Jehovah's Witnesses consider Jesus to be God's Son

[JehovahsWitness]

Jehovah's Witnesses consider Jesus to be unique in that he is the only begotton son of God. His existence preceded the creation of the earth, the angels, and every living creation.


Question for debate : Do you believe Jesus to be a unique son, and if so, in what way?

[Donray]

Why didn't god give us the bible that cannot be misinterpreted?

Is God intelligent enough to supply a bible that would never be misunderstood?

All this and many other threads point out is that the bible is one big piece of bad literature.

It appears the JWs worship at least two gods as many early Christians did.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 14 by polonius.advice]

This is coming from the same person that accuses people of....

...ignoring much of the Bible and trying to justify their own belief system

By attacking Paul's writings are you not guilty of the very thing you're accusing others of doing when the Bible doesn't support your belief system?

RESPONSE: Not at all. The only thing I am "guilty of" is insisting on the facts of history. Some reports in scripture are accurate, some are not. Analysis and evidence have to be evaluated carefully.

"How do I know, the Bible tells me so" is hardly the way to approach history.

Yet when someone insist on facts from you, suddenly you're silent or facts are not needed. Words like 'clearly' start showing up when it's not clear at all. I can't help but notice the double standard. You're asking for people to replace 'the Bible tells me so' with 'I'm telling you so'. But just before that you were saying the 'Bible tells me so.' Yet you're approach to research is not reliable and the only opinion that seems to count is your own.

Perhaps you'd like to address post viewtopic.php?p=852988#852988 and post viewtopic.php?p=852991#852991 where it actually is clear that Jesus was spoken of as 'one of a kind' in the Bible. Or will you label those scriptures 'inaccurate' at your convenience?

RESPONSE: I report history clearly and accurately and don't waste time with endless platitudes.

If you believe any of my facts are in error, please specify clearly which ones and what you say the fact really is (with your evidence, of course).

And remember, any assertions which you make but cannot fully support are considered "mere assertions without evidence" and can be rejected without comment.

I did point to where you are in error in these two post. viewtopic.php?p=852988#852988 and post viewtopic.php?p=852991#852991

Complete with evidence.

[polonius]

RESPONSE: I'm afraid the messages you cited are rambles. You did not specify where (you claim), I was in error. If you have a specific assertion to make, make it succinctly in only one or a few sentences.

But if you are still hung up on the only begotten son claim, perhaps you would like to consider these bible passages:

Psalm 2:7 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
7 I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He said to me (David), “You are my son; today I have begotten you.

Exodus 4:22 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)
22 Then you shall say to Pharaoh, ‘Thus says the LORD: Israel is my firstborn son.

2 Samual 7: 14 I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me. (Solomon) (NRSV)

Jeremiah 31:9 ((NRSV) ..for I have become a father to Israel,
and Ephraim is my firstborn.


Luke 3:38 New Revised Standard Version (NRSV)…Adam, son of God.

Dictionary: A somewhat old fashioned adjective, begotten is the past participle of the verb beget, which means to father or produce as offspring. You might recognize this word from John 3:16, one of the most popular and most often quoted bible verses: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

Here we have six "begotten" sons of God before we come to Jesus.

Obviously John's "only begotten son" is incorrect.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 23 by polonius.advice]

I can see by this response you didn't understand what was posted about the scriptures you're trying to use as your evidence. So I guess that is why they are 'ramblings' to you. That is ok though, there are those that do understand it and I hope are encouraged by the fact that there are many that are 'begotten' by God but there is only one 'only begotten' or 'only Son'. 'Begotten' and 'only begotten' are two different words that you are trying to give the same meaning and you are in error for doing so.

Do you agree with the Bible's use of the word, monogenés to describe Jesus?

3439 monogenḗs (from 3411 /misth�tós, "one-and-only" and 1085 /génos, "offspring, stock") – properly, one-and-only; "one of a kind" – literally, "one (monos) of a class, genos" (the only of its kind).

Look at the links please. http://biblehub.com/greek/3439.htm and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monogen%C4%93s

Do you understand that the word you're trying to say has the same meaning used in the Bible doesn't hold the same meaning? 'Begotten' is not the same as 'only begotten'. There is 'gennaó' which is 'begotten' and 'monogenés' which means 'only begotten'. Jesus isn't unique because he is a son of God but a unique/one of kind of Son to God. Like Issac was to Abraham though Abraham had more than one son. But Issac was 'one of a kind son' because he was Abraham's only son from Sarah. Jesus is 'one of a kind' because Jesus is the only son that was created directly by Jehovah. "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth..." 1 Col 1:15, 16. This is why Jesus is unique and one of a kind or monogenés.