. Your greek scholars can't make up their minds? What is laughable is when you compare the two side by side.
@JeanetteLTorres The problem is not all trinitarians believe the same thing. I recently quoted James Whites definition to a man who said " that not what I believe". Listening to these two men you would think JWs are just automatons and you ask them something outside what the Watchtower teaches they are stuck. For instance James White (in the Vid) is an expert when preaching to the converted, but in a live debate with Greg Stafford (JW) he did not fare well at all. You can view this on youtube
JeanetteLTorres Read all of page 10,11and 12 to get the context. I quoted verses that mention Kyrios that are clearly not speaking of God. Do you honestly think the KIT feel that verse should read Jehovah
No trinitarian I know would come to the conclusion you have come to. The latter part of vs 11"lord to the glory of God the Father" is not a direct quote from the OT. You have to take the blinkers off for this one thing You are reading what you want to see in the KIT and not what is being said
@steveparadise1 I gave you a direct qoute from the KIT. I input nothing of my own. And concerning Trinitarians, you have no ideal what you are talking about. Be sure to take out the spaces between each letter when you paste the following link in your address bar.
h t t p : / / t i n y u r l . c o m / 4 2 y n t c 8
@steveparadise1 Here is another Trinitarian teaching exactly the same thing I teach. Don't forget to take out the spaces between each letter. h t t p : / / t i n y u r l . c o m / 6 l e d j u 8
@JeanetteLTorres I see your problem with this. You are that intent on finding something to disprove JWs or discredit the NWT that you have let your thinking and reasoning ability go on vacation for a while.
You have asked me to quote from the KIT. You are assuming ,by that quote, that the KiIT are saying all references to Kyrios in the NT are a replacement for Jehovah..
I explained quite clearly in my last posts that they are not saying that, NO SCHOLAR SAYS THAT.
@steveparadise1 I am going to type a direct qoute from the forword of the K.I.T: "How may modern translators determine when to render the Greek words Ky'rios and Theos (((as the divine name?))) So I ask you what is the divine name? Now I will qoute the rest of what it says, " By determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures." Not one time does the watchtower say that Kyrios is not translated from the Greek into the Enlish as Jehovah.
@steveparadise1 Phil 2:11 is a direct qoute from the Old Testament Is. 45:23. Unto (Me) every knee will bow and every tongue will sware. Also in the N.W.T footnotes on Dt. 10:17 it says For Jehovah your God is The God of gods and the Lord of lords, thier God great, mighty.....in the footnotes of the 1984 NWT study bible is says, The God of gods. or, Heb.-Eloheh Gr.- Theos'ton theon and the Lord of lords Heb.- ha adhonim ((Gr.- Kyrios.)) Dt 10;17 is aplied to Christ in Rev. 19:16
@JeanetteLTorres Page 11 para. 3 makes the point that we are interested in "How may the modern translator determine when to render the Greek words Kyrios and Theos as the divine name? By determining where the NT writers quote from the Hebrew scriptures,
IE: Psalm 110:1 " The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord (Jesus)" Jesus quoting this verse at Luke 20:42 in the NWT " Jehovah says to my Lord (Jesus)"
@JeanetteLTorres Page 10 continues " In view of this (LXX), what is the modern translator to do? Is he justified or authorized in entering the divine name, Jehovah, into a translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures?"... Every Greek- English dictionary states that these two words (Kyrios and Theos) have been used as equivalents of the divine name (in the LXX)" It goes on to ask. "Is the translator warranted in using the divine name as an equivalent to these 2 Greek words when quoting the OT
@JeanetteLTorres The KiT on page 10 under "Restoring the Divine Name" speaking of the LXX (Septuagint) "sometime during the the 2nd or 3rd century the Tetragammaton (YHWH,or JHVH) was eliminated from the Greek text". This of course is the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.It Continues on page 10 "Instead of YHWH (or JHVH) they substituted Kyrios, Lord and "Theos, God.
That of course is the Greek version of the OT. Our concern is the "Kyrios" in the Christian Greek Scriptures
@jeanetteLTorres Paul says Jesus "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty". Does this in anyway tell the Hebrew Christians that Jesus is himself God? Especially as Paul goes on to say about Jesus "God, your God". Also Paul said that Jesus was the "image" and "representation of his (Gods) Being" The T.E.V. says "sits at the right side of the Supreme Being"
No reasonable person would believe that Jesus and The Majesty are the same person and that they are of equal power or even close to it
@steveparadise1 It is not saying that Jesus is the Father, or that the Father is Jesus. It is saying in this particular portion of scripture that there are at list two seperate persons both addressed as capitial God. This is infact teaching the trinity. There are not 3 Gods, but 3 persons that make the one God. Scripture does not give us enough detail to help our finite minds comprehend the infinite. However there is enough scripture to know that 3 persons are addressed as one God
@JeanetteLTorres It is not my intention, at this time, to identify Jesus with Michael as we are currently discussing Phil. and Heb and the position that Jesus now holds. I'm sure if you're doing a vid on Michael you will use a verse or 2 from Hebrews.
The point that I'm tying to make is this. Why is the glorified Jesus, with all his deserved titles and status, still being portrayed by Paul as being in subjection to God in all ways ? Why is he clearly described as being separate from God ?
@JeanetteLTorres A look at the first two chapters of Job tells us you are correct in how the Jews viewed angels. Nevertheless, Paul is going to great lengths, at both Philippians and Hebrews, to explain the high position Jesus now holds in heaven.
If Jesus was fully God almighty then that would be the end of it. Why the need to explain the position of the glorified, resurrected Jesus ? Why the comparison?
Are you suggesting 1st century Christians did not know that God is greater than angels?
@steveparadise1 Its purpose was to present the Lord Jesus Christ as perfect and superior in comparison to anything Judaism and the old covenant had to offer. The author was writing to a group of Christians who were under intense persecution and some were contemplating a return to Judaism.He admonished them not to turn away from their only hope of salvation.
@steveparadise1 In chapters 1-10:18, the author demonstrates Jesus Christ as preeminent over the angels (1:6); over Moses, (3:3); over the Old Testament priesthood, (5:10). The writer explains that the New Covenant is greater than the Old Covenant because Jesus was the perfect, permanent sacrifice, rather than the Old Testament sacrifices. So you see, angel were not the only thing the author was making Jesus a comparison to.
@steveparadise1 If what you are trying to get at is Jesus being Michael the Arch Angel, then I will discuss that in my next video. Jesus is not Michael the Arch Angel but in order to go into great detail, it would be to lengthy so just be patient and wait for my next video. Thank you
@JeanetteLTorres Obviously Jesus was resurrected to a "superior position" than a man. Back to Hebrews Chap 1:4 "So he has become better than the angels, to the extent that he inherited a name more excellent than theirs". If Jesus is God why make a comparison to angels ? Surely by reason of him being God he would naturally be higher than angels, powers and authorities. If Jesus was resurrected as God in heaven again this comparison to angels would be entirely inappropriate !
@steveparadise1 The comparison to angels was made because Jews had the highest opinion of the transcendent excellence of angels, they even associate them with God in the creation of the world, and suppose them to be of the privy council of the Most High. As, therefore, the Jews considered them next to God, and none entitled to their adoration but God; on their own ground the apostle proves Jesus Christ to be God, because God commanded all the angels of heaven to worship him. Heb. 1:6
@JeanetteLTorres Jesus emptied himself and took on the form of man. More than this "he humbled himself and became obedient even to death on a cross" NRSV
Heb 2:9 says " we behold Jesus who has been made a little lower than angels". Philippians 2. goes on to say "for this very reason God exulted him to a superior position". The exultation to a superior position was a reward. "for this very reason" Paul said. As was the name he was "given". What was this "superior position"?
@JeanetteLTorres Read it and looked up the verse in the interlinear and saw what I expected to see "Kurios" = Lord. Not LORD. I have the same understanding of the lit. translation of "Kurios" as Paul had when he wrote it.
If anyone deserves every knee to bend and every tongue to acknowledge him, Its Jesus I do not deny that.
I think the crucial point is to understand what Jesus emptied himself of !
Also what the bible says about his subordination to the Father
@steveparadise1 There is no difference between Lord and LORD. There is a difference between lord and Lord. And you do not understand even what your own Greek is saying. If you have the K.I.T then type it word for word what it is saying in the front forword section concerning the Divine name Kurios. Or do an video responce, show me the front cover and read it out loud so I can hear it. Then we will have something to talk about.
@JeanetteLTorres I do not know what dictionary or lexicon you are using but the literal translation "Kurios" (Kyrios) means "Lord", any Lord. (as far as I am aware there is no Greek word "KuioUs").
I see you are ready to check up Diaglott and Interlinear. Do this with "Kurios" please and clear this up.
If anyone says "Kurios" means Jehovah, then they are mistaken.
Quote your reference.
Apart from "act independently as God" I agree with all that, but it does not tell us that Lord = Jehovah
@steveparadise1 K.I.T-(Forword) pg. 11 p. 3 "How may modern translators determine when to render the Greek words Kyrios and Theos as the (divine name)? By determining where the inspired Christian writers have qouted from the Hebrew Scriptures. Then they must refer to the Hebrew text to locate whether the divine name appears there. And this is exactly what the apostle Paul did. Interlinear says capital Kurios for Lord Phil. 2:11 Paul took the qoute from Is 45:23 & applied it to Christ.
@steveparadise1 You need to read all of the forword section in the Kingdom Interlinear. You have a very neatly covered up understanding of the word "Kurios". As far as Jesus coming not to do His own will but the Fathers, you don't understand in full impact the emptying brought out in Phil. 2. Subordinance does not mean inferiority of natures, only position. Jesus voluntarily took upon Himself the form of a servant to set the example, to die for our sins, and be our great High Priest
@JeanetteLTorres You ask how would every tongue openly acknowledge Jesus as Lord glorify the Father? For 1 reason. Paul under inspiration said it would Phil 2:11.
Jesus own words at John 17:4 "I have glorified you (God) on earth , Having finished the work YOU GAVE ME to do" That is how God the Father is glorified. Jesus finishes gods work. For this God has GIVEN him a name above every name.What Jesus does reflects on the Father. If the Son is glorified then the Father is also glorified John17:5
@steveparadise1 The name given to him as a man/servant-born of a woman, seed implanted by the Holy Spirit, who emptied Himself of all His rights to (Independently act as God) to be a servant and become our Great High Priest, one who is touched by our infirmities yet without sin. The name given is Kurious in the Greek-Lord-Jehovah.
@JeanetteLTorres The divine name is used over 6,000 times in the OT. Many modern bibles have substituted the name Jehovah, and replaced it with the title LORD (all capitals). Most tell you this in the preface.
This is best seen at Ps110:1 where most bibles read "The LORD said to my Lord. Sit at my right hand.." Note the capitalization.
In other words "The LORD (God, Jehovah) said to my Lord (Jesus).
The "Kyrios" at Phil. 2 does not fall into this category. It is simply Lord, a title for Jesus
@JeanetteLTorres You said in your video " The Watchtower acknowledges that "Kyrios" (Lord) is another name for Jehovah God". You seem to be plucking something out of the air, attributing it to the JWs, then go about proving them wrong. The Greek word "Kyrios" does indeed mean lord but at no time does the Watchtower,or any JW say it is "another name for Jehovah" . Lord is a title not a name and is applied to many men as well as angels, Jesus and Jehovah.
Jehovah is the Father. The father is "the only true God". The name above every name was "GIVEN" to Jesus.
The honour that is here directed at Jesus "is to the glory of God the Father".
You are decimating this passage. Your explanation makes no sense.
The relationship between The Father and the Son can be seen in this verse in
1 Cor 27 " For God subjected all things under his feet,it is evident that when He says all things, it is with exception the one who subjected all things to him. Simple
@steveparadise1 Jesus's name is above every name? Why would every knee bow, & every tongue confess that Jesus is (Greek)-Kurious- Lord (Jehovah)? How would this glorify the Father when in Is 45:23 the Father says, By my own self I have sworn-- out of my own mouth in righteousness the word has gone forth, so that (it will not return)--that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear? Jn 17:5 Father glorify me with thine (own) self, with the glory I had with thee before the world was
" every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus is JEHOVAH, to the glory of God the Father"
You are way off with that one. Firstly JWs do not claim that "Kurios" is another name for Jehovah. It is those who want to hide Gods name that say this. Hence the reason many bibles use LORD (capitals) where Gods name belongs. The NWT reverses this shameful practice.
Lord is a title and in this case it was God who gave it to him. " God made him both Lord and Christ this Jesus you impaled Acts 2: 36
If you are snickering at the NWT for the use of the word "seizure" then you are also mocking W.E. Vine, Strong's Concordance, The New American Concordance and many more who state "Harpagmos" means to "SEIZE". So in this the NWT is accurate.
NEB. "He did not think to snatch at equality"
Paul is exhorting Christians to be like Jesus in humility Vs 3. What you are suggesting is the exact opposite.
The NWT is not the translation to pick up on this. the NEB & TEV also
If you are snickering at the NWT for the use of the word "seizure" then you are also mocking W.E. Vine, Strong's Concordance, The New American Concordance and many more who state "Harpagmos" means to "SEIZE". So in this the NWT is accurate.
NEB. "He did not think to snatch at equality"
Paul is exhorting Christians to be like Jesus in humility Vs 3. What you are suggesting is the exact opposite.
The NWT is not the translation to pick up on this. the NEB & TEV also
Gave Him the name which is ((above)) every name, again, we are talking about position. Jesus emptied himself of all authority to independently act as God. Jesus made himself subordinate but subordinance does not mean inferiority. The Father exalted Him to His rightful position -But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; Heb. 1:3 We are to imitate Christ humility and love each other enough to die for each other. Jn 15:13
so why did one part of the trinity recieve a better name than it had before coming to earth? and how could God receieve a better name than the one he had before? and how are we as christians supposed to imitate that since Paul said this is the mind set we should have that was in christ?
@urinfamousr79 Dr. Westcott whom the Watch Tower recognizes and uses as an authority on the Greek text had this to say concerning Christ double natures "even during his dwelling on earth under the limitations of His manhood the activity of His divine being was not interrupted." Take a look at the titles given to Christ, Son of man, Son of God, Creator, High Priest, Mediator and Lord- Kurious-Jehovah. Do you see anything different prior to the incarnation?
I ask you: do you comprehend "that Eternal Life" is the "true Light" and "that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." (Jn1:1-9; 1Jn1:1-5;2:8)
Death is darkness: the total absence of "that Eternal Life" and "the True Light." Therefore it is impossible "that Eternal Life" ever die, and it is impossible "the True Light" ever be darkness.
"In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." Jn1:4-5
@afterraincomessun Where is you scriptural rebuttal to the other scriptures I have quoted? You can save your personal comments (Don't waste my time) and deal only with scripture.
He is the author of many articles in the areas of Biblical Studies and Manichaean Studies, and of the book, The Manichaean Body: In Discipline and Ritual (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), winner of the "Best First Book" prize from the American Academy of Religion.
@inscentof How about just taken one of their books, "The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scripture" and see if they follow their own translation. Check out the link below my video and see for yourself.
Jason David BeDuhn is an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, and M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in the Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington.
@lchiddle WOW! Jason David BeDuhn is an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, and M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in the Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington. He is the author of many articles in the areas of Biblical Studies and Manichaean Studies,
@JeannetteLTorres Look up Truth in Translation evaluates the subject of bias in English New Testament translations. After defining New Testament translation bias, the author uses selected passages from nine well-known English versions as examples of translation bias.
@inscentof Funny because I have been using the Watch Towers own Kingdom Interlinear Translation, and I have also been using The Watch Towers Diaglott in order to not be accused of Bias. lol
so my question is was Jesus a man : that is what this text says:
in heaven in God's form ,
then a man , then a slave till death ,
and then:9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
@afterraincomessun In heaven as God, on earth as God and man. He never emptied himself of his nature of existing as God, He simply added to Himself in addition to deity, the nature of man. He was both God and Man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic union, it is a technical term in Christian theology employed in Christology to describe the union of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis.
@JeannetteLTorres this is not what the text says but what you want to read in it and it surely does not
agree with the hebr5 text 8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
8 Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
@afterraincomessun If you think that I am reading something into the text well then the Watch Tower beat me to it back in 1880." We think it has been shown that the Christ of the Scriptures is compound being, Divine and human. (Watchtower, 11/1880, p. 6, Reprints, p. 160)."This did not last long as the light became brighter their former truth was discarded.
@JeannetteLTorres well in fact it shows your about a 130 years behind but still want to go back to the dark ages from which they came
:
the research taught them that they were building on what babylon the great had left them with as a heritage.
after a while they discovered that nothing babylon left them was to be trusted and they had to be guided by Jehovahs spirit to discover truly bible based new ideas.
the translations of the bible and the teaching of the church back then were darkened .
@afterraincomessun You should be saying that it is being led by the spirit of Charles Taze Russell because Jehovah has nothing to do with it. You are the one error and you are so brain washed all you can see is Watch Tower pollution.
@afterraincomessun That's the whole thing, there is already so much that has already been discovered and is already out there, but you don't know it because the Watch Tower has desperately tried to keep it's followers in the dark through changing the original text in some places, by purposely not following the original text in other places and by psychological conditional which you exhibit quite well. And no, I don't think I am "so smart", You can move on to my other videos now.
first you were pointing at the beginnings the early years : back then there was little known and much research had to be done:
NOW we now many facts .
But as babylon had power in the past she still is blinding the sight of many upright persons:
together with the devil:
9 So down the great dragon was hurled, Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him.
@afterraincomessun Just give an answer using scripture instead of pouring out Watch Tower pyschological rhetoric. It will get you no where. It is the Holy Spirit which leads, guides, and instructs, not the Watch Tower.
@afterraincomessun Yes He is, that is why I am making these videos. God also comforts me when I hurt, heals me when I'm sick, strengthens me when I'm weak, and encourages from His word. Romans 8:14-17 NIV) because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. John 16:13} But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth.
@JeannetteLTorres dear Jeannette: if you watch your own comments you will see that it is you that is not dealing with scripture alone!
and when i quote a scripture you never come back on it but change the context:
this morning i asked give me please the page of the diaglot subject that you mentioned but you did not answer : as for me i cant find the alledged text
16 And it happened that as we were going to the place of prayer, a certain servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination, met us. She used to furnish her masters with much gain by practicing the art of prediction.
@Jeannette matthew 7: 22 Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, YOU workers of lawlessness.
john 16:2 Men will expel YOU from the synagogue. In fact, the hour is coming when everyone that kills YOU will imagine he has rendered a sacred service to God.
@afterraincomessun This is an (I don't know how to give a rebuttal to the scripture you gave, so I will just throw anything out there) type of rebuttal. Like I said, move on to the next video.
@afterraincomessun "Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name... expel demons in your name... perform many powerful works in your name And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, "
so if you put everything that the faithful and discrete slave has discovered compared with the knowledge back then in the past: than it is a miracle that so much has been unveiled.
only if you have another reason not willing to subject to the watchtowers teachings then you would reject this:
other free persons can research with an open mind.
Jeanette get yourself free from your hate and anger : this will save you .Jehovah wants every one to gain this knowledge!
@afterraincomessun Have you looked at the Greek in the Watch Towers own "Diaglott" I believe it reads in the Greek, It reads "One God-Greek-Theo=Jehovah, the Father, out of whom are All things, and we for him; and One Lord,-Kurios=Jehovah through whom are all things. Jehovah is used for both God (Theo) and Lord (Kurios). Check it out yourself. Emphatic Diaglott which is (supposed) to be the Original Greek Text Interlineary Word for Word English Translation. Capital "K" for Kurios = Jehovah
part 2 further more the bible makes clear what to think about a lot of gods:
1 cor 8:we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.
@afterraincomessun Have you looked at the Greek in the Watch Towers own "Diaglott" it reads "One God-Greek-Theo=Jehovah, the Father, out of whom are All things, and we for him; and One Lord,-Kurios=Jehovah through whom are all things. Jehovah is used for both God (Theo) and Lord (Kurios). Check it out yourself. Emphatic Diaglott which is (supposed) to be the Original Greek Text Interlineary Word for Word English Translation. Check out the greek, the word Capital Kurious is used.
@afterraincomessun This is what the Greek is saying: In heaven as God, on earth as God (and) man. He emptied Himself of position, not nature. So as God in heaven, then as God and man on earth. Emptying Himself of position, does not imply that He emptied Himself of deity. Thank you for your comment.
philipp 5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.
@afterraincomessun "Emptied" Himself of what? not his deity. Study the word Being or existing in Vines Dictionary of the Old and New Testament words. And please view my new video.
The Trinity doctrine does not teach that Jesus is the Father, you are confusing Oneness theology.
The Greek in Philippians 2:7 disagrees with the NWT. Jesus didn't change his form, but added to himself; taking upon himself the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men... This was HOW he made himself of no effect, or no reputation.
if you are a god then you already have everything;
however as a son Jesus had to be obedient to his father Jehovah:
7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death,(Jehovah God, the father) with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;
@lchiddle [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; 9 and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him, 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chiz´e·dek.
I'm not exactly sure how this is responded to my post, but it sounds to me like you're arguing against scripture. Jesus made himself nothing, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men, and having the appearance of a man.
There is nothing in scripture that supports Jesus ceasing being God, on the contrary, scripture reveals Jesus was both God and man.
23 Furthermore, Jesus himself, when he commenced [his work], was about thirty years old, being the son, as the opinion was,
of Joseph,
[son] of He´li, ...................
[son] of Seth,
[son] of Adam,
[son] of God.
so Jesus was a real Human but he was perfect and later understood who he was from the tales of his parents and by God who opened heavens for him when he was baptised.
5 Hence when he comes into the world he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. 6 You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin [offering].’ 7 Then I said, ‘Look! I am come (in the roll of the book it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” 8 After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin [offering]”—[sacrifices] that are offered according to the Law—
@lchiddle part 4 —[sacrifices] that are offered according to the Law— 9 then he actually says: “Look! I am come to do your will.” He does away with what is first that he may establish what is second.
as Jewish law only allows someone to become priest when he is 30 years (adult age) Jesus said this symbolically speaking at his baptism.
Luke 1:35 And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy--the Son of God.
8 For this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘Following after [the] glory he has sent me to the nations that were despoiling YOU people; for he that is touching YOU is touching my eyeball. 9 For here I am waving my hand against them, and they will have to become spoil to their slaves.’ And YOU people will certainly know that Jehovah of armies himself has sent me.
@lchiddle 22 And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad, and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,
ADAM was free to chose and was perfect: however he had a right to chose but not the right to decide what was wrong or right .
when he did this this text was actual
only God decides which was right or wrong not a man
Reageren op deze video...11 because there was born to YOU today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord, in David’s city. in fact the sheppards know more than you because they knew that the saviour of Israel was sent by God .
revelation says:
10 And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: “Salvation [we owe] to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
so although Jesus was going to fullfill this role , the question remains did he knew this in so many details?
@lchiddle Jesus raised not himself because there are so many text that say HE WAS RAISED BY GOD.
he raised himself in this way that by being obedient till death he earned the prize of resurrection , not only for himself but he opened the way for all mankind to have a ressurrection.
i think you know all these facts but try still to twist the truth on you tube in order to have other people mislead:
why dont you repent instead:or read hebrews 12 :17
@lchiddle 17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my soul, in order that I may receive it again. 18 No man has taken it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. The commandment on this I received from my Father.”
you see how simple : a child can do the dishes.
but i stop talking with you :whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·hen´na.
@lchiddle 17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my soul, in order that I may receive it again.
NWT18 No man has taken it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. The commandment on this I received from my Father.”
is the word RECEIVE in vers 17 not the same as the word in greek that says : this I RECEIVED from my Father ?
DID JESUS take this commandment from his father or receice it?
As I'm sure you are aware, the Greek word λαμβάνω has six different meaning that relate to "taking" so before you try to argue that it doesn't mean to take, just keep that in mind.
now how many texts do you want where it says that God (the father) raised Jesus up?.
i start in chronological order oke?
mattew 16:21 From that time forward Jesus Christ commenced showing his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the older men and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised up.
@lchiddle mattew 17 9 And as they were descending from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying: “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of man is raised up from the dead.”
23 and they will kill him, and the third day he will be raised up.” Consequently they were very much grieved.
19 and will deliver him up to [men of] the nations to make fun of and to scourge and to impale, and the third day he will be raised up.”
@lchiddle the only indirect way Jesus indicated that he was going to rebuild this temple was :
he was going to be faithfull and obedient till death:
because the answer he was giving to satan in his fathers favor was so wonderful
(But Satan answered Jehovah and said: “Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul. )(JESUS DID NOT) ( HE STAYED FAITHFUL)
THAT GOD GAVE HIM EVERLASTING LIFE AFTER HE RESURECTED HIM!!!!!
7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.
@JeanetteLTorres You seem to be picking out what you want to see rather than what is said. This is how it is with most anti JWs.
As I have explained as clear as possible, the WBTS only have 1 Greek book, the KIT. They only printed the Diaglott.
Page 9 "Our endeavour throughout has been to give as literal translation as POSSIBLE where the modern English idiom allows....as NEARLY AS POSSIBLE word for word"
Liars? I would say not. Although someone has been lying to you Jeanette and its not the WBTS
steveparadise1 3 months ago
JeanetteLTorres Thomas Winter, instructor of Greek at University of Nebraska said of the KIT. "Highly useful toward mastery of Koine Greek. It is up-to-date and consistently accurate"
I could go on with many more but I think that's enough to make my point.
Could men with no knowledge of bible languages produce a bible that garnishes such praise from independent, unbiased, non JW, experts? It is obvious that the problem is not with the scholarly work, but rather the theological differences.
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@steveparadise1 Then have him explain the contradictions in both of the Watchtower own greek books. Have him explain why they lie when they say it is a word for word translation from the Greek into English.
JeannetteLTorres 3 months ago
@steveparadise1 That's because they copied someone else's bible. Johannes Greber's demon inspired bible.
jojoneli76 3 weeks ago
@steveparadise1 Thomas Winter's review was on the KIT ONLY, not on the NWTS. In fact using the KIT only helps reinforce the lies found in the NWTS. Mr. Winter is not a biblical scholar but he is a scholar on classical Greek. Anyway, his review was done in 1974 and in 1980 he stated and I quote....
jojoneli76 3 weeks ago
@steveparadise1 "I am not happy with the use now being made of the review," and he went on to note a few problems, such as Jesus' words in John 8:58 (which NWT translates as "I have been"). Winter commented, "No way to go here but 'I am'" (Thomas N. Winter, in a letter to M. Kurt Goedelman of Personal Freedom Outreach, dated 3 October 1980).
jojoneli76 3 weeks ago
@JeanetteLTorres "The NWT was written to reflect their own peculiar doctrines" according to Cetner.Is this the view of Associate Professor of Religious studies at N. Arizona University Jason Beduhn ? After comparing 9 of the most popular bibles, including the NWT, for his book "Bias in Translation" he concluded that the NWT was the most accurate compared, and is a remarkably good translation". Although he was stunned by the reaction from anti JWs he stood by his position.
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Bruce Metzger. speaking of the "supposed scholarship" of the NWT that it was a "sham and perversion of Gods word, particularly with reference to the person of our saviour Jesus Christ". Strange, as he also said "On the whole, one gets a tolerably good impression of the scholarly equipment of the translators".
We can conclude from this then? He appreciates the "scholars" behind the NWT except when they call into question the person of Jesus.So hat is it Bruce a "sham", or "good"?
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres On the video we have disgruntled ex JW Joan Cetnar saying " They were not telling the truth when they claim it (NWT) is a fresh translation"
Edgar J Goodspeed who taught Koine Greek at the Uni of Chicago and translator of "An American Translation" commented on the NWT " A frank, free, vigorous translation. It exhibits a vast array of sound, serious learning. As I can testify".
She obviously didn't know the translators of the NWT, as she claims, as well as she thinks.
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Do you accept what I said concerning the Emphatic Diaglott?
You could Google it I suppose.
The vitriolic attacks on the scholarship of the NWT I find particularly unwarranted.
I do not speak Greek or Hebrew so I must rely on what the experts have to say as well as what makes sense to me in the English. I also realized that it is not the NWT against the scholarly world and there is much support in other translations and scholars for the more controversial passages.
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres There were lots of "THATS". What particular one are you referring to
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@steveparadise1 Just start with the first "that" you disagree with.
JeannetteLTorres 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres These attackers of the WBTS sound very convincing as they go through their spiel on how you can catch out the "dumbed down" JW by using this verse or that. It is an entirely different matter when you are faced with a JW.
Two of the main antagonists James White and Rob Bowman with their "Listen to us sort out the pesky JW attitude" debated one of Jehovah's Witnesses at different times. They got a bit of a surprise when they had to "walk the walk".
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@steveparadise1 Hmmm, why don't you tell them that.
JeannetteLTorres 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres No matter who told who what, who told somebody else, the identity of the translators of the NWT is still not known. The accusation that these men are "unlettered and ordinary" kind of rings a bell Acts 4:13. Nevertheless, proof of a scholarly translation is not who wrote it, but how accurate it is.
Do you honestly feel an organisation that prints in 194 different languages would have no scholars capable enough to translate from Hebrew,Aramaic and Greek?
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres I could not view the Tinyurl trinity when you posted. I have now, so I know where you stand with the trinity.
As far as the videos you sent me I will respond to the criticism of the NWT
All I will say on 1975 is. Where did the WBTS state "the end of the world would be 1975" ?
As for the "Do as we say or else" video. Totally out of context diatribe.
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres As you would expect there would be some differences between the KIT and the Diaglott. There are differences between all 4 interlinear's that I have. So, it is not laughable, it is to be expected.
The WBTS have no control of what is in the Emphatic Diaglott but accept it as a valuable contribution to NT scholarship.
Interesting that he translated John 1:1 in his literal Greek to English as "a god was the Word" but in his version "Logos was God".
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Let me clear this misconception up for you.
The Emphatic Diaglott was a work by Benjamin Wilson first published by Powler and Wells Ltd. New York in 1865. He was a Christadelphian as can be seen by his translating Satan as "Enemy".
The WBTS acquired the rights and printed unchanged in 1902. The Diaglott is now in the public domain. It was not unusual for the Watchtower to publish non JW bibles.
The KJV. American Standard Version, Bible in Living English (Byington)
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres What is it exactly that got up your hump about the JWs?
The very thing you accuse JWs of, being controlled by the Watchtower, you seem to be doing with these anti JW so called scholars. Every thing they say, with little or no evidence, you accept as gospel then repeat as fact. You are the one being controlled not me.
I repeat. What bible (or bibles) do you prefer to use and could you explain what your belief in the trinity? Why are trinitarians reluctant to answer this?
steveparadise1 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Their comments on the NWT are laughable. Greek scholar and professor of languages at Idaho university studied the 10 different translations of the bible for bias in the text. His conclusion as a non JW independent expert ! The NWT is the most faithful to the original Greek. He is not alone in this.
These men twist things and anti JWs eat it up.
To much here to deal with like this.
You tell me what you believe, what bible you prefer and we can move on. Or not
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 What is his name?
JeannetteLTorres 3 months ago
@steveparadise1 Your own greek books, the Diaglott and the Kingdom Interlinier both contradict each other. Your greek scholars can't make up their minds? What is laughable is when you compare the two side by side.
JeannetteLTorres 3 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres The problem is not all trinitarians believe the same thing. I recently quoted James Whites definition to a man who said " that not what I believe". Listening to these two men you would think JWs are just automatons and you ask them something outside what the Watchtower teaches they are stuck. For instance James White (in the Vid) is an expert when preaching to the converted, but in a live debate with Greg Stafford (JW) he did not fare well at all. You can view this on youtube
steveparadise1 4 months ago
JeanetteLTorres Read all of page 10,11and 12 to get the context. I quoted verses that mention Kyrios that are clearly not speaking of God. Do you honestly think the KIT feel that verse should read Jehovah
No trinitarian I know would come to the conclusion you have come to. The latter part of vs 11"lord to the glory of God the Father" is not a direct quote from the OT. You have to take the blinkers off for this one thing You are reading what you want to see in the KIT and not what is being said
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 I gave you a direct qoute from the KIT. I input nothing of my own. And concerning Trinitarians, you have no ideal what you are talking about. Be sure to take out the spaces between each letter when you paste the following link in your address bar.
h t t p : / / t i n y u r l . c o m / 4 2 y n t c 8
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 Here is another link for you, be sure to take out the spaces between each letter. h t t p : / / t i n y u r l . c o m / 6 6 v 4 p k j
So please don't attempt to tell me, a trinitarian, what trinitarian believe or disbelieve. Thank you
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 Here is another Trinitarian teaching exactly the same thing I teach. Don't forget to take out the spaces between each letter. h t t p : / / t i n y u r l . c o m / 6 l e d j u 8
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres I see your problem with this. You are that intent on finding something to disprove JWs or discredit the NWT that you have let your thinking and reasoning ability go on vacation for a while.
You have asked me to quote from the KIT. You are assuming ,by that quote, that the KiIT are saying all references to Kyrios in the NT are a replacement for Jehovah..
I explained quite clearly in my last posts that they are not saying that, NO SCHOLAR SAYS THAT.
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Going by the aforementioned. How should the NWT,or any translator for that matter, Translate Kyrios at Phil 2:11.
Firstly it is not a quote from the OT containing the "Tetragrammaton". It is simply Kyrios, Lord.
By your reasoning Rev17:14 really means Jesus is "Jehovah (Kyrios) of Jehovah's (Kyrios) and King of Kings". Or
1 Cor 8:5 means "there are many gods and many Jehovah's (Kyrios)"
By no stretch can you say "Jesus is Jehovah to the glory of God the Father" as you claim
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 I am going to type a direct qoute from the forword of the K.I.T: "How may modern translators determine when to render the Greek words Ky'rios and Theos (((as the divine name?))) So I ask you what is the divine name? Now I will qoute the rest of what it says, " By determining where the inspired Christian writers have quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures." Not one time does the watchtower say that Kyrios is not translated from the Greek into the Enlish as Jehovah.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 Phil 2:11 is a direct qoute from the Old Testament Is. 45:23. Unto (Me) every knee will bow and every tongue will sware. Also in the N.W.T footnotes on Dt. 10:17 it says For Jehovah your God is The God of gods and the Lord of lords, thier God great, mighty.....in the footnotes of the 1984 NWT study bible is says, The God of gods. or, Heb.-Eloheh Gr.- Theos'ton theon and the Lord of lords Heb.- ha adhonim ((Gr.- Kyrios.)) Dt 10;17 is aplied to Christ in Rev. 19:16
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Page 11 para. 3 makes the point that we are interested in "How may the modern translator determine when to render the Greek words Kyrios and Theos as the divine name? By determining where the NT writers quote from the Hebrew scriptures,
IE: Psalm 110:1 " The utterance of Jehovah to my Lord (Jesus)" Jesus quoting this verse at Luke 20:42 in the NWT " Jehovah says to my Lord (Jesus)"
The AV says The Lord says to my Lord"
Not "Jehovah says to Jehovah"
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Page 10 continues " In view of this (LXX), what is the modern translator to do? Is he justified or authorized in entering the divine name, Jehovah, into a translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures?"... Every Greek- English dictionary states that these two words (Kyrios and Theos) have been used as equivalents of the divine name (in the LXX)" It goes on to ask. "Is the translator warranted in using the divine name as an equivalent to these 2 Greek words when quoting the OT
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres The KiT on page 10 under "Restoring the Divine Name" speaking of the LXX (Septuagint) "sometime during the the 2nd or 3rd century the Tetragammaton (YHWH,or JHVH) was eliminated from the Greek text". This of course is the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures.It Continues on page 10 "Instead of YHWH (or JHVH) they substituted Kyrios, Lord and "Theos, God.
That of course is the Greek version of the OT. Our concern is the "Kyrios" in the Christian Greek Scriptures
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@jeanetteLTorres Paul says Jesus "sat down at the right hand of the Majesty". Does this in anyway tell the Hebrew Christians that Jesus is himself God? Especially as Paul goes on to say about Jesus "God, your God". Also Paul said that Jesus was the "image" and "representation of his (Gods) Being" The T.E.V. says "sits at the right side of the Supreme Being"
No reasonable person would believe that Jesus and The Majesty are the same person and that they are of equal power or even close to it
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 It is not saying that Jesus is the Father, or that the Father is Jesus. It is saying in this particular portion of scripture that there are at list two seperate persons both addressed as capitial God. This is infact teaching the trinity. There are not 3 Gods, but 3 persons that make the one God. Scripture does not give us enough detail to help our finite minds comprehend the infinite. However there is enough scripture to know that 3 persons are addressed as one God
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres It is not my intention, at this time, to identify Jesus with Michael as we are currently discussing Phil. and Heb and the position that Jesus now holds. I'm sure if you're doing a vid on Michael you will use a verse or 2 from Hebrews.
The point that I'm tying to make is this. Why is the glorified Jesus, with all his deserved titles and status, still being portrayed by Paul as being in subjection to God in all ways ? Why is he clearly described as being separate from God ?
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres A look at the first two chapters of Job tells us you are correct in how the Jews viewed angels. Nevertheless, Paul is going to great lengths, at both Philippians and Hebrews, to explain the high position Jesus now holds in heaven.
If Jesus was fully God almighty then that would be the end of it. Why the need to explain the position of the glorified, resurrected Jesus ? Why the comparison?
Are you suggesting 1st century Christians did not know that God is greater than angels?
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 Its purpose was to present the Lord Jesus Christ as perfect and superior in comparison to anything Judaism and the old covenant had to offer. The author was writing to a group of Christians who were under intense persecution and some were contemplating a return to Judaism.He admonished them not to turn away from their only hope of salvation.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 In chapters 1-10:18, the author demonstrates Jesus Christ as preeminent over the angels (1:6); over Moses, (3:3); over the Old Testament priesthood, (5:10). The writer explains that the New Covenant is greater than the Old Covenant because Jesus was the perfect, permanent sacrifice, rather than the Old Testament sacrifices. So you see, angel were not the only thing the author was making Jesus a comparison to.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 If what you are trying to get at is Jesus being Michael the Arch Angel, then I will discuss that in my next video. Jesus is not Michael the Arch Angel but in order to go into great detail, it would be to lengthy so just be patient and wait for my next video. Thank you
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Obviously Jesus was resurrected to a "superior position" than a man. Back to Hebrews Chap 1:4 "So he has become better than the angels, to the extent that he inherited a name more excellent than theirs". If Jesus is God why make a comparison to angels ? Surely by reason of him being God he would naturally be higher than angels, powers and authorities. If Jesus was resurrected as God in heaven again this comparison to angels would be entirely inappropriate !
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 I will reply to this on next weekend when I have more time. Probably in the form of a video.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 The comparison to angels was made because Jews had the highest opinion of the transcendent excellence of angels, they even associate them with God in the creation of the world, and suppose them to be of the privy council of the Most High. As, therefore, the Jews considered them next to God, and none entitled to their adoration but God; on their own ground the apostle proves Jesus Christ to be God, because God commanded all the angels of heaven to worship him. Heb. 1:6
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Jesus emptied himself and took on the form of man. More than this "he humbled himself and became obedient even to death on a cross" NRSV
Heb 2:9 says " we behold Jesus who has been made a little lower than angels". Philippians 2. goes on to say "for this very reason God exulted him to a superior position". The exultation to a superior position was a reward. "for this very reason" Paul said. As was the name he was "given". What was this "superior position"?
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres Read it and looked up the verse in the interlinear and saw what I expected to see "Kurios" = Lord. Not LORD. I have the same understanding of the lit. translation of "Kurios" as Paul had when he wrote it.
If anyone deserves every knee to bend and every tongue to acknowledge him, Its Jesus I do not deny that.
I think the crucial point is to understand what Jesus emptied himself of !
Also what the bible says about his subordination to the Father
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 There is no difference between Lord and LORD. There is a difference between lord and Lord. And you do not understand even what your own Greek is saying. If you have the K.I.T then type it word for word what it is saying in the front forword section concerning the Divine name Kurios. Or do an video responce, show me the front cover and read it out loud so I can hear it. Then we will have something to talk about.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres To summarize
Kurios Lit. means Lord, whether that be Man, Angel, Jesus or God depending on who you are addressing
LORD, all capitals is what bibles use as a substitute for the Divine name.
The Kurios in Phil. 2 is not this, but the generic Lord, in this case applied to Jesus and does not, by any stretch mean Jehovah.
As far as Jesus acting "independently as God" Jesus is very clear that he came not to do his own will but his Fathers. You know the verses Jeanette
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres I do not know what dictionary or lexicon you are using but the literal translation "Kurios" (Kyrios) means "Lord", any Lord. (as far as I am aware there is no Greek word "KuioUs").
I see you are ready to check up Diaglott and Interlinear. Do this with "Kurios" please and clear this up.
If anyone says "Kurios" means Jehovah, then they are mistaken.
Quote your reference.
Apart from "act independently as God" I agree with all that, but it does not tell us that Lord = Jehovah
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 K.I.T-(Forword) pg. 11 p. 3 "How may modern translators determine when to render the Greek words Kyrios and Theos as the (divine name)? By determining where the inspired Christian writers have qouted from the Hebrew Scriptures. Then they must refer to the Hebrew text to locate whether the divine name appears there. And this is exactly what the apostle Paul did. Interlinear says capital Kurios for Lord Phil. 2:11 Paul took the qoute from Is 45:23 & applied it to Christ.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 You need to read all of the forword section in the Kingdom Interlinear. You have a very neatly covered up understanding of the word "Kurios". As far as Jesus coming not to do His own will but the Fathers, you don't understand in full impact the emptying brought out in Phil. 2. Subordinance does not mean inferiority of natures, only position. Jesus voluntarily took upon Himself the form of a servant to set the example, to die for our sins, and be our great High Priest
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres You ask how would every tongue openly acknowledge Jesus as Lord glorify the Father? For 1 reason. Paul under inspiration said it would Phil 2:11.
Jesus own words at John 17:4 "I have glorified you (God) on earth , Having finished the work YOU GAVE ME to do" That is how God the Father is glorified. Jesus finishes gods work. For this God has GIVEN him a name above every name.What Jesus does reflects on the Father. If the Son is glorified then the Father is also glorified John17:5
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 The name given to him as a man/servant-born of a woman, seed implanted by the Holy Spirit, who emptied Himself of all His rights to (Independently act as God) to be a servant and become our Great High Priest, one who is touched by our infirmities yet without sin. The name given is Kurious in the Greek-Lord-Jehovah.
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres The divine name is used over 6,000 times in the OT. Many modern bibles have substituted the name Jehovah, and replaced it with the title LORD (all capitals). Most tell you this in the preface.
This is best seen at Ps110:1 where most bibles read "The LORD said to my Lord. Sit at my right hand.." Note the capitalization.
In other words "The LORD (God, Jehovah) said to my Lord (Jesus).
The "Kyrios" at Phil. 2 does not fall into this category. It is simply Lord, a title for Jesus
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@JeanetteLTorres You said in your video " The Watchtower acknowledges that "Kyrios" (Lord) is another name for Jehovah God". You seem to be plucking something out of the air, attributing it to the JWs, then go about proving them wrong. The Greek word "Kyrios" does indeed mean lord but at no time does the Watchtower,or any JW say it is "another name for Jehovah" . Lord is a title not a name and is applied to many men as well as angels, Jesus and Jehovah.
steveparadise1 4 months ago
Jehovah is the Father. The father is "the only true God". The name above every name was "GIVEN" to Jesus.
The honour that is here directed at Jesus "is to the glory of God the Father".
You are decimating this passage. Your explanation makes no sense.
The relationship between The Father and the Son can be seen in this verse in
1 Cor 27 " For God subjected all things under his feet,it is evident that when He says all things, it is with exception the one who subjected all things to him. Simple
steveparadise1 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 I will respond to this sometime this weekend when I have more time. Thank you for commenting
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
@steveparadise1 Jesus's name is above every name? Why would every knee bow, & every tongue confess that Jesus is (Greek)-Kurious- Lord (Jehovah)? How would this glorify the Father when in Is 45:23 the Father says, By my own self I have sworn-- out of my own mouth in righteousness the word has gone forth, so that (it will not return)--that to me every knee will bend down, every tongue will swear? Jn 17:5 Father glorify me with thine (own) self, with the glory I had with thee before the world was
JeannetteLTorres 4 months ago
" every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus is JEHOVAH, to the glory of God the Father"
You are way off with that one. Firstly JWs do not claim that "Kurios" is another name for Jehovah. It is those who want to hide Gods name that say this. Hence the reason many bibles use LORD (capitals) where Gods name belongs. The NWT reverses this shameful practice.
Lord is a title and in this case it was God who gave it to him. " God made him both Lord and Christ this Jesus you impaled Acts 2: 36
steveparadise1 4 months ago
Where to start with this.
If you are snickering at the NWT for the use of the word "seizure" then you are also mocking W.E. Vine, Strong's Concordance, The New American Concordance and many more who state "Harpagmos" means to "SEIZE". So in this the NWT is accurate.
NEB. "He did not think to snatch at equality"
Paul is exhorting Christians to be like Jesus in humility Vs 3. What you are suggesting is the exact opposite.
The NWT is not the translation to pick up on this. the NEB & TEV also
steveparadise1 4 months ago
Where to start with this.
If you are snickering at the NWT for the use of the word "seizure" then you are also mocking W.E. Vine, Strong's Concordance, The New American Concordance and many more who state "Harpagmos" means to "SEIZE". So in this the NWT is accurate.
NEB. "He did not think to snatch at equality"
Paul is exhorting Christians to be like Jesus in humility Vs 3. What you are suggesting is the exact opposite.
The NWT is not the translation to pick up on this. the NEB & TEV also
steveparadise1 4 months ago
lol witness to Jehovah's Witnesses - you can argue with them until your blue in the face and you won't change their mind
As for their bible translation and the KJV - they are both exactly the same, only different.
wiggyandtee 7 months ago
Gave Him the name which is ((above)) every name, again, we are talking about position. Jesus emptied himself of all authority to independently act as God. Jesus made himself subordinate but subordinance does not mean inferiority. The Father exalted Him to His rightful position -But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; Heb. 1:3 We are to imitate Christ humility and love each other enough to die for each other. Jn 15:13
JeannetteLTorres 9 months ago
so why did one part of the trinity recieve a better name than it had before coming to earth? and how could God receieve a better name than the one he had before? and how are we as christians supposed to imitate that since Paul said this is the mind set we should have that was in christ?
urinfamousr79 10 months ago
@urinfamousr79 Dr. Westcott whom the Watch Tower recognizes and uses as an authority on the Greek text had this to say concerning Christ double natures "even during his dwelling on earth under the limitations of His manhood the activity of His divine being was not interrupted." Take a look at the titles given to Christ, Son of man, Son of God, Creator, High Priest, Mediator and Lord- Kurious-Jehovah. Do you see anything different prior to the incarnation?
JeannetteLTorres 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@JeannetteLTorres you didnt answer my question.
urinfamousr79 9 months ago
@FEINBACHRISING
I ask you: do you comprehend "that Eternal Life" is the "true Light" and "that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all." (Jn1:1-9; 1Jn1:1-5;2:8)
Death is darkness: the total absence of "that Eternal Life" and "the True Light." Therefore it is impossible "that Eternal Life" ever die, and it is impossible "the True Light" ever be darkness.
"In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." Jn1:4-5
barbsinclair 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun Where is you scriptural rebuttal to the other scriptures I have quoted? You can save your personal comments (Don't waste my time) and deal only with scripture.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
Comment removed
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
He is the author of many articles in the areas of Biblical Studies and Manichaean Studies, and of the book, The Manichaean Body: In Discipline and Ritual (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), winner of the "Best First Book" prize from the American Academy of Religion.
Quoted from Truth in Translation: Introduction
inscentof 11 months ago
@inscentof How about just taken one of their books, "The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scripture" and see if they follow their own translation. Check out the link below my video and see for yourself.
JeannetteLTorres 11 months ago
Jason David BeDuhn is an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, and M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in the Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington.
inscentof 11 months ago
@inscentof
Jason BeDuhn is a recognized student of Religious Studies not Greek translation. Real Greek scholars have heavily criticized his work.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle WOW! Jason David BeDuhn is an associate professor of religious studies at Northern Arizona University, in Flagstaff. He holds a B.A. in Religious studies from the University of Illinois, Urbana, and M.T.S. in New Testament and Christian Origins from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. in the Comparative Study of Religions from Indiana University, Bloomington. He is the author of many articles in the areas of Biblical Studies and Manichaean Studies,
inscentof 10 months ago
Did you get that MTS in New Testiment and Christian Origins Harvard Divinity. Do you want more positive comments?
inscentof 10 months ago
@inscentof
This is not Greek translation. A study of the New Testament and Christian origins is very different from a study in Koine and Classical Greek.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres Look up Truth in Translation evaluates the subject of bias in English New Testament translations. After defining New Testament translation bias, the author uses selected passages from nine well-known English versions as examples of translation bias.
inscentof 11 months ago
@inscentof Funny because I have been using the Watch Towers own Kingdom Interlinear Translation, and I have also been using The Watch Towers Diaglott in order to not be accused of Bias. lol
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
part 3
did jesus lift himself up NO
God exalted him , his father Jehovah!
so sure it is that his name is above every (other) (because it is not higher than the name of the one that gave him this name)name.
afterraincomessun 11 months ago
so my question is was Jesus a man : that is what this text says:
in heaven in God's form ,
then a man , then a slave till death ,
and then:9 For this very reason also God exalted him to a superior position and kindly gave him the name that is above every [other] name, 10 so that in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, 11 and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.
afterraincomessun 11 months ago
@afterraincomessun Remove the word "then", this is an addition not a subtraction then an addition, just an addition.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun In heaven as God, on earth as God and man. He never emptied himself of his nature of existing as God, He simply added to Himself in addition to deity, the nature of man. He was both God and Man at the same time. This is called the Hypostatic union, it is a technical term in Christian theology employed in Christology to describe the union of Christ's humanity and divinity in one hypostasis.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres this is not what the text says but what you want to read in it and it surely does not
agree with the hebr5 text 8Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
8 Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered 9 and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun If you think that I am reading something into the text well then the Watch Tower beat me to it back in 1880." We think it has been shown that the Christ of the Scriptures is compound being, Divine and human. (Watchtower, 11/1880, p. 6, Reprints, p. 160)."This did not last long as the light became brighter their former truth was discarded.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres well in fact it shows your about a 130 years behind but still want to go back to the dark ages from which they came
:
the research taught them that they were building on what babylon the great had left them with as a heritage.
after a while they discovered that nothing babylon left them was to be trusted and they had to be guided by Jehovahs spirit to discover truly bible based new ideas.
the translations of the bible and the teaching of the church back then were darkened .
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun You should be saying that it is being led by the spirit of Charles Taze Russell because Jehovah has nothing to do with it. You are the one error and you are so brain washed all you can see is Watch Tower pollution.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres if fact you think your so smart:
but look how medicine developed:
or othere sciences:
they started with scrap:
till semmelweis discovered the cause : lots of pregnant women and young mothers died.
Do you blame all doctors for their being so simple minded back then?
still you dont have any apreciation for what is since then discovered.
you should in fact be treated in the way they did before his discovery for you reject progression.
and the same you do with bible research!!!!!!!
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun That's the whole thing, there is already so much that has already been discovered and is already out there, but you don't know it because the Watch Tower has desperately tried to keep it's followers in the dark through changing the original text in some places, by purposely not following the original text in other places and by psychological conditional which you exhibit quite well. And no, I don't think I am "so smart", You can move on to my other videos now.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres
part 1 you are changing the subject:
first you were pointing at the beginnings the early years : back then there was little known and much research had to be done:
NOW we now many facts .
But as babylon had power in the past she still is blinding the sight of many upright persons:
together with the devil:
9 So down the great dragon was hurled, Satan, who is misleading the entire inhabited earth; he was hurled down to the earth, and his angels were hurled down with him.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun Just give an answer using scripture instead of pouring out Watch Tower pyschological rhetoric. It will get you no where. It is the Holy Spirit which leads, guides, and instructs, not the Watch Tower.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres is the holy spirit guiding you?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun Yes He is, that is why I am making these videos. God also comforts me when I hurt, heals me when I'm sick, strengthens me when I'm weak, and encourages from His word. Romans 8:14-17 NIV) because those who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. John 16:13} But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
Comment removed
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres dear Jeannette: if you watch your own comments you will see that it is you that is not dealing with scripture alone!
and when i quote a scripture you never come back on it but change the context:
this morning i asked give me please the page of the diaglot subject that you mentioned but you did not answer : as for me i cant find the alledged text
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres about satans powers:
acts 16
16 And it happened that as we were going to the place of prayer, a certain servant girl with a spirit, a demon of divination, met us. She used to furnish her masters with much gain by practicing the art of prediction.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@Jeannette matthew 7: 22 Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ 23 And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, YOU workers of lawlessness.
john 16:2 Men will expel YOU from the synagogue. In fact, the hour is coming when everyone that kills YOU will imagine he has rendered a sacred service to God.
there is enough power to mislead men even to kill
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun This is an (I don't know how to give a rebuttal to the scripture you gave, so I will just throw anything out there) type of rebuttal. Like I said, move on to the next video.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@afterraincomessun "Many will say to me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name... expel demons in your name... perform many powerful works in your name And yet then I will confess to them: I never knew YOU! Get away from me, "
See...knowing his name doesn't save you.
pretoshohmoofc 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres part 2
so if you put everything that the faithful and discrete slave has discovered compared with the knowledge back then in the past: than it is a miracle that so much has been unveiled.
only if you have another reason not willing to subject to the watchtowers teachings then you would reject this:
other free persons can research with an open mind.
Jeanette get yourself free from your hate and anger : this will save you .Jehovah wants every one to gain this knowledge!
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres and i am an open mind and am not under influence of mind control as you seem to say:
i have been in other churches a;nd read everything that i like ; i have a copy of crisis of conscience.
it is a disgusting book and so is the one that wrote it .
it is a traitor, who misleads the minds of people who enjoy reading negative facts about the watchtower.
if you are one of his victims and are mislead than i am ready to help you .
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun lol lol lol, gald to see you have a sense of humor. Watch my other videos
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres
part 1 i answer you here instead of your inbox:
you dont know the simpliest use of the word god in the bible :
the word is not only used to point at the one almighty God Jehovah:
it is just a title.
in psalms is reffered to judges in israel as being Gods
psalm 82:6 “I myself have said, ‘YOU are gods,
And all of YOU are sons of the Most High.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun Have you looked at the Greek in the Watch Towers own "Diaglott" I believe it reads in the Greek, It reads "One God-Greek-Theo=Jehovah, the Father, out of whom are All things, and we for him; and One Lord,-Kurios=Jehovah through whom are all things. Jehovah is used for both God (Theo) and Lord (Kurios). Check it out yourself. Emphatic Diaglott which is (supposed) to be the Original Greek Text Interlineary Word for Word English Translation. Capital "K" for Kurios = Jehovah
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres could you please tell me what page ?
i cannot find it
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres
part 2 further more the bible makes clear what to think about a lot of gods:
1 cor 8:we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no God but one. 5 For even though there are those who are called “gods,” whether in heaven or on earth, just as there are many “gods” and many “lords,” 6 there is actually to us one God the Father, out of whom all things are, and we for him; and there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things are, and we through him.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun Have you looked at the Greek in the Watch Towers own "Diaglott" it reads "One God-Greek-Theo=Jehovah, the Father, out of whom are All things, and we for him; and One Lord,-Kurios=Jehovah through whom are all things. Jehovah is used for both God (Theo) and Lord (Kurios). Check it out yourself. Emphatic Diaglott which is (supposed) to be the Original Greek Text Interlineary Word for Word English Translation. Check out the greek, the word Capital Kurious is used.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres i think if you seen one you've seen them all !
it tells more about you than you think.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun This is what the Greek is saying: In heaven as God, on earth as God (and) man. He emptied Himself of position, not nature. So as God in heaven, then as God and man on earth. Emptying Himself of position, does not imply that He emptied Himself of deity. Thank you for your comment.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
part 1
philipp 5 Keep this mental attitude in YOU that was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. 7 No, but he emptied himself and took a slave’s form and came to be in the likeness of men. 8 More than that, when he found himself in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient as far as death, yes, death on a torture stake.
afterraincomessun 11 months ago
@afterraincomessun "Emptied" Himself of what? not his deity. Study the word Being or existing in Vines Dictionary of the Old and New Testament words. And please view my new video.
JeannetteLTorres 10 months ago
@JeannetteLTorres 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form? sure he left that position : thats what it is all about.
he became a real man a perfect man.
but he was killed as a criminal at the torture stake, so being obedient till death.
still as the word he was untouchable : to be obedient he became human : flesh
14 So the Word became flesh and resided among us, and we had a view of his glory, a glory such as belongs to an only-begotten son from a father;
he was not the father simple it is
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
The Trinity doctrine does not teach that Jesus is the Father, you are confusing Oneness theology.
The Greek in Philippians 2:7 disagrees with the NWT. Jesus didn't change his form, but added to himself; taking upon himself the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men... This was HOW he made himself of no effect, or no reputation.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle this is not real:
if you are a god then you already have everything;
however as a son Jesus had to be obedient to his father Jehovah:
7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death,(Jehovah God, the father) with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered;
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear. 8 Although he was a Son, he learned obedience from the things he suffered; 9 and after he had been made perfect he became responsible for everlasting salvation to all those obeying him, 10 because he has been specifically called by God a high priest according to the manner of Mel·chiz´e·dek.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
I'm not exactly sure how this is responded to my post, but it sounds to me like you're arguing against scripture. Jesus made himself nothing, taking the form of a slave, becoming in the likeness of men, and having the appearance of a man.
There is nothing in scripture that supports Jesus ceasing being God, on the contrary, scripture reveals Jesus was both God and man.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle then prove that:
first he was a god not almighty God and then he became a real man just like adam was,
when he was baptised he got his spiritual life that he had before in heaven , but still he was a man.
when he died God Jehovah his father , rewarded him .
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
That theological view is not supported by scripture.
1. Jesus was and always has been Almighty God (Zechariah 2:8-11).
2. Jesus was fully man, but also fully God (Philippians 2:5-8).
3. Jesus was not like Adam, Adam had no knowledge of right and wrong (Genesis 3:22).
4. Jesus was always the Christ, this was not something that happened at his baptism (Luke 2:11).
5. Jesus raised himself from the dead (John 2:19) and death could not hold him (Act 2:24).
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle part 1
it seems you lived in Jesus's time:
i have to do it with the bible:
jesus was :
40 And the young child continued growing and getting strong, being filled with wisdom, and God’s favor continued upon him.
4 But when the full limit of the time arrived, God sent forth his Son, who came to be out of a woman and who came to be under law,
jesus was an earthly son of God Jehovah just like Adam was:
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun you draw too much conclusions and far beyond you can do if you only consider the texts
what are you an angel or so?
my bible is translated with much brains and understanding and helps us out of the dark ages where you want to stay it seems
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle
part 2
23 Furthermore, Jesus himself, when he commenced [his work], was about thirty years old, being the son, as the opinion was,
of Joseph,
[son] of He´li, ...................
[son] of Seth,
[son] of Adam,
[son] of God.
so Jesus was a real Human but he was perfect and later understood who he was from the tales of his parents and by God who opened heavens for him when he was baptised.
hebrews 10:7 must have happened at his baptism.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddlepart 3
5 Hence when he comes into the world he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. 6 You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin [offering].’ 7 Then I said, ‘Look! I am come (in the roll of the book it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” 8 After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin [offering]”—[sacrifices] that are offered according to the Law—
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle part 4 —[sacrifices] that are offered according to the Law— 9 then he actually says: “Look! I am come to do your will.” He does away with what is first that he may establish what is second.
as Jewish law only allows someone to become priest when he is 30 years (adult age) Jesus said this symbolically speaking at his baptism.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
So you still wish to make giant assumptions and argue against scripture.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle its not my bible that is wrong : its your understanding
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
Then straighten me out on the verses I quote rather than hopping around and plucking fantastic concussions out from thin air.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
Luke 1:35 And the angel answered her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy--the Son of God.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle (Zechariah 2:8-11).?
8 For this is what Jehovah of armies has said, ‘Following after [the] glory he has sent me to the nations that were despoiling YOU people; for he that is touching YOU is touching my eyeball. 9 For here I am waving my hand against them, and they will have to become spoil to their slaves.’ And YOU people will certainly know that Jehovah of armies himself has sent me.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
You've missed out verse 10 and 11. Also try reading it in a real Bible.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle i quoted darby what s wrong with this translation?
.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
You only quoted up to verse 9
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle 6 who, although he was existing in God’s form,?
darby:6who, subsisting in the form of God, did not esteem it an object of rapine to be on an equality with God;
amplified:6Who, although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [[b]possessing the fullness of the attributes which make God God],
does it any where say that Jesus WAS OR IS GOD?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
Yes, twice in Philippians 2:6.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle 22 And Jehovah God went on to say: “Here the man has become like one of us in knowing good and bad, and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite,
ADAM was free to chose and was perfect: however he had a right to chose but not the right to decide what was wrong or right .
when he did this this text was actual
only God decides which was right or wrong not a man
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
Still trying to twist scripture... [tut tut]
lchiddle 10 months ago
Reageren op deze video...11 because there was born to YOU today a Savior, who is Christ [the] Lord, in David’s city. in fact the sheppards know more than you because they knew that the saviour of Israel was sent by God .
revelation says:
10 And they keep on crying with a loud voice, saying: “Salvation [we owe] to our God, who is seated on the throne, and to the Lamb.”
so although Jesus was going to fullfill this role , the question remains did he knew this in so many details?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle Jesus raised not himself because there are so many text that say HE WAS RAISED BY GOD.
he raised himself in this way that by being obedient till death he earned the prize of resurrection , not only for himself but he opened the way for all mankind to have a ressurrection.
i think you know all these facts but try still to twist the truth on you tube in order to have other people mislead:
why dont you repent instead:or read hebrews 12 :17
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
Too right God raised Jesus... yet more proof that Jesus is God.
You add to what Jesus says, because your theology calls him a liar.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle no where Jesus said that he would raise himself
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
John 2:19
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle what did he say there:?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
So the Jews said to him, "What sign do you show us for doing these things?"
Jesus answered them, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?"
But he was speaking about the temple of his body.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle SO he did not literally say that he would resurrect himself from the death
why would he talk so indirectly?
because the answer is also indirect
the only indirect way Jesus indicated that he was going to rebuild this temple was :
he was going to be faithfull and obedient till death:
because the answer he was giving to satan in his fathers favor was so wonderful
THAT GOD GAVE HIM EVERLASTING LIFE AFTER HE RESURECTED HIM!!!!!
it was his reward , and in this way he rraised himself up!!
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
How was Jesus being indirect? The Jews just presumed to know what he was referring to.
Jesus is the everlasting life (1 John 1:2) this is not something he was rewarded with at his resurrection.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle 17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my soul, in order that I may receive it again. 18 No man has taken it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. The commandment on this I received from my Father.”
you see how simple : a child can do the dishes.
but i stop talking with you :whoever says, ‘You despicable fool!’ will be liable to the fiery Ge·hen´na.
you called me a fool ?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
You're a fool because you argue against that which you do not know or understand, and you do it with such zeal and arrogance.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle he did not actually say he was going to raise himself from the death , did he?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle do you have more PROOF texts about Jesus resurrecting himself:
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
John 10:17 - For this reason the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it up again.
lchiddle 10 months ago
@lchiddle 17 This is why the Father loves me, because I surrender my soul, in order that I may receive it again.
NWT18 No man has taken it away from me, but I surrender it of my own initiative. I have authority to surrender it, and I have authority to receive it again. The commandment on this I received from my Father.”
is the word RECEIVE in vers 17 not the same as the word in greek that says : this I RECEIVED from my Father ?
DID JESUS take this commandment from his father or receice it?
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
As I'm sure you are aware, the Greek word λαμβάνω has six different meaning that relate to "taking" so before you try to argue that it doesn't mean to take, just keep that in mind.
lchiddle 10 months ago
Reageren op deze video..
now how many texts do you want where it says that God (the father) raised Jesus up?.
i start in chronological order oke?
mattew 16:21 From that time forward Jesus Christ commenced showing his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the older men and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and on the third day be raised up.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle mattew 17 9 And as they were descending from the mountain, Jesus commanded them, saying: “Tell the vision to no one until the Son of man is raised up from the dead.”
23 and they will kill him, and the third day he will be raised up.” Consequently they were very much grieved.
19 and will deliver him up to [men of] the nations to make fun of and to scourge and to impale, and the third day he will be raised up.”
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle now who did it:
acts 2:32 This Jesus God resurrected, of which fact we are all witnesses.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lchiddle acts 13:30 But God raised him up from the dead;
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle the only indirect way Jesus indicated that he was going to rebuild this temple was :
he was going to be faithfull and obedient till death:
because the answer he was giving to satan in his fathers favor was so wonderful
(But Satan answered Jehovah and said: “Skin in behalf of skin, and everything that a man has he will give in behalf of his soul. )(JESUS DID NOT) ( HE STAYED FAITHFUL)
THAT GOD GAVE HIM EVERLASTING LIFE AFTER HE RESURECTED HIM!!!!!
AND BY HIS SACRIFICE WE WILL LIVE
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@lchiddle DID JESUS CRY TO HIMSELF ?
WHAT A SHOW WOULD THAT BE.
NO HE SCREAMED TO HIS FATHER JEHOVAH
HEBR 5
7 In the days of his flesh [Christ] offered up supplications and also petitions to the One who was able to save him out of death, with strong outcries and tears, and he was favorably heard for his godly fear.
afterraincomessun 10 months ago
@afterraincomessun
You really don't have any idea what the Trinity concept is, hence you ignorant responses.
Learn the difference between different theologies you ignorant fool.
Jesus is not the Father. The Trinity never has taught this. Jesus is very God from very God.
Jesus is one with the Father, everything the Father does the Son does also (John 5:17).
lchiddle 10 months ago