Every pantheon has its "high God" it's Creator God

[Elijah John]

Every pantheon has it's "high Creator God" and it's offspring. Including son and daughter gods.

Jehovah's Witnesses rightly (from my pov) claim there is only one God, the Father, Jehovah.

Unlike Trinitarians, JWs readily admit that Jesus, the Son, is inferior to the Father Jehovah. Arians taught something very similar.

But can't Arian cosmology be considered a form of polytheism as well? After all, even pagan pantheons pretty much all have only one (sometimes two. male and female) Creator gods.

Arians like JW's ascribe to Jesus a superhuman status, embracing the Pauline concept that Jesus is the "firstborn of all Creation, though whom all things are created".

For debate, how does even such "monotheistic" Christian cosmology differ from the pagan pantheons?

Can't the JW cosmic view be considered a form of "bi-theism" with one Creator God, and one main created, lesser God, ie Michael, the pre-incarnate Jesus?

[shnarkle]

Setting your false equivalence aside, simply asserting that what one believes is monotheism doesn't make it monotheism.

You are right, because what you believe is independent of, you know, the actual definition of the term.

Strict biblical Monotheism suggests a self-sufficient solitary and transcendent Supreme Being. Christianity presents an immanent personal figure that Trinitarians suggest is God along with an indwelling Spirit that is also known. That may very well fit their definition of monotheism, but it doesn't fit the strict definition of monotheism which is why Jesus, Paul, John, etc. were considered to be propagating heretical blasphemy. It is quite simply blasphemy to the strict definition of monotheism.

Strictly speaking, it isn't monotheism at all.

Christians believe that there is only one God...

Sure, but they then proceed to redefine monotheism to fit their belief system. monotheism doesn't allow for anyone beside God. "There is none beside me". Christianity then states that Christ sits beside God. They have their own definition of monotheism.

We see this all the time in our post modern culture. People claiming that they're men when they're really women. They claim they're black when they're really white. They claim they're Irish, when they're really Philpino. etc. They can drive around in a Kia and claim it's a Cadillac. It doesn't make it a Cadillac.

Let me be clear here. I don't have a problem with people believing whatever their heart desires. I'm just pointing out that the king has no clothes. I feel no need to point this out to them unless they choose to enter into a debate on the subject.

[marco]

Let me be clear here. I don't have a problem with people believing whatever their heart desires. I'm just pointing out that the king has no clothes. I feel no need to point this out to them unless they choose to enter into a debate on the subject.

I agree that deifying Christ and something called the Holy Spirit adds to the number of gods ..... unless we accept that a mystery is a truth above reason but revealed by God. In this case, the mystery is the Trinity. Clever people have bowed before this mystery so it isn't quite of the form of the naked emperor. A discussion simply involves one party saying "my cleverness exceeds yours."

[DPMartin]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

well you may cotton to the JW thinking but you should know that JW is not Christian in the biblical sence. JWs do not acknowledge Jesus as the begotten Son of God they say He's of some angel or an angel don't remember, but the important thing is they do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as the begotten Son of the Father.

which you should also know even Jews of the day knew meant equal with God.

Joh_5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.


so your views are not scriptural at all if you don't acknowledge Jesus as the only begotten Son of God.

[JehovahsWitness]

... you should know that JW is not Christian in the biblical sence.

I am one of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES and I assure you, we are most certainly are Christians in the biblical sense (see below for biblical evidence).




https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... hristians/

To read more please go to other posts related to...

RELIGION, CHRISTIANITY and ...RELIGIOUS DENOMINATIONS

[JehovahsWitness]

JWs do not acknowledge Jesus as the begotten Son of God .

I do not know where you get your information from but I can assure you that JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES most definitely believe Jesus is the only begotten Son of God.

Here is the statement from the Jehovah's Witness official website

He [Jesus] is the only one created directly by Jehovah and is therefore appropriately called God’s “only-begotten� Son. (John 1:14) Jesus served as God’s Spokesman, so he is also called “the Word.�​

source: https://www.jw.org/en/publications/book ... us-christ/

RELATED POSTS


What does "only begotten" (monogenes) mean? by tigger2
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 451#786451

[JehovahsWitness]

... even Jews of the day knew meant equal with God.

Yes well Jehovah's Witnesses don't follow the Jews (much less the Pharisees who you are quoting) we follow Jesus who said the following:

JESUS CHRIST
"The Father is greater than I." - John 14:28

RELATED POSTS

Is there bibilcal evidence to indicate Jesus is NOT Almighty God (YHWH) ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 572#751572

Does Jesus have a God? (Checkpoint)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 527#908527

[JehovahsWitness]

it's debatable whether it's more of a joke than a transliteration at all.

To you maybe.

I suppose we will just have to chose between your opinion and the peer reviewed published works of some of the utmost scholars in the field of Greek and Hebrew study, who without ambiguity state that Iesous is indeed a transliteration of Yehoshua/Yeshua

• - The translators of The Greek Septuagint
  - The Jewish Encyclopedia
  - Strongs Concordance
  - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
  - The Catholic Encyclopedia

Have a most excellent day and thank you for an entertaining discussion.

JW



REFERENCES

The Greek Septuagint
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 440#918440

Strongs
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 433#918433

[ 1,,G2424, iesous ]
is a transliteration of the Heb. Joshua," meaning "Jehovah is salvation" - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words

The word Jesus is the form assumed in Latin by the Greek Iesous, which is the transliterated form of the Hebrew Jehoshua, Jeshua, or Joshua, meaning “Jehovah is salvation.� - Encyclopædia Britannica
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Encyclop ... sus_Christ

The word Jesus is the Latin form of the Greek Iesous, which in turn is the transliteration of the Hebrew Jeshua, or Joshua, or again Jehoshua, meaning "Jehovah is salvation." - Catholic Encyclopedia
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374x.htm

THE BOOK OF JOSHUA [...] bears in Hebrew the superscription ; in the Septuagint, using the post-exilic form of the name (; Neh. viii. 17), Ἰησοῦς
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/artic ... ua-book-of

FURTHER READING: A Closer look at the process from Yehoshua to Iesous

[shnarkle]

Let me be clear here. I don't have a problem with people believing whatever their heart desires. I'm just pointing out that the king has no clothes. I feel no need to point this out to them unless they choose to enter into a debate on the subject.

I agree that deifying Christ and something called the Holy Spirit adds to the number of gods ..... unless we accept that a mystery is a truth above reason but revealed by God. In this case, the mystery is the Trinity. Clever people have bowed before this mystery so it isn't quite of the form of the naked emperor. A discussion simply involves one party saying "my cleverness exceeds yours."

One needn't be clever to win a debate.

What God reveals needn't be a mystery either. The invisible thought dwells within the spoken word. The breath must vibrate the vocal chords for the sound to be manifestly communicated. I am not the thought, nor am I the word, nor am I the breath that vibrates the word into existence yet they are all mine; my thought, my breath, my word, and when received communicates who I am. It is in that communication that the divine presents itself.

So for all practical intents and purposes, Christ might just as well be God. Who else does one look to other than God's image? The image is the only game in town, yet it can't be overstated enough that God is distinctly different than his image. In biblical terminology God cannot be compared to his image at all. Yet it is only in, with, and through the image that God can be known, or rather as Paul points out only insofar as we may be known of God. Why? An all knowing God can't be known. Transcendence is beyond existence. It is synonymous with non existence.

[otseng]

well you may cotton to the JW thinking but you should know that JW is not Christian in the biblical sence.

Moderator Final Warning

Please note rule 15:

15. It is not permitted to say another person or group is not a Christian or call them a cult if the person or group identifies as Christian (this includes Catholics, Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, or any group that claims to be Christian).

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[shnarkle]

[Replying to post 33 by DPMartin]

you should also know even Jews of the day knew meant equal with God.

Joh_5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

To say that the Jews knew something isn't the same as saying that the Jews believed something to be true, or that the Jews interpreted something to be true. The fact is that gospel narratives indicate that the Jews didn't comprehend their own texts. Jesus repeatedly points out that it's as if they've never read them before. When referring to the book of Moses, he says, "Haven't you read...etc." The text you provide states that they wanted to kill him because he had broken the Sabbath. The first clue that this isn't the case is the fact that the Mosaic law allows provisions for doing good works on the Sabbath. To then interpret the Mosaic law according to the false interpretation of the scribes and Pharisees rather than the witness of scripture itself is to agree with who Jesus himself characterizes as "liars".

Even modern day Jewish scholars familiar with their own law will point out that the scribes and Pharisees described in the gospel narratives are lying right through their teeth in almost every case.

They interpreted Jesus incorrectly just like they interpreted their own texts incorrectly. Jesus himself says that his father is greater than he is. Yet you would prefer to take the interpretation of the scribes and Pharisees over Christ? Why?

If you were to identify yourself as the son of your own father, it wouldn't make you equal with him. This is a logical fallacy.