By what name are we saved...Jehovah or Jesus?

[TalonKarrde_X]

Falsely, to the JW's Jesus is not God. Before he lived on earth, he was Michael, the archangel. Jehovah made the universe through him. On earth he was a man who lives a perfect life. After dying ona stake (not a cross) he was resurrected as a spirit, his body was destroyed. Jesus is not coming again, he "returned" invisibly in 1914 in spirit.

This part up to here is correct. And you are to be commended for getting this much right, as most people get nothing right.

Very soon, he and his angels will destroy all non-JW.

Look here folks. There is no grace or mercy in what the JW's believe. The only way to be saved is to be baptised a JW. Most followers must earn everlasting life on earth by "door-to-door" worl. Salvation in heaven is limited,......to 144,000 "anointed ones".

This part is either wrong, or too twisted and confused to give a proper understanding. You can disagree, and still give a fair report.
Think about it for a minute. If JW's believe that 'the only way to be saved is to be baptised a JW', then engaging in the preaching work would show them to have the highest possible care and concern for their fellow man. And, if not, then they are showing themselves to be selfless and loving for continuing in the work Jesus commissioned his disciples to do (Mat 7:1-2).

[Diggindeeper]

This part up to here is correct. And you are to be commended for getting this much right, as most people get nothing right.

This part is either wrong, or too twisted and confused to give a proper understanding. You can disagree, and still give a fair report.
Think about it for a minute. If JW's believe that 'the only way to be saved is to be baptised a JW', then engaging in the preaching work would show them to have the highest possible care and concern for their fellow man. And, if not, then they are showing themselves to be selfless and loving for continuing in the work Jesus commissioned his disciples to do (Mat 7:1-2).

You know, I cannot in honest conscience defend Jehovah's Witnesses. I am confused that you both refute them, but in the next breath...defend their beliefs! You are either for them or against them.

I am totally against their false teachings. And they ARE false teachings.

[guestman]

"Guestman", I've never been able to understand this interpretation. Everyone (including Jehovah's Witnesses) realize there's only one God (Isaiah43:10 & 45:5). So in what possible reality could John have intended, "Jesus was a false god"?

Do you perceive anything false about Jesus? If He was "false", then He must also have been a liar, hypocrite, sinner, and all other sorts of falsities, mustn't He?

Also --- Jesus accepted worship; He Himself said "GOD ONLY shall you worship" (Matt4:10). Yet time after time Jesus accepted worship, and did not rebuke those who worshiped Him (the Disciples did rebuke those who bowed to them!) --- if Jesus was not THE God, then He was a blasphemer.

I mean no offense --- I'd really like to know how you rationalize these things.

As long as you accept the trinity, this "interpretation" will evade you. Is there not a considerable difference between "a man" and "the man". One generalizes, the other specific. The definite article "the" specifies a particular person, whereas the indefinite article "a" specifies no one for certain. For example, why is Herod called "a god" at Acts 12:22 in the King James Bible when the Greek word theos is used here ? Or of the apostle Paul that is called "a god" at Acts 28:6 in the King James Bible even though the Greek word theos is here ?

Within the confines of John 1:1, 2, when the apostle John wrote these words down, he wanted to be sure that there was not a misunderstanding regarding who "the Word" is. Even concerning "the Word", he used the definite article ho in all three instances. Why ? To establish that he alone is "the Word", that there is only one person that fits this description. Is Jesus "the Word" or "a word" ? Likewise of "the God", with the definite article ton, that establishes that there is only one person who is "the God", and it is not Jesus, who is distinguished as "a god".

In addition, the Bible must harmonize, which it does not if the trinity is accepted. Jesus often called himself "God's son"(Matt 27:43; John 10:36), "the only-begotten Son of God"(John 3:16, 18), and "Son of God"(John 5:25). Yet, this is thrown out as evidence of who he really is, but the "orthodox" teaching by the churches that Jesus is God takes precedence over all that Jesus and his apostles said or wrote confirming his submission to God.(John 8:28, 29; 14:28; 1 Cor 3:23; 11:3)

If Jesus is God, then who is the "prophet" that Jehovah sent, as seen at Deuteronomy 18:15 ?(see Acts 3:19-23) If Jesus is God, then how can Malachi 3:1 be explained, whereby it says: "Look! I am sending my messenger, and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord, whom you people are seeking, and the messenger of the covenant in whom you are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,” Jehovah of armies has said." ? Who is the one called "the messenger of the covenant" that Jehovah sent forth ?

Most do not want to know what the truth is, just as the Jews in Jesus day had him impaled though he had all the credentials that overwhelmingly showed him as the "prophet from your own midst, from your brothers...is what Jehovah will raise up for you."(Deut 18:15)

Most do not want the "status quo" to change regarding their religious beliefs, even in the face of mounting evidence ? They do not want to have their "world" altered, to ' rock their boat'. These ones do not follow Proverbs 2:4, which says that a person must "keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures you keep searching for it, in that case you will understand the fear of Jehovah, and you will find the very knowledge of God."

If you had your glasses on, you could readily see that at Matthew 4:10, Jesus was not speaking of himself, but rather, quoting from Deuteronomy 5:9 and 10:20, that "it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone (not to me) you must render sacred service.’” Again, a ploy to distort what the Bible really teaches. In the near future, the trinity doctrine, along with all false religion will be a thing of the past when Jehovah God brings down Babylon the Great, being "completely be burned with fire."(Rev 18:8)

[amazzin]

I highly recommend you tone it down with the rhetoric guestman. Remember you are a guest here and this is a Christian forum - your false Cultic belief has it's limits here.

As long as you accept the trinity, this "interpretation" will evade you. Is there not a considerable difference between "a man" and "the man". One generalizes, the other specific. The definite article "the" specifies a particular person, whereas the indefinite article "a" specifies no one for certain. For example, why is Herod called "a god" at Acts 12:22 in the King James Bible when the Greek word theos is used here ? Or of the apostle Paul that is called "a god" at Acts 28:6 in the King James Bible even though the Greek word theos is here ?

Within the confines of John 1:1, 2, when the apostle John wrote these words down, he wanted to be sure that there was not a misunderstanding regarding who "the Word" is. Even concerning "the Word", he used the definite article ho in all three instances. Why ? To establish that he alone is "the Word", that there is only one person that fits this description. Is Jesus "the Word" or "a word" ? Likewise of "the God", with the definite article ton, that establishes that there is only one person who is "the God", and it is not Jesus, who is distinguished as "a god".

In addition, the Bible must harmonize, which it does not if the trinity is accepted. Jesus often called himself "God's son"(Matt 27:43; John 10:36), "the only-begotten Son of God"(John 3:16, 18), and "Son of God"(John 5:25). Yet, this is thrown out as evidence of who he really is, but the "orthodox" teaching by the churches that Jesus is God takes precedence over all that Jesus and his apostles said or wrote confirming his submission to God.(John 8:28, 29; 14:28; 1 Cor 3:23; 11:3)

If Jesus is God, then who is the "prophet" that Jehovah sent, as seen at Deuteronomy 18:15 ?(see Acts 3:19-23) If Jesus is God, then how can Malachi 3:1 be explained, whereby it says: "Look! I am sending my messenger, and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord, whom you people are seeking, and the messenger of the covenant in whom you are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,” Jehovah of armies has said." ? Who is the one called "the messenger of the covenant" that Jehovah sent forth ?

Most do not want to know what the truth is, just as the Jews in Jesus day had him impaled though he had all the credentials that overwhelmingly showed him as the "prophet from your own midst, from your brothers...is what Jehovah will raise up for you."(Deut 18:15)

Most do not want the "status quo" to change regarding their religious beliefs, even in the face of mounting evidence ? They do not want to have their "world" altered, to ' rock their boat'. These ones do not follow Proverbs 2:4, which says that a person must "keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures you keep searching for it, in that case you will understand the fear of Jehovah, and you will find the very knowledge of God."

If you had your glasses on, you could readily see that at Matthew 4:10, Jesus was not speaking of himself, but rather, quoting from Deuteronomy 5:9 and 10:20, that "it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone (not to me) you must render sacred service.’” Again, a ploy to distort what the Bible really teaches. In the near future, the trinity doctrine, along with all false religion will be a thing of the past when Jehovah God brings down Babylon the Great, being "completely be burned with fire."(Rev 18:8)

[Gadgeteer]

As long as you accept the trinity, this "interpretation" will evade you.

"Guestman" --- why are you here? Let's presume that you want to know the truth; that you are open to Scripture, real Scripture, provable from credible historical documentation as "actual and not altered". Let's presume that you want to follow Jesus on His terms, and are willing to recognize mistakes in any doctrine you've brought here with you. Is it okay if I presume that about you?

When you were smaller --- did you ever play with the cardboard tube that comes in paper-towel rolls? Remember how fun it was to look through one and pretend you were on a pirate ship, or a famous astronomer, looking through a telescope? How much to the side can you see when looking through one of those tubes? Pretty much nothing. Only what you point the tube at. What if you're still playing with one of those tubes --- but you are pointing it at the New World Translation and other Watchtower publications, and are unwilling to pull the tube away and look at the things others are showing you? Neither you nor I should be afraid of the truth. If the stuff we're saying isn't true, then SHOW us --- but you're just not interacting with what we say.

For example --- what is your answer to Revelation1, where Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega, and then Revelation 22 where JESUS is the Alpha and Omega? What about Titus2:13 and 2Pet1:1, where are the words "our God and Savior Jesus"? What about Hebrews1:8, where God calls the Son "God"?

Is there not a considerable difference between "a man" and "the man". One generalizes, the other specific. The definite article "the" specifies a particular person, whereas the indefinite article "a" specifies no one for certain.

You're still arguing for "Jesus is a false god". On what basis is this what John meant? There is no other God, and Jesus was not a false anything.

For example, why is Herod called "a god" at Acts 12:22 in the King James Bible when the Greek word theos is used here ? Or of the apostle Paul that is called "a god" at Acts 28:6 in the King James Bible even though the Greek word theos is here ?

Exactly who were calling Herod "God"? The people; certainly no one Christian. Same with Paul --- they saw him survive a deadly snake bite --- so therefore they THOUGHT he was a god. There's a universe of difference between godless men calling someone "a god", and John the Apostle calling Jesus a "false god"...

Within the confines of John 1:1, 2, when the apostle John wrote these words down, he wanted to be sure that there was not a misunderstanding regarding who "the Word" is. Even concerning "the Word", he used the definite article ho in all three instances. Why ? To establish that he alone is "the Word", that there is only one person that fits this description. Is Jesus "the Word" or "a word" ? Likewise of "the God", with the definite article ton, that establishes that there is only one person who is "the God", and it is not Jesus, who is distinguished as "a god".

Plenty of other passages prove Jesus was Divine. We've also discussed "testimony of the witnesses"; you and I are two thousand years out from Jesus being alive; but we have a record of the witnesses, who plainly said "Blasphemy! You're calling Yourself 'GOD'!"

In addition, the Bible must harmonize, which it does not if the trinity is accepted. Jesus often called himself "God's son"(Matt 27:43; John 10:36), "the only-begotten Son of God"(John 3:16, 18), and "Son of God"(John 5:25). Yet, this is thrown out as evidence of who he really is, but the "orthodox" teaching by the churches that Jesus is God takes precedence over all that Jesus and his apostles said or wrote confirming his submission to God.(John 8:28, 29; 14:28; 1 Cor 3:23; 11:3)

Why do you have a problem with Jesus being both Son of God, and fully Godhead (as Col2:9 really says, which your NWT has altered into "the purpose of God").

If Jesus is God, then who is the "prophet" that Jehovah sent, as seen at Deuteronomy 18:15 ?(see Acts 3:19-23) If Jesus is God, then how can Malachi 3:1 be explained, whereby it says: "Look! I am sending my messenger, and he must clear up a way before me. And suddenly there will come to His temple the [true] Lord, whom you people are seeking, and the messenger of the covenant in whom you are delighting. Look! He will certainly come,” Jehovah of armies has said." ? Who is the one called "the messenger of the covenant" that Jehovah sent forth ?

Who raised Jesus from the Dead? The Father, or Jesus Himself? Both.

Most do not want to know what the truth is, just as the Jews in Jesus day had him impaled though he had all the credentials that overwhelmingly showed him as the "prophet from your own midst, from your brothers...is what Jehovah will raise up for you."(Deut 18:15)

When you say "most do not want to know the truth" --- do you include yourself in the consideration? Are you "closed" to something someone can show you from Scripture (as I said above, using the cardboard tube) --- or are you willing to accept your own fallibility and consider that Scripture could say something different from what you've been taught?

Most do not want the "status quo" to change regarding their religious beliefs, even in the face of mounting evidence ? They do not want to have their "world" altered, to ' rock their boat'. These ones do not follow Proverbs 2:4, which says that a person must "keep seeking for it as for silver, and as for hid treasures you keep searching for it, in that case you will understand the fear of Jehovah, and you will find the very knowledge of God."

Unless you have credible answers to the verses that have been cited to you, you will respectfully have to include yourself in "not-wanting-to-change".

If you had your glasses on, you could readily see that at Matthew 4:10, Jesus was not speaking of himself, but rather, quoting from Deuteronomy 5:9 and 10:20, that "it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone (not to me) you must render sacred service.’” Again, a ploy to distort what the Bible really teaches. In the near future, the trinity doctrine, along with all false religion will be a thing of the past when Jehovah God brings down Babylon the Great, being "completely be burned with fire."(Rev 18:8)

[/quote]That is what He said, "only GOD can be worshiped". Shall I quote all the places where Jesus accepted worship, and did not rebuke anyone who worshiped Him?

Why did Jesus do that?


"Guestman", we can give you "benefit of a doubt", and presume you are a Truth-Seeker, and have a heart that longs to follow Jesus. The true Jesus, on His terms. I imagine you might be offended at words like "rhetoric"; but take your last paragraph quoted just above --- without Scriptural support calling us "Babylon the Great" and saying "we'll be burned with fire", is rhetoric. I'd like you to explain why Jesus accepted worship, a severe blasphemy unless He really was God. And the verses cited above, with questions like "who was the Alpha and Omega --- Jehovah, or Jesus?"

S'allright?

:-)

[guestman]

I highly recommend you tone it down with the rhetoric guestman. Remember you are a guest here and this is a Christian forum - your false Cultic belief has it's limits here.

I will always try to be tactful, yet direct. I am no way trying to be disrespectful. I was sent to the Areopagus due to what I have presented from the Bible. Please allow me to continue discussions here, though I will not "water down the truth", just as Jesus did not and was eventually murdered by the Jews.(1 Thess 2:14, 15)

[TalonKarrde_X]

I am confused that you both refute them, but in the next breath...defend their beliefs!

Actually, I didn't do either of those things, lol.

[Diggindeeper]

This part up to here is correct. And you are to be commended for getting this much right, as most people get nothing right.

This part is either wrong, or too twisted and confused to give a proper understanding. You can disagree, and still give a fair report.
Think about it for a minute. If JW's believe that 'the only way to be saved is to be baptised a JW', then engaging in the preaching work would show them to have the highest possible care and concern for their fellow man. And, if not, then they are showing themselves to be selfless and loving for continuing in the work Jesus commissioned his disciples to do (Mat 7:1-2).

Talongarrd, this is your post (#76). You defend their 'continuing preaching'. But, the fact is, they are PEACHING false doctrines contrary to the Bible. They present a false 'Jesus' (a different 'Jesus') who is merely 'a god', another prophet among us. They preach that only 144,000 will be worthy to make it to heaven, they deny hell and they preach that Jesus returned 'invisibly' in 1914! (Did he?)

No, I cannot 'defend' their works. And if they are going door to door preaching things contrary to scriptures, how can that be commendable???

[markedward]

I don't think he's defending JW. He's simply clarifying what it is they believe and do. In an extreme example, it would be like, 'Jews are wrong because they don't believe in Jesus and they eat babies.'* Well, the first part might be right, but the second part is a wildly wrong misrepresentation; so if a Christian steps in and says 'Jews don't eat babies', the Christian isn't defending Judaism, he's simply clarifying what it is they believe and do. If we're saying 'Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong', it doesn't do us any good to argue against something they don't actually believe or do, right?

*Believe it or not, as ridiculous as it sounds in the paragraph above, this is an actual Straw Man accusation made against Jews called blood libel, going as far back as the first century AD, and exploding during the European Medieval era.

[TalonKarrde_X]

Yeah, I can see how you might look at it that way. However, my intention was to call out the other two posters who were being quite judgmental. Jesus taught that we should not judge others (Mat 7:1-2). We simply don't possess the faculties necessary to do so righteously (consider Isa 11:3-4). If we do judge, we invariable do so unrighteously; and if we judge unrighteously, we condemn ourselves.

Judging others is decidedly different from disagreeing, or teaching, or explaining, or discussing. Those things we should do. But, if the other person views things differently, we should try to not give in to our sinful human weakness of wanting to condemn that person.

But, the fact is, they are PREACHING false doctrines contrary to the Bible. They present a false 'Jesus' (a different 'Jesus') who is merely 'a god', another prophet among us. They preach that only 144,000 will be worthy to make it to heaven, they deny hell and they preach that Jesus returned 'invisibly' in 1914! (Did he?)

No, I cannot 'defend' their works. And if they are going door to door preaching things contrary to scriptures, how can that be commendable???

What I notice to be most striking about your comment is, it is purely subjective. Every point you make here, is based on your own personal view of the meaning of the Bible. But, then, after presenting your subjective views, you then draw an objectively based conclusion. Objective truth cannot be obtained from subjective opinion.

Yes, they do present Jesus differently that you view him, but this is not contrary to the Bible; it is contrary to your view. Now, if they said, 'Don't read the Bible, it won't give you the truth about Jesus. Here, read this other book', then you'd have a point. But this is not the case. They stick to using the Bible, and show from the Bible, why they view things the way they do.

Yes, they do say that 144,000 have the hope of a heavenly resurrection, and they show why they think so from the Bible. They would also explain why they don't think that hell means what the churches teach it to mean or how they derive the year 1914, from the Bible. And, as Christians, they follow the command from Jesus to preach.

So, how are their actions commendable? They are not hypocrites. They stick to what they believe, and they live it. They do the hard things because those are a part of what they believe is right. Ezekiel 3:4-7, Romans 2:13-15.

[TalonKarrde_X]

I don't think he's defending JW. He's simply clarifying what it is they believe and do.

Now, are you defending me, or simply trying to clarify what I meant?

[Diggindeeper]

Yeah, I can see how you might look at it that way. However, my intention was to call out the other two posters who were being quite judgmental. Jesus taught that we should not judge others (Mat 7:1-2). We simply don't possess the faculties necessary to do so righteously (consider Isa 11:3-4). If we do judge, we invariable do so unrighteously; and if we judge unrighteously, we condemn ourselves.

Judging others is decidedly different from disagreeing, or teaching, or explaining, or discussing. Those things we should do. But, if the other person views things differently, we should try to not give in to our sinful human weakness of wanting to condemn that person.

What I notice to be most striking about your comment is, it is purely subjective. Every point you make here, is based on your own personal view of the meaning of the Bible. But, then, after presenting your subjective views, you then draw an objectively based conclusion. Objective truth cannot be obtained from subjective opinion.

Yes, they do present Jesus differently that you view him, but this is not contrary to the Bible; it is contrary to your view. Now, if they said, 'Don't read the Bible, it won't give you the truth about Jesus. Here, read this other book', then you'd have a point. But this is not the case. They stick to using the Bible, and show from the Bible, why they view things the way they do.

Yes, they do say that 144,000 have the hope of a heavenly resurrection, and they show why they think so from the Bible. They would also explain why they don't think that hell means what the churches teach it to mean or how they derive the year 1914, from the Bible. And, as Christians, they follow the command from Jesus to preach.

So, how are their actions commendable? They are not hypocrites. They stick to what they believe, and they live it. They do the hard things because those are a part of what they believe is right. Ezekiel 3:4-7, Romans 2:13-15.

The 'Bible' translation they use is a terrible translation that they use, not acceptable at all in what is orthodox Protestant theology. So they do not teach RIGHTLY by using the Bible.

Are you Jehovah Witness??? If so, listen...it IS a cult. Period. That is not judging. That is proven fact. And stop dancing around the issues...like DID JESUS RETURN INVISIBLY IN 1914???? That is absolutely not scriptural. There is nothing in the scriptures (accepted scriptures) that support that. And that is only one aspect of their false teachings.

But then, if you are a Jehovah Witness/Watchtower adherent, naturally you would say I am judging you. To that, I answer that we are called to judge/try/ discern false teachings/ false teachers!

[TalonKarrde_X]

The 'Bible' translation they use is a terrible translation that they use, not acceptable at all in what is orthodox Protestant theology. So they do not teach RIGHTLY by using the Bible.

Yeah, but they only completed that translation in the '50s. They were around for 70 or 80 years before that. So, this is not really a solid point to argue on. Were they teaching rightly before that, then?

not acceptable at all in what is orthodox Protestant theology.

And of course, Jesus always emphasized that we should stick to the traditions of men...

Are you Jehovah Witness??? If so, listen...it IS a cult. Period. That is not judging.

Yes, that is exactly what judging means.

And stop dancing around the issues...like DID JESUS RETURN INVISIBLY IN 1914???? That is absolutely not scriptural. There is nothing in the scriptures (accepted scriptures) that support that. And that is only one aspect of their false teachings.

We have very different ideas on what the issues are. I'm more concerned with sound scriptural spiritual attitudes. As disciples of Christ we should work to manifest the fruits of God's spirit (Gal 5:16-24). Do you know exactly what every prophecy from the Bible means? Can you correctly interpret all 31000 verses of the Bible? Probably not. But what did Jesus say was the most important thing? Love (Mat 22:36-39, Gal 5:22, 1 Cor 13:4-7).
Why did Jesus condemn the Pharisees, etc.? It was not because they did not have a perfect understanding of the scriptures (compare Acts 1:6-7). It was because they hypocritically loaded the people with their own commands that they themselves did not do (Mat 23:3), and they judged and condemned anyone who went against what they said (John 7:32,49, Mat 22:15-18).

But then, if you are a Jehovah Witness/Watchtower adherent, naturally you would say I am judging you.

No, I would try not to say that. Because that would be judging, lol.

To that, I answer that we are called to judge/try/ discern false teachings/ false teachers!

Scripture please.

[guestman]

"Guestman" --- why are you here? Let's presume that you want to know the truth; that you are open to Scripture, real Scripture, provable from credible historical documentation as "actual and not altered". Let's presume that you want to follow Jesus on His terms, and are willing to recognize mistakes in any doctrine you've brought here with you. Is it okay if I presume that about you?

When you were smaller --- did you ever play with the cardboard tube that comes in paper-towel rolls? Remember how fun it was to look through one and pretend you were on a pirate ship, or a famous astronomer, looking through a telescope? How much to the side can you see when looking through one of those tubes? Pretty much nothing. Only what you point the tube at. What if you're still playing with one of those tubes --- but you are pointing it at the New World Translation and other Watchtower publications, and are unwilling to pull the tube away and look at the things others are showing you? Neither you nor I should be afraid of the truth. If the stuff we're saying isn't true, then SHOW us --- but you're just not interacting with what we say.

For example --- what is your answer to Revelation1, where Jehovah is the Alpha and Omega, and then Revelation 22 where JESUS is the Alpha and Omega? What about Titus2:13 and 2Pet1:1, where are the words "our God and Savior Jesus"? What about Hebrews1:8, where God calls the Son "God"? You're still arguing for "Jesus is a false god". On what basis is this what John meant? There is no other God, and Jesus was not a false anything. Exactly who were calling Herod "God"? The people; certainly no one Christian. Same with Paul --- they saw him survive a deadly snake bite --- so therefore they THOUGHT he was a god. There's a universe of difference between godless men calling someone "a god", and John the Apostle calling Jesus a "false god"...
Plenty of other passages prove Jesus was Divine. We've also discussed "testimony of the witnesses"; you and I are two thousand years out from Jesus being alive; but we have a record of the witnesses, who plainly said "Blasphemy! You're calling Yourself 'GOD'!"
Why do you have a problem with Jesus being both Son of God, and fully Godhead (as Col2:9 really says, which your NWT has altered into "the purpose of God").
Who raised Jesus from the Dead? The Father, or Jesus Himself? Both.:-)

I could ask you the same question as to why you are here. Jesus told Pilate, when asked the question "Are you a king ?", that "I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone that is on the side of the truth listens to my voice."(John 18:37)

I have already provided solid evidence that Jesus is not God but you continue to discard it. When Thomas exclaimed "My Lord and my God" at John 20:28, he was not giving worship to Jesus but was beside himself to see Jesus again after his resurrection, for by his character, the expression "doubting Thomas" came to be. Many have uttered the expression "Oh my God" when an unusual event occurred and this was certainly the case with Thomas. And whether or not Thomas may have meant this, cannot be accepted as truth, for even Peter, who was also one of the apostles made several mistakes in judgment.(Mark 14:72; Gal 2:11-15)

I will follow Jesus example, whereby Matthew, quoting from Isaiah 42:1, wrote of God saying to him: "Look! My servant whom I chose, my beloved, whom my soul approved! I will put my spirit upon him, and what justice is he will make clear to the nations. He will not wrangle, nor cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the broad ways."(Matt 12:18, 19)

Two things are noted here, (1) that Jesus is called Jehovah's "servant whom I chose, my beloved" and upon whom God "put (his) spirit upon him", and (2) that Jesus was prophetically spoken of that he would "not wrangle" with anyone, but would make ' clear what justice is to the nations '.

Hence, Jesus is not Jehovah but his "servant" just as David is called Jehovah's "servant" at Luke 1:69. Peter, when in Solomon's colonade, told the listening Jewish crowd: "The God of Abraham and of Isaac and of Jacob, the God of our forefathers, has glorified his Servant, Jesus, whom you, for your part, delivered up and disowned before Pilate’s face, when he had decided to release him."(Acts 3:13)

When the religious leaders of Jesus day had him before the Sanhedrin, they sarcastically said: "If you are the Christ, tell us".(Luke 22:67) These religious leaders were not interested all the evidence that Jesus gave, of the miracles from healing, stopping the force of winds, to raising the dead.(Matt 9:35; Mark 4:39; John 11:44) As Jesus replied: "Even if I told you, you would not believe it at all. Moreover, if I questioned you, you would not answer at all."(Luke 22:68, 69) It is no different here.

John 1:1 accurately reads, that Jesus is "a god", a deity in heaven. That is why the apostle John wrote that "no man has seen God at any time; the only-begotten god (Greek monogenes theos) who is in the bosom [position] with the Father is the one that has explained him."(John 1:18) Thus, Jesus as "the Word" is Jehovah's chief spokesperson, who was "with God" in his "bosom" in the beginning.(John 1:1, 2) How can Jesus be "with God" and at the same time be God ? He cannot !

Since we are made in "God's image", the family arrangement is patterned after Jehovah's family in heaven. We have "sons and daughters" that are not as old nor equal to us in our household. God's household of angelic sons are not as old nor equal to him, including Jesus, for he calls himself the "firstborn of all creation" at Revelation 3:14. Hence, Jesus is a creation of Jehovah God and not part of a "Godhead" that is a made up word from the word godhood to promote the trinity.

Thence, Jesus cannot be both the "Son of God and fully Godhead". This has already been explained why. Colossians 2:9 says that in Jesus Christ, "in him that all the fullness of the divine quality ("divine quality",Greek ho theotes) dwells bodily." The Emphatic Diaglott reads of ho theotes in the interlinear "of the deity", Westcott and Hort's Greek master text, The New Testament in the Original Greek, reads of ho theotes in the interlinear "of the divinity", the online interlinear Scripture4all reads of ho theotes in the interlinear "of the deity."

Did Jesus raise himself from the dead ? How extremely unreasonable to believe that a dead person can raise themselves from the dead. The apostle Peter said to the Jews that "this Jesus God resurrected, of which fact we are all witnesses."(Acts 2:32) Peter later told the Jews, that "whereas you killed the Chief Agent of life. But God raised him up from the dead, of which fact we are witnesses."(Acts 3:15) He further said to the Jews, that "let it be known to all of you and to all the people of Israel, that in the name of Jesus Christ the Naz·a·rene´, whom you impaled but whom God raised up from the dead."(Acts 4:10)

As far I am concerned, this is my last time to respond to you.

[Diggindeeper]

How come Jehovah's Witnesses always head to threads like this one, 'By what name are we saved...Jehovah or Jesus?'

Is it to try to convince us all in what you call Christiandom about how wrong we all are? To try to convince us that Jesus is only a god? And yet, you have the audacity to come here claiming that YOU are 'Christians'?

Watchtower people can't hide behind a false title. Watchtower's ever changing indoctrination is quickly discovered.