Questions about Jesus and JW’s

[MissKate13]

1. Jehovah’s Witnesses say Jesus was “a god.” This is how the NWT reads (John 1:1).

Do JW’s believe Jesus was a true or false god?

2. JW’s say Jesus is a created being.

When was Jesus (capital or lower case g) created?

I look forward to your responses to one or both questions.

MissKate13

[Difflugia]

one should be careful not to abuse the so-alled "sharps rule".

Yes. Let's all try to remember not to abuse grammar.

Indeed in discussing Rev. 2:8; 2:2 .Kermit Titrud offers the following "modification" to the Granville Sharp rule stating: "If the first substantive has an article and the second does not, the second refers to the same person or thing as the first unless the context suggests otherwise." - D.A. Black's (Ed.) Linguistics and NT Interpretation pp. 249-250

Further while Sharp did not clearly exclude proper names from the rule’s application, a close examination of his monograph reveals that he felt the rule could be applied absolutely only to personal, singular, non-proper nouns. (For more on this point see the commentary "Sharp Redivivus? - A Reexamination of the Granville Sharp Rule" https://bible.org/article/sharp-rediviv ... sharp-rule )

If you intend this observation to apply to 2 Peter 1:1, it doesn't. The second noun in the clause is saviour, not a proper noun.

Given the above, there is no grammatical basis to object to translating the Greek in a similar way to the English "Our King and country".

It's not certain and there is some ambiguity, but it's gross hyperbole for you to claim that the mere possibility equates to "no grammatical basis" for an objection. The ambiguity in Greek is similar to what we would have in English and for the same reasons. There are many combinations of common nouns that fit either sense: "our car and truck" and "our pots and pans" are contextually different than "our lord and master" and "our muse and inspiration." Now add a proper noun and it should be obvious to anyone without an ax to grind that most such constructions refer to a single entity: "our muse and inspiration Mark Twain" or "our leader and president Joe Biden." This is the context for the rule that you've warned the rest of us against abusing. It's possible that the muse isn't Twain and the leader isn't Biden, but the context provides a definite "grammatical basis" for objecting to either of those readings.

Considering that Witnesses absolutely insist that "the Word" is "a god" in the same context (and indeed the same sentence) that also refers to God the Father, it seems at best shortsighted to insist that "our god and saviour Jesus Christ" is out of place even if the following verse refers to "God and Jesus our lord" as separate entities. Now that it's been explained to you, though, I'd think that "shortsighted" would no longer apply and in the future one might rather call it "disingenuous."

[MissKate13]

The Scriptures clearly state that Jesus is Yahweh!

Peter referred to Jesus Christ as “our God and Savior!

Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:… (2 Peter 1:1)

Paul wrote that we should be looking for the appearing of our great God and Savior, who gave Himself for us.

11 For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, 14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.

Yahweh Himself said Jesus would be named “THE YAHWEH OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.”

5“Behold, the days are coming,” says the Lord,
“That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness;
A King shall reign and prosper,
And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth.
6 In His days Judah will be saved,
And Israel will dwell safely;
Now this is His name by which He will be called:
THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.


Here we have the Father (Theos) saying to the Son, “Your throne O God (Theos) is forever and ever. Therefore God, (Theos), Your God (Theos) has anointed You…”

8 But to the Son He says:

”Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
9 You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”

[JehovahsWitness]

The Scriptures clearly state that Jesus is Yahweh!

Peter referred to Jesus Christ as “our God and Savior!

I did address this point. See below

Peter referred to Jesus Christ as “our God and Savior!

DOES PETER CALL JESUS OUR GOD AND SAVIOUR?

2PETER 1:1 NKJV

Simon Peter, a bondservant and apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who have obtained like precious faith with us by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ

While some bible translations render the verses in a way that suggests they refer to one individual, one should be careful not to abuse the so-alled "sharps rule". Indeed in discussing Rev. 2:8; 2:2 .Kermit Titrud offers the following "modification" to the Granville Sharp rule stating: "If the first substantive has an article and the second does not, the second refers to the same person or thing as the first unless the context suggests otherwise." - D.A. Black's (Ed.) Linguistics and NT Interpretation pp. 249-250

Since the very next verse distinguished beween the two reading in the New King James Version, the contextnof Peters openjng words lends to the above rule.

2PETER 1:1 NKJV

Grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord

Further while Sharp did not clearly exclude proper names from the rule’s application, a close examination of his monograph reveals that he felt the rule could be applied absolutely only to personal, singular, non-proper nouns. (For more on this point see the commentary "Sharp Redivivus? - A Reexamination of the Granville Sharp Rule" https://bible.org/article/sharp-rediviv ... sharp-rule )[/indent]



AND CHRIST OR AND [OF] CHRIST?

Given the above, there is no grammatical basis to object to translating the Greek in a similar way to the English "Our King and country". While it shoulld be understood, (even without saying) that the KING is not the The Country, for clarity we can change the word order or add a word such as the possesive pronoun (our). For example the KING JAMES VERSION reads :

2 PETER 1:1

....like precious faith with us through the righteousnessof God and our Saviour Jesus Christ

Other translations highlight that two different individuals are being referred to by adding the preposition "of" (as one might in "A subject of King and [of] country") note the following translations ...

VARIOUS OTHER TRANSLATIONS

Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained a like precious faith with us in the righteousness of our God and the Saviour Jesus Christ - American Standard Version

Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Savior Jesus Christ - Webster's Bible Translation

Simon Peter, a bondservant and Apostle of Jesus Christ: To those to whom there has been allotted the same precious faith as that which is ours through the righteousness of our God and of our Saviour Jesus Christ.- Weymouth New Testament

CONCLUSION It is grammatically dubious to insist that the writer of Peter was suggesting Jesus was God in the above passage. Two indivisuals are spoken of only one of which is being revered to as God. The most one can say is the expression is somewhat ambiguous and we need to look to the wider context of Peter's writing to for a definitive conclusion. An investiagtion which clearly points two individuals, Jesus being different from YHWH God

[JehovahsWitness]

DOES THE FACT THAT JESUS WAS PROPHECIED A THEOPHORIC NAME MEAN HE MUST HAVE BEEN EQUAL TO ALMIGHTY GOD YHWH THE FATHER?

JEREMIAH 23:6 - NWT

“Look! The days are coming,” declares Jehovah, “when I will raise up to David a righteous sprout.*+ And a king will reign+ and show insight and uphold justice and righteousness in the land.+ 6 In his days Judah will be saved,+ and Israel will reside in security.+ And this is the name by which he will be called: Jehovah Is Our Righteousness.”+

In bible times theophoric names were very common and did not mean the bearer was Almighty God himself.

THEOPHORIC (from Greek: θεόφορος, theophoros, literally "bearing or carrying a god") embeds the word equivalent of 'god' or God's name in a person's name, reflecting something about the character of the person so named in relation to that deity

EL-ijah - my GOD is Jah
Gabri-EL - Mighty man of GOD
EL-isha - GOD Is Salvation
Dani-EL - My Judge Is GOD
Samu-EL - Name of GOD
Jo-EL - Jehovah Is GOD

Note the following commentary

"The Israelite called Jehozadak, whose name means “Jehovah Declared Righteous” or “Jehovah Is Righteous,” was not Jehovah himself. (1 Chron. 6:14, 15) Jeremiah 33:16 tells us that even Jerusalem was to be called “Jehovah Is Our Righteousness,” but does that mean that Jerusalem was Jehovah himself? No! The name of the last reigning king of Jerusalem was Zedekiah, and that name means “The Righteousness of Jah.” " - Watchtower September 1, 1979 p. 26 par 9

RELATED POSTS

Emmanuel : Does Jesus theophoric name make him equal to Almighty God?
viewtopic.php?p=1112508#p1112508

[Emanuel] Did God need to be literally on earth in bodily form in order to be "with" his people?
viewtopic.php?p=1112524#p1112524

Does Jesus theophoric name "Jehovah Is Our Righteousness" him equal to Almighty God?[Jeremiah 23:6]
viewtopic.php?p=1115135#p1115135

Why is Jesus called THE WORD [logos]?
viewtopic.php?p=1114597#p1114597

Is THE WORD a figure of speech?
viewtopic.php?p=1018169#p1018169

In what sense is Jesus "The last Adam:?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p959850

Is JESUS MICHAEL the archangel?
viewtopic.php?p=780486#p780486

[Difflugia]

I did address this point.

Insufficiently, it seems. Perhaps you didn't see my recent comment and your claim is still merely shortsighted.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to boatsnguitars in post #341]

"The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.'" (Psalm 53:1)

I've flagged your post. You're literally calling me a fool. Rude.

Matthew 5:22
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.

See you in Hell.

Are you a brother or sister of Christ? If not there is no judgement. Plus those were not OWH's words, those words came from the Bible, if you don't like what is written there then don't read it.
I highly doubt OWH is angry with you either. Most likely they feel pity for those that say in their heart, 'there is no God'.

I do find it perplexing when an atheist tries to use the Bible in their defense though and then goes further to condemn someone to fiery hell. A place they don't believe exists and neither does the person they are condemning.

[MissKate13]

When Jesus says in John 14:28 that “the Father is greater than I.” Is Jesus saying he is NOT co-equal with God in essence (nature)?

This is a question I would ask Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Unitarians.

The term “greater” in both English and Greek can have two possible meanings. It can mean better in essence, as well as position and rank, or it can mean one who holds a higher office or status.

I can say I’m greater than my dog both in essence (nature) as well as position and rank.

I can say the President of the USA is greater than I. He hold a higher office or status than I do. However, we are co-equal in essence. We are fully human in nature.

Did Jesus say that God was superior to him in essence (nature)? When he spoke the words “The Father is greater than I,” did he speak them due to the Father’s status in the heaven, or did he speak them from the status of his human position as a servant?

We must look at the context to determine what Jesus meant by “the Father is greater than I.” John has a lot to say in previous thirteen chapters, but the immediate context of chapter 14 will help us understand.

12 “Truly, truly, I tell you, whoever believes in Me will also do the works that I am doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13 And I will do whatever you ask in My name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If you ask Me for anything in My name, I will do it.” (John 14:12-14)

By “greater,” does Jesus mean believers would do better or more superior works than he did? Or did He mean they would do a greater number of works than he did? Jesus is speaking of quantity here not quality. Believers would collectively perform more miracles than Jesus performed. And why is that?

Jesus gives the answer: because I am going to the Father, and ANYTHING YOU ASK ME FOR IN MY NAME, I WILL DO IT.” Jesus did not say the Father will do it. He says, “I will do it. Why? So the Father will be glorified in the Son.

Jesus says, “IF YOU ASK ME…” He is making himself the direct object of prayer, which would be blasphemy if he were a mere creature. Jesus is saying he hears all believers prayers and answers them, which tells us he has the Omni attributes of God. He is omnipotent. Only an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God can make the promise, “I WILL DO IT.”

Continuing with the context…

23 Jesus replied, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word. My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.” (John 14:23)

Jesus is claiming here to be present with all believers along with the Father. He is just as omnipresent as the Father is. Therefore, he is the same in essence/nature as the Father. He is claiming to be God.

When Jesus says, “the Father is greater than I,” he cannot be saying the Father is greater in essence.

So in what sense is the Father greater than Jesus? What does John say in 17:5?

“And now, Father, glorify Me in Your presence with the glory I had with You before the world existed. (John 17:5)

Jesus is saying he had the very same glory the Father had before creation. We know he set aside his glory when he came to earth (Php. 2:7).

Jesus tells his disciples in 14:28 to not be sad or afraid. He tells them to rejoice that he’s going back to the Father. Jesus is saying that if he remains on the earth, the Father will be greater than I in terms of glory and status. We know from 17:5 that Jesus set aside the glory he possessed before creation. Jesus wants his disciples to rejoice because once he ascends to heaven, no longer will the Father be greater than he while on earth. He will once again have the glory he once had.

PS. I pray my post will bring answers from the hearts of those who respond and not the words of a Watchtower cut & paste. I would love a ONE TO ONE discussion as opposed to a ONE to an ORGANIATION’S words. Heck, I can google those.

[MissKate13]

[Replying to Difflugia in post #361]

Thank you Difflugia for your most excellent post! I appreciate your explanation of the Greek grammar. Thanks to you, I now understand the Sharp’s rule. I pray you stick around. You are a great asset to this thread, and I believe I can learn much from you.

Be blessed,

MissKate13

[William]

[Replying to MissKate13 in post #367]

When Jesus says in John 14:28 that “the Father is greater than I.” Is Jesus saying he is NOT co-equal with God in essence (nature)?

No. Jesus is saying that The Father is older than The Son - The Father has more data in which to work from. The Son is still in the process of learning that data.
In essence, like any son, Jesus is accepting his role in having a beginning...in being the product of a father - in essence "like" the father - only it is not a 'physical' thing but a 'spiritual' thing.

The worship of physical things is forbidden - even if those things take shape in our minds, in the sense of becoming 'spiritually 'physical', in the sense of mind images and one's belief in the reality those images...

[MissKate13]

[Replying to MissKate13 in post #367]

When Jesus says in John 14:28 that “the Father is greater than I.” Is Jesus saying he is NOT co-equal with God in essence (nature)?

No. Jesus is saying that The Father is older than The Son - The Father has more data in which to work from. The Son is still in the process of learning that data.
In essence, like any son, Jesus is accepting his role in having a beginning...in being the product of a father - in essence "like" the father - only it is not a 'physical' thing but a 'spiritual' thing.

The worship of physical things is forbidden - even if those things take shape in our minds, in the sense of becoming 'spiritually 'physical', in the sense of mind images and one's belief in the reality those images...

Thank you for your response.

Where do you get the idea that Jesus is saying the Father is older than the Son? Can you provide Scripture which says this?

What do you mean by Jesus had a beginning? Are you referring to his human birth? If you are referring to his pre-existence, that’s a problem because in John 17:5, Jesus says, “ 5 And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” The Scriptures do not state that Jesus had a beginning. We know he existed before the world was created. Nowhere in Scripture do they talk of a time prior to that.

The Scriptures do not tell us that while Jesus was in physical form that he did not have the same essence/nature of the Father. In fact, they tell us the opposite. “
For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;” (Colossians 2:9). The Father and the Son share the same attributes.