Some Qs about the JW view of Jesus and angels

Deeje said:

This may have added impetus to their hope that the coming of God’s kingdom was immanent, as they asked Jesus, as he was ascending to heaven, if he was going to establish his kingdom at that time? (Acts 1:6)

Click to expand...

Why would they ask if Jesus was going to establish His kingdom if they had already seen Him in His kingdom?

I think you are trying to have your cake and eat it. Either Jesus was in His Kingdom or He was not in His Kingdom and if He was not, then it is just another failed prophecy by Jesus.

danieldemol said:

Why would they ask if Jesus was going to establish His kingdom if they had already seen Him in His kingdom?

I think you are trying to have your cake and eat it. Either Jesus was in His Kingdom or He was not in His Kingdom and if He was not, then it is just another failed prophecy by Jesus.

Click to expand...

No matter what I say you will find a way to discredit it...so believe as you wish. I have answered your question as much as it is possible to answer it, biblically. If you have a more informed answer then let’s hear it.....

Deeje said:

No matter what I say you will find a way to discredit it...so believe as you wish. I have answered your question as much as it is possible to answer it, biblically. If you have a more informed answer then let’s hear it.....

Click to expand...

The more informed answer would be that it was a false prophecy. The timeframe for Jesus to establish His kingdom is passed as the people He referred to have long since died.

danieldemol said:

The more informed answer would be that it was a false prophecy. The timeframe for Jesus to establish His kingdom is passed as the people He referred to have long since died.

Click to expand...

Biblically speaking, the prophesy in Daniel places the coming of God's kingdom in the days of the final human rulers of this world.
Who are they?

Daniel interpreted a dream of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, who saw an immense image made of different metals, representing the world powers who would follow down through history with a connection to God's people. Starting with Babylon, we are taken to Medo-Persia....to Greece....to Rome...and finally to Britain who allied with the USA. (Daniel ch 2)

The present world rulers are the ones dominating the earth when God's kingdom, represented by a huge boulder, strikes the image on its feet.
Daniel 2:44 says...
"In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed. And this kingdom will not be passed on to any other people. It will crush and put an end to all these kingdoms, and it alone will stand forever".

I believe that the kingdom will come in our time.

I think you need more knowledge if you are going to pass judgment on the things that God reveals by means of his prophets.

REGARDING WHETHER THERE ARE TWO GOOD IN JEHOVAH'S WITNESS THEOLOGY

Hi Peggy.

The reason I regretted to two gods in Jehovahs witness theology is because that is what was taught to me by a Jehovahs witness in the Jehovahs witness protection of this very forum.

Below is a quote

Clear asked Pegg : John 1:1-2 in the New World Translation says "In the beginning the Word was, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god. 2 This one was in the beginning with God. In Jehovahs Witness theology, does this verse mean that Jesus as "the Word" who will, after birth, become known as Jesus) was, in some way, a god who was with the Lord God in the beginning of creation? (post #3)

Pegg answered : "Yes, Jesus is most certainly a god according to scripture and if we look at what the term 'god' actually means in hebrew El, its likely meaning is
mighty One; Strong One. (Post #4)

Clear asked "... to make sure that I understand correctly :
1) Jehovahs Witnesses believe that the Lord God (i.e., God, the Father; the God Almighty, etc.) is one God and that the pre-creation Jesus is a second god (i.e. God #2, the Son, the lessor god).

And, if I am correct;

2) Jehovahs' Witnesses believe that God #1 (i.e. the Lord God) directs god #2 (pre-creation Jesus) and god #2 (pre-creation Jesus) does not direct God #1 (i.e. the Lord God).

"Is this correct or am I misunderstanding this basic relationship according to Jehovahs Witness theology?

Peggy then explained that this was correct.

However, you are now apparently telling us that Jesus was never, and in no way a god, that is, only his father is a god and that the information I was taught in the j.w. thread was incorrect?

Is this new understanding from you correct or is the information I received from the j.w. Peggy correct?

In John 1:1 it speaks of "the word" who was "a God". Are you saying this specific phrase does not refer to Jesus but all the phrases are speaking of only one god?

Clear

Katzpur said:

Unless I'm mistaken, @Clear, JWs don't believe Jesus Christ is divine in the first place. They believe that God is Jesus' Father, but that it is inaccurate to think of Him as "God." Because He is "the mighty one," they honor Him, but stop short of giving Him the same title His Father has.

Click to expand...

Yes, the Tetragrammaton only applies to God, and Not to Jesus.
For example: Psalms 110
In the KJV the Tetragrammaton is printed as LORD ( ALL Upper-Case Letters )
Where the Tetragrammaton does Not appear then Lord (Jesus ) is in some lower-case letters.
Jesus is divine in the sense that pre-human Jesus came from Heaven, and his God sent heavenly Jesus to Earth for us.

Terry Sampson said:

Vision? LOL! Another irreconcilable difference between us.

Click to expand...

Seems to me the irreconcilable difference is between you and Jesus because Jesus instructed to tell the ' VISION ' to No one at Matthew 17:9.
If it were Not a 'VISION' there would be No need for Jesus to say what he said at Matthew 17:9.

Harel13 said:

....., JWs also state that god resurrected Jesus' physical body - so it seemed to me that Jesus had both a physical, resurrected one and a spiritual one.

Click to expand...

No, there was No physical resurrection for Jesus' physical body - www.jw.org

Eyes to See said:

Now some will also try and argue Thomas was stating that Jesus was Thomas' God. But it appears that Thomas was using the term the way many today would use it when someone is utterly amazed or startled at something and exclaims: My God!

Click to expand...

Yes, we often hear in front of a reporter someone exclaim, " Oh, my God ! " and we know the person is Not calling the reporter as being God.
Plus, before the words of John 20:28 we find the words at John 20:17 where Jesus says that he will ascend to his Father.... and to his God.
Even the resurrected ascended-to-heaven Jesus still thinks he has a God over him according to John at Revelation 3:12.

danieldemol said:

Why would they ask if Jesus was going to establish His kingdom if they had already seen Him in His kingdom?............

Click to expand...

Jesus was giving them a preview, a coming attraction about the coming time of Matthew 25:31-33.
Doesn't Jesus make it clear to them that the kingdom would Not immediately appear at Luke 19:11-15 __________

Israel Khan said:

Logic 101
By your reasoning, witnesses shouldn't get information from a JW about a religion if they were former members of that religion.

Click to expand...

Yes, logic 101 compare any information with www.jw.org

URAVIP2ME said:

Seems to me the irreconcilable difference is between you and Jesus because Jesus instructed to tell the ' VISION ' to No one at Matthew 17:9.
If it were Not a 'VISION' there would be No need for Jesus to say what he said at Matthew 17:9.

Click to expand...

Nah, your JW bias is limiting your understanding of τὸ ὅραμα.

URAVIP2ME said:

Jesus was giving them a preview, a coming attraction about the coming time of Matthew 25:31-33.
Doesn't Jesus make it clear to them that the kingdom would Not immediately appear at Luke 19:11-15 __________

Click to expand...

There is a difference between “immediately” and “soon”.
But they did not see Jesus “in His kingdom” at the transfiguration as He was not in His kingdom, and they only saw a vision of what was allegedly to come.

Terry Sampson said:

Excellent recommendation, as was Israel Kahn's recommendation to check out "Insight into Scripture" (Vol. 1 and 2). So, now that there's really no need to ask a JW a question here in RF, when www.jw.org is a much more trustworthy source for JW theology, and since it is a well-established fact that JWs don't believe, much less accept, what non-JWs believe or think, the great mystery here and now is: Why would a JW, in his or her right mind, become a member of RF? Unless, of course, they're here to proselytize and/or voice their objections to things said in RF?

Click to expand...

When I had to help two elderly people I had to stay close at hand, my intention coming here was more on the line of research.
When a person posted something and that something I found did Not match Scripture then what I posted was meant to be food for thought.
One historian ( right or wrong I do Not know ) said of all the people Jesus spoke to that only 1% became a follower.
So, since most people do Not compare what they think with www.jw.org they might be interested in some verses posted.

I feel most bad when I read people wrongly think the Bible teaches a literal hell fire.
So, I want them to feel comfort, and Not to have the worry about dead loved ones being in pain.

danieldemol said:

There is a difference between “immediately” and “soon”.
But they did not see Jesus “in His kingdom” at the transfiguration as He was not in His kingdom, and they only saw a vision of what was allegedly to come.

Click to expand...

Exactly, Matthew 17:9 is a 'VISION' and Not a real happening.
At Luke 19:11-15 Jesus gives the illustration that the kingdom would Not ' immediately ' appear. ( Not soon appear, Not instantly appear )
The real happening comes at the soon coming ' time of separation ' at Jesus' glory time as found at Matthew 25:31-33.

URAVIP2ME said:

I feel most bad when I read people wrongly think the Bible teaches a literal hell fire.
So, I want them to feel comfort, and Not to have the worry about dead loved ones being in pain.

Click to expand...

That's certainly not my worry.

Terry Sampson said:

Nah, your JW bias is limiting your understanding of τὸ ὅραμα.

Click to expand...

I find the Greek word at Matthew 17:9 (KJV) is translated into English from the Greek as: the VISION
People who died before Jesus are still awaiting a resurrection - John 3:13; Acts 24:15; Hebrews 11:13; Hebrews 11:39
Daniel is still resting according to Daniel 12:13; King David still did Not ascend - Acts of the Apostles 2:34.

URAVIP2ME said:

Exactly, Matthew 17:9 is a 'VISION' and Not a real happening.

Click to expand...

Precisely why Matthew 16:28 is a false prophecy.

At Luke 19:11-15 Jesus gives the illustration that the kingdom would Not ' immediately ' appear. ( Not soon appear, Not instantly appear )...

Click to expand...

Revelation 1 describes the fulfilment of it’s prophecy as “soon” and that “the time is near”.
So either Revelation 1 contradicts Luke 19, or “immediately” means “on the spot” as opposed to, - within a short period of time - (ie soon).

URAVIP2ME said:

I find the Greek word at Matthew 17:9 (KJV) is translated into English from the Greek as: the VISION

Click to expand...

Whoopty-do. Check out the Greek word at Acts 7:31. which is translated into English from the Greek, in your New World Translation and the KJV, as: the SIGHT.

URAVIP2ME said:

Exactly, Matthew 17:9 is a 'VISION' and Not a real happening.

Click to expand...

So, in Acts 7, when Stephen said:

• 30 “After forty years had passed, an angel appeared to him in the wilderness of Mount Sinai, in the flame of a burning thorn bush. 31 When Moses saw it, he marveled at τὸ ὅραμα; and as he approached to look more closely, there came the voice of the Lord: 32 ‘I am the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob.’ Moses shook with fear and would not venture to look. 33 But the Lord said to him, ‘Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground.

He really was saying, "When Moses saw it, he marveled at the vision; and as he approached to look more closely, there came the voice of the Lord ... But the Lord said to him, 'Take off the sandals from your feet, for the place on which you are standing is holy ground."

Neat! A vision tells Moses that the ground on which he is standing is holy ground. Hmmm, ... Since when do persons who are not really there fuss over where a person is standing?

Clear said:

2) Jehovahs' Witnesses believe that God #1 (i.e. the Lord God) directs god #2 (pre-creation Jesus) and god #2 (pre-creation Jesus) does not direct God #1 (i.e. the Lord God).

"Is this correct or am I misunderstanding this basic relationship according to Jehovahs Witness theology?

Peggy then explained that this was correct.

However, you are now apparently telling us that Jesus was never, and in no way a god, that is, only his father is a god and that the information I was taught in the j.w. thread was incorrect?

Is this new understanding from you correct or is the information I received from the j.w. Peggy correct?

In John 1:1 it speaks of "the word" who was "a God". Are you saying this specific phrase does not refer to Jesus but all the phrases are speaking of only one god?

Click to expand...

NO. Its not so much that Pegg was wrong, but that you are misunderstanding her meaning.

For the sake of argument John 1:1 is always used to furnish proof that Jesus was God (capital "G") but the definite article is applied only to "ho theos" (THE God) and not to the Word (Jesus as God's spokesman...ho logos) as he is just given the title "theos" in a different sense....identifying him as "a god" (small "g"). A lesser "mighty one" in this context.

John 1:1
"In en the beginning archē was eimi the ho Word logos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi with pros · ho God theos, and kai the ho Word logos was eimi God theos." (Mounce Interlinear)

The definite article ho appears before the first mention of God in this sentence, but is omitted before the second. The presence of the definite article before the noun suggests an identity, a personality, whereas its absence merely suggests a quality about someone.

As one who is familiar with the Greek, "theos" is translated "god" but it has more than one meaning. In Greek there are no capital letters. If God himself referred to human judges as "gods" (those with divine authority) then the designation given to Jesus as "a god" (one endowed with divine authority both in heaven and on earth) equally applies, but not in the sense that the word applies to Yahweh. (ho theos) THE God has a capital "G"..."a god" has a small "g".

Yahweh is "the Most High over all the earth" according to Psalm 83:18 (Tanakh)....
יטוְיֵֽדְע֗וּ כִּי־אַתָּ֬ה שִׁמְךָ֣ יְהֹוָ֣ה לְבַדֶּ֑ךָ עֶ֜לְי֗וֹן עַל־כָּל־הָאָֽרֶץ:

There is no one equal to, or higher than he is.

I don't know how to make it any plainer....

Jehovah's Witnesses do not believe in two gods unless you understand the nuance in the meaning of the Greek "theos" as "a mighty one" compared to "THE Mighty One."