Is Jesus God

[Sojourner55]

To say that Jesus is not his Father does not denie the divinity of Christ.

To claim that those who point out what is so blatantly obvious in the scriptures, are JW's is not a nice thing to do. It's basically saying those that will not subscribe to error have to belong to a cult denomination so therefore the error is protected and the people will not oppose for fer of the stigma of being associated with a cult denomination.

If you are not a Jehovah's Witness, I apologize. But, understand that an overwhelming majority of people on this board who deny the full deity of Jesus, are JW's.

The Bible states categorically that Jesus sits at the right hand of God, not on the throne of God

Do you denie this ?

"At the right hand" is an expression that denotes a position of power and honor. It does not mean a literal throne next to God's throne.

The Bible states categorically that Jesus is the mediator between men and God. If God was dealing with us directly there would be no need for a mediator.

Do you denie this ?

When Adam sinned, he, as the representative of mankind, created a separation between God and us that can only be bridged by a sinless person taking the punishment that Adam's sin required. The problem is, no descendant of Adam can be sinless. Only God is sinless. But God can neither bleed nor die, can He? The solution: create a body He can inhabit, that can bleed and die. Enter: Jesus, God Himself, robed in humanity. God Himself is the mediator:

To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. (2 Cor 5:19)

The Bible states categorically that Jesus is our high priest before the throne of God making intercession for us.

Do you denie this ?

See above. Being the mediator is what makes Jesus our High Priest.

Now if you cannot denie these statements of who Jesus is then how do you manage to twist the scriptures in such contortions that you make Christ out to be God his Father himself.

I don't believe Jesus is the Father. Jesus is the human Son by which His Father both reveals Himself, and reconciles lost souls to Himself.

Christ means the anointed one

God is the one that does the anointing, he does not anoint himself he anoints others so as to enable them to fill positions or offices at his own discretion.

Again, God anointed the One Who is His Redeemer--His incarnation of Himself in the flesh. Jesus existed as God in the beginning, and is the same as He was then, except He robed Himself in humanity. Jesus is separate and distinct from God only in the sense of His incarnation--and the human traits and characteristics that are part of that.

[Sojourner55]

Traveler, your misconception of Jesus is based on your misunderstanding of what the Scriptures declare about Him. Jesus existed as God from eternity, as His Logos--the expression of His thought, mind, will and purpose. And Jesus, the man is the incarnation of the Logos in human form. Consider this: the words you are reading at this moment are my personal thoughts. They should be invisible, unknown and unknowable to you. How is it then, that you see and understand them? Because I made them known to you by my "logos," the expression and communication of my mind in a form you can see and understand. Jesus is the divine Logos of God.

God is invisible Spirit. We would not see, hear, or understand Him unless He communicated Himself in a way perceptible to His creatures. Anytime either the angels or man has ever seen or heard God, it was His Logos that they saw and heard. It was the Logos that walked in the garden of Eden, from Whose face Cain bewailed his banishment, and it was the Logos who was seen by those in the OT who are recorded as having seen God. John clearly states in His Gospel, that no man has ever seen God. Yet Abraham, Jacob, and Moses claim that they did. How do we reconcile these without a contradiction? One cannot see what is invisible, but one can see that which represents it. And Jesus represents God.

That's why He said, "He that has seen me, has seen the Father." He is the "Word" that reveals the "Thought." See it? That's also why Paul stated that everything God is, all His fullness deity and being, is manifest in Jesus the man:
For in Him all the fulness of Deity dwells in bodily form. (Col 2:9)

The words you type into these threads are your thoughts and feelings about what is in your mind, and what you believe. We can see those things because you expressed them by your logos. John used that Greek expression specifically to convey to his readers the relationship between Jesus and God, but the concept is lost on so many people. Jesus is and always has been God's manifestation, communication, and revelation of Himself. The difference is, unlike the temporary OT appearances, Jesus is the permanent, human incarnation of God. Consider that concept in these passages:

No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him. (John 1:18)

John is saying here, that the only way we can see God is in the physical form of Jesus--the Word of God who proceeded forth from God.

Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Col 1:15-17)
Paul is telling us that God is invisible, but we can see His exact image in Jesus. Note that He is also stating that all things were created by Jesus, for Jesus. That's because Jesus is the very Word that went forth from God to call the universe--and everything in it--into existence, as we see in Genesis, where we see creative acts proceeded by God saying, "let there be."

Jesus presented Himself to the Jews as the very One who had spoken to Abraham. He plainly stated that Abraham had rejoiced to see His appearing to him. And Jesus could not have been any clearer in expressing that truth when He said, "before Abraham was, I AM"

Not only is He stating that He existed before Abraham was born, He was clearly calling Himself the same thing He called Himself when Moses asked for His name:

And God said unto Moses, I AM THAT I AM: and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, I AM hath sent me unto you.
And God said moreover unto Moses, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, The LORD God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you: this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations. (Exo 3:4-3)

In fact, Jesus--speaking as the Almighty God dwelling within Him, declared that He would raise His human body from the dead:
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. (John 2:19)


Jesus could say that only as God Himself.

[David Taylor]

To say that Jesus is not his Father does not denie the divinity of Christ.

You're however, are walking down the path, and jumping from A, to C; and skipping over B.

To shay that Jesus is God, does not require Onenessism, nor does it require one to believe that Jesus is the Father.

The historic Trinity view of Christianity does not believe that Jesus is the Father; it believes that Jesus and the Father are both God, yet each retains their own individualism within the Trinity.

YHWH, the eternal uncreated, Creator God has manifested Himself in three different subject-object distinctions; yet remaining one single, united, unconflicting God; and there is no other.

That the scritpures tell us there is one God and there is no other, and there is one Creator and there is no other, and that there is one God we worship and no other; and those scriptures identify Him as being YHWH; and then those same scriptures reveal to us that the Father is YHWH, the Son is YHWH, and the H.S. is YHWH; we cannot come to any rational tendable conclusion other than the historic Christian faith of God being a Trinity of three-in-one with the Godhead; each all equally God; and equally harmonious and perfect, and righteous, and eternal in unity; --yet also etnerally distinct one from another.

I agree with you that the Oneness view is not a tendably biblical viewpoint; Jesus is not the Father; however, neither is the view that strips Jesus from being YHWH; and attempts to turn Jesus into another created being who is not YHWH; something Paul and the NT writers never attempted to do; but rather, boldly stated Jesus as being YHWH, the great I AM.

[guestman]

You asked for our input. Here is mine. Jesus Christ is God. The Bible is clear on that.

Acts 20:28 – “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood”

2 Peter 1:1 – “Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ."


John 10:29-33 – “My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand. I and the Father are one.” Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

John 1:1-3 – “In the beginning was the Word**, and the Word** was with God, and the Word** was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."

**Revelation 19:11-13 - "I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice he judges and wages war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on his head are many crowns. He has a name written on him that no one knows but he himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is the Word of God."

John 20:27-29 – “Then He said to Thomas, "Reach your finger here, and look at My hands; and reach your hand here, and put it into My side. Do not be unbelieving, but believing." And Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

In considering Acts 20:28, and the rendition of the King James Bible (along with the NIV), which says: "to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood", the arrangement of the Greek words should be closely noted. The online interlinear Scripture4all (based on Westcott and Hort 1881 Greek master text that is from the Codex Sinaitcus of the 4th century and not Scriverners Text of 1894 which is based on a modified Beza 1598 Textus Receptus, with Scriverners intent to artificially create a Greek text that closely matched the 1550 Textus Receptus by Robert Stephanus upon which the King James Bible is based), reads: "ten ekklesian tou theou hen periepoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou", which literally reads: "the out-called (congregation) of-the God which he-procures thru the blood of-the own (Greek haimatos tou idiou )"

At Hebrews 9:12, the apostle Paul uses these Greek words in a different arrangement concerning Jesus, saying: "oude dia haima tragos kai moschos dia tou idiou haimatos ("his own blood") eiserchomai ephapax eis ho hagios aionios lutrosis heurisko ", which literally means: "not-yet thru blood of-he-goats and of-cattle thru yet of-the own blood he-into-came on-once into the holies eonian loosening finding".(online interlinear Scripture4all ) This scripture is rendered by the New World Translation as "he (Jesus) entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place and obtained an everlasting deliverance [for us]." The King James Bible says "by his own blood "(Greek tou idiou haimatos ) here also.

Likewise, at Hebrews 13:12, Paul says of Jesus: "dio kai IEsous hina hagiazo dia tou idiou haimatos ("his own blood") ho laos exo ho pulE pascho", which is literally "thru-which and Jesus that he-should-be-holyizing (sanctify) thru the own blood the people out of-the gate emotioned."(online interlinear Scripture4all) The King James Bible reads here: "Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood (Greek "tou idiou haimatos" ), suffered without the gate."

The New World Translation reads here: "Hence Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate." Yet, at Acts 20:28, the King James Bible, along with many other Bible translations, does not follow the order of the Greek words, in order to put a trinitarian twist on them, saying that "God purchased (the congregation) with his own blood".

Hence, there is distortion by several translations or versions of the Bible to promote the trinity without regard for what is accurate, saying that God....purchased (the congregation) with his own blood" ("tou idiou haimatos") rather than what is accurately written, "blood of his own" or "haimatos tou idiou".

This leaves one with the belief that God gave "his own blood". This however, is not what Paul told the "older men" present with him, for he said "haimatos tou idiou ", meaning "blood of-the own", not "tou idiou haimatos ", meaning "the own blood ". Too, Jesus said to the Samaritan woman that "God is a Spirit".(John 4:24) How can then God be flesh and blood when Jesus said that he is a spirit ?

In The New Testament in the Original Greek, by Greek scholars Westcott and Hort, Vol., 2, London, 1881, pp. 99, 100 of the Appendix, Hort stated: “It is by no means impossible that [hui·ou´, “of the Son”] dropped out after [tou i·di´ou, “of his own”] at some very early transcription affecting all existing documents. Its insertion (hui·ou´, “of the Son") leaves the whole passage free from difficulty of any kind.”

A footnote in the Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, says of Acts 20:28: "Greisbach, and nearly all modern editors, read "Church of the Lord". The phrase ecclesia tou Kurious (rendered as "Church of the Lord") nowhere occurs in the New Testament, while ecclesia tou theou (meaning "congregation of God") occurs about ten times in Paul's epistles. There are no less than six different readings of this phrase in the MSS.,(manuscripts) which have probably arisen from a presumed difficulty in understanding it in connection with the latter part of the sentence---"purchased with his own blood." But read as it stands in the original, and it still makes good sense, without rejecting the reading of the most ancient MS.,(manuscript) and some of the oldest Pesh ittoo Syriac copies. The reader can supply the elliptical word after "own", whether it be "Son", or "Lamb", or "Sacrifice", thus, "feed the CHURCH of God, which he acquired by the BLOOD of his OWN [Son]."

Hence, Acts 20:28 properly reads: "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son]."(New World Translation)

Accepting the rendering of the King James Bible gives it a trinitarian twist, trying to tie this in with another Scripture that has been tampered with, 1 Timothy 3:16, which reads according to the King James Bible: "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

The word "God" is not within this Scripture, for it says accurately: "Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in [the] world, was received up in glory.’ "(New World Translation) The Greek word hos (meaning "he who", G3739) was used by Paul and not theos (meaning "God", G2316 and placed by Scriverners Textus Receptus here). This tampering is no different than someone trying to pass off a counterfeit $20 bill as genuine.

When words are altered or added, this is intentional corruption of scripture for the sole purpose of bolstering the trinity or other wrong doctrines, just as the addition of the words "who is in heaven" at the end of John 3:13 by such Bibles as the Catholic Douay, King James Bible, Amplified Bible, and New King James Bible, to name a few. This phrase is added to provide supposed support for the trinity doctrine ( just as the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit; and these three are one” as if these were a quotation from 1*John 5:7) and is called intentional tampering.

[Stormcrow]

When I saw Him [Christ], I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Revelation 1:17-18 (NASB)

"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. Isaiah 44:6 (NASB)

"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last. "Surely My hand founded the earth, And My right hand spread out the heavens [John 1:1-3]; When I call to them, they stand together. Isaiah 48:12-13 (NASB)

"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." Revelation 22:12-13 (NASB)

The "first and the last" of the Old Testament is the same "first and last" of the New.

[David Taylor]

When I saw Him [Christ], I fell at His feet like a dead man. And He placed His right hand on me, saying, "Do not be afraid; I am the first and the last, and the living One; and I was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of death and of Hades. Revelation 1:17-18 (NASB)

"Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: 'I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me. Isaiah 44:6 (NASB)

"Listen to Me, O Jacob, even Israel whom I called; I am He, I am the first, I am also the last. "Surely My hand founded the earth, And My right hand spread out the heavens [John 1:1-3]; When I call to them, they stand together. Isaiah 48:12-13 (NASB)

"Behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to render to every man according to what he has done. "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end." Revelation 22:12-13 (NASB)

The "first and the last" of the Old Testament is the same "first and last" of the New.

The New Testament tells us that the 'first and the last' is the 'alpha and omega'; and specifically, 'THE ALMIGHTY'.

Revelation 1:8 "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty. I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last 22:13 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last."

The Old Testament tells us that the 'first and the last' is YHWH, and there is no other God.

Isaiah 44:6 "Thus saith [YHWH] the LORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer [YHWH] the LORD of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God."

However, where all of this comes together in beautiful glory; is when one ties it all back, from YHWH the Almighty, the first and the last, the beginning and the end of which there is no other God.....one continuing on in Revelation chapter 1 finds the identity to be Jesus, the Son of Man, He who was alive, then dead, then alive forevermore.

No doubt between Isaiah and Revelation that Jesus is YHWH, the Almighty.

Revelation 1:13 "And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle. His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength. And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last: I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen

[Diggindeeper]

In considering Acts 20:28, and the rendition of the King James Bible (along with the NIV), which says: "to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood", the arrangement of the Greek words should be closely noted. The online interlinear Scripture4all (based on Westcott and Hort 1881 Greek master text that is from the Codex Sinaitcus of the 4th century and not Scriverners Text of 1894 which is based on a modified Beza 1598 Textus Receptus, with Scriverners intent to artificially create a Greek text that closely matched the 1550 Textus Receptus by Robert Stephanus upon which the King James Bible is based), reads: "ten ekklesian tou theou hen periepoiesato dia tou haimatos tou idiou", which literally reads: "the out-called (congregation) of-the God which he-procures thru the blood of-the own (Greek haimatos tou idiou )"

At Hebrews 9:12, the apostle Paul uses these Greek words in a different arrangement concerning Jesus, saying: "oude dia haima tragos kai moschos dia tou idiou haimatos ("his own blood") eiserchomai ephapax eis ho hagios aionios lutrosis heurisko ", which literally means: "not-yet thru blood of-he-goats and of-cattle thru yet of-the own blood he-into-came on-once into the holies eonian loosening finding".(online interlinear Scripture4all ) This scripture is rendered by the New World Translation as "he (Jesus) entered, no, not with the blood of goats and of young bulls, but with his own blood, once for all time into the holy place and obtained an everlasting deliverance [for us]." The King James Bible says "by his own blood "(Greek tou idiou haimatos ) here also.

Likewise, at Hebrews 13:12, Paul says of Jesus: "dio kai IEsous hina hagiazo dia tou idiou haimatos ("his own blood") ho laos exo ho pulE pascho", which is literally "thru-which and Jesus that he-should-be-holyizing (sanctify) thru the own blood the people out of-the gate emotioned."(online interlinear Scripture4all) The King James Bible reads here: "Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood (Greek "tou idiou haimatos" ), suffered without the gate."

The New World Translation reads here: "Hence Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered outside the gate." Yet, at Acts 20:28, the King James Bible, along with many other Bible translations, does not follow the order of the Greek words, in order to put a trinitarian twist on them, saying that "God purchased (the congregation) with his own blood".

Hence, there is distortion by several translations or versions of the Bible to promote the trinity without regard for what is accurate, saying that God....purchased (the congregation) with his own blood" ("tou idiou haimatos") rather than what is accurately written, "blood of his own" or "haimatos tou idiou".

This leaves one with the belief that God gave "his own blood". This however, is not what Paul told the "older men" present with him, for he said "haimatos tou idiou ", meaning "blood of-the own", not "tou idiou haimatos ", meaning "the own blood ". Too, Jesus said to the Samaritan woman that "God is a Spirit".(John 4:24) How can then God be flesh and blood when Jesus said that he is a spirit ?

In The New Testament in the Original Greek, by Greek scholars Westcott and Hort, Vol., 2, London, 1881, pp. 99, 100 of the Appendix, Hort stated: “It is by no means impossible that [hui·ou´, “of the Son”] dropped out after [tou i·di´ou, “of his own”] at some very early transcription affecting all existing documents. Its insertion (hui·ou´, “of the Son") leaves the whole passage free from difficulty of any kind.”

A footnote in the Emphatic Diaglott, by Benjamin Wilson, says of Acts 20:28: "Greisbach, and nearly all modern editors, read "Church of the Lord". The phrase ecclesia tou Kurious (rendered as "Church of the Lord") nowhere occurs in the New Testament, while ecclesia tou theou (meaning "congregation of God") occurs about ten times in Paul's epistles. There are no less than six different readings of this phrase in the MSS.,(manuscripts) which have probably arisen from a presumed difficulty in understanding it in connection with the latter part of the sentence---"purchased with his own blood." But read as it stands in the original, and it still makes good sense, without rejecting the reading of the most ancient MS.,(manuscript) and some of the oldest Pesh ittoo Syriac copies. The reader can supply the elliptical word after "own", whether it be "Son", or "Lamb", or "Sacrifice", thus, "feed the CHURCH of God, which he acquired by the BLOOD of his OWN [Son]."

Hence, Acts 20:28 properly reads: "Pay attention to yourselves and to all the flock, among which the holy spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the congregation of God, which he purchased with the blood of his own [Son]."(New World Translation)

Accepting the rendering of the King James Bible gives it a trinitarian twist, trying to tie this in with another Scripture that has been tampered with, 1 Timothy 3:16, which reads according to the King James Bible: "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory."

The word "God" is not within this Scripture, for it says accurately: "Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in [the] world, was received up in glory.’ "(New World Translation) The Greek word hos (meaning "he who", G3739) was used by Paul and not theos (meaning "God", G2316 and placed by Scriverners Textus Receptus here). This tampering is no different than someone trying to pass off a counterfeit $20 bill as genuine.

When words are altered or added, this is intentional corruption of scripture for the sole purpose of bolstering the trinity or other wrong doctrines, just as the addition of the words "who is in heaven" at the end of John 3:13 by such Bibles as the Catholic Douay, King James Bible, Amplified Bible, and New King James Bible, to name a few. This phrase is added to provide supposed support for the trinity doctrine ( just as the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy spirit; and these three are one” as if these were a quotation from 1*John 5:7) and is called intentional tampering.

Guestman, you accuse others of 'intentional tampering' and tell us this is 'intentional corruption' while using and promoting your Watchtower translated New World Translation? I don't see how you can do that with a clear conscience, knowing that it is revered only by the Jehovah's Witnesses who alone adhere to Watchtower interpretations in all doctrines.

[Dante]

In the beginning was my father, and my father was with me and my father was me.
In the beginning were you, and you were with me and you are me.
Can anyone make a sense out of it? Honestly, I can never understand the statement. I think the Muslim's perspective about the case makes more senses than Cristian's, The Father is God, Jesus is His Messenger, and the Holy Spirit is the Angel who reveal and translate the divine words into human language. Straight, simple, and crystal clear.

[guestman]

Guestman, you accuse others of 'intentional tampering' and tell us this is 'intentional corruption' while using and promoting your Watchtower translated New World Translation? I don't see how you can do that with a clear conscience, knowing that it is revered only by the Jehovah's Witnesses who alone adhere to Watchtower interpretations in all doctrines.

The New World Translation has shown repetitively to be accurate. Of the King James Bible, for example, at Philippians 1:9, it reads: "And this I pray, that your love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment." Is this accurate ? Let's see.

The Greek word for "knowledge" is gnosis. However, the apostle Paul used the Greek word epignosis, meaning not just "knowledge" but "accurate knowledge". Thus, the New World Translation reads that "this is what I continue praying, that your love may abound yet more and more with accurate knowledge and full discernment." The King James Bible fails to accurately render epignosis also at Ephesians 1:17 and Colossians 1:10, presenting it only as "knowledge".

At 1 Corinthians 10:24, the King James Bible reads: "Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth." This gives the impression that a Christian is to "seek....another's wealth". The New World Translation reads: "Let each one keep seeking, not his own [advantage], but that of the other person", thus conveying accurately what the apostle Paul was expressing.

And at Matthew 5:3, the King James Bible reads: "Blessed are the poor in spirit (literally "those who are beggars of the spirit"): for theirs is the kingdom of heaven." What does this mean ? That a person has to be "poor in spirit" to gain entrance to the "kingdom" ? This is illogical. However, the New World Translation more accurately renders it as "Happy are those conscious of their spiritual need, since the kingdom of the heavens belongs to them."

Another example is Genesis 22:18, whereby the King James Bible reads: "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice." This rendering conveys the idea that God's blessing will come automatically.

However, the Hebrew verb (uethbaraku) is in the reflexive (or self-directed action) form here, saying that the people of the nations must “bless themselves" or must make the effort to meet God's requirements in order to receive his blessings through faith in the Messianic Seed, Jesus Christ. Thence, the New World Translation reads: "And by means of your seed all nations of the earth will certainly bless themselves due to the fact that you have listened to my voice.’”

This same verb construction is used at Genesis 26:4, in which the King James Bible reads: "And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed", making it appear as if nothing is required in order to "be blessed". More accurately, it reads: "‘And I will multiply your seed like the stars of the heavens and I will give to your seed all these lands; and by means of your seed all nations of the earth will certainly bless themselves,’ "(New World Translation)

Thus, the New World Translation gives serious consideration to accurately rendering both Hebrew and Greek words, preserving verb forms so as to increase an accurate understanding of the Bible.

It takes into consideration the morphology of a sentence, as well as nuances of Hebrew and Greek words, whether it is past, present or future, whether it is in the reflexive tense, in order to accurately render what was written down, so that we the reader can gain "accurate knowledge". Jesus said in prayer to his Father, Jehovah God: "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge (Greek ginoskosin, meaning "to know absolutely") of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ."(John 17:3)

[davidtriune]

Hhhmmm...... back atcha. I've never indicated otherwise. F/S/HS are YHWH. They're not a Trinity. Trinity isn't just a descriptor for threeness of any kind when you decide for it to be; and then it's the absolute, specfic, and unmodifiable label for a doctrine when you'd you like it to be. Sorta like interposing God as three "distinctions" instead of three "persons". You play loose when you want to and it serves your purpose.

And just like in the other thread, you've avoided any semblance of even acknowledging my questions and challenges. Please answer whether God is three hupostases. Trinity (the actual specific doctrine) is untamperable and says God is three hupostases of one ousia. Exegete that from scripture.

Enough diversion. Answer the simple and direct question, please. Is God three hupostases as Trinity doctrine declares? And please answer from scripture.

PneumaPsucheSoma,
I remember having fought with you about the identities of the father and the son and the holy spirit as being soul/body/spirit awhile ago. I now regret doing that. I believe all are entitled to their own opinion concerning this topic. Please forgive me.