Some Qs about the JW view of Jesus and angels

[Katzpur]

Hello @Katzpur. My question was about how I understood certain JW teachings, which some of our local JWs kindly spent some time to correct.
I originally understood that Jesus' spirit was inserted into a mortal body and that upon death, his spirit, which was originally immortal, went back to heaven. However, 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.

Thanks for the clarification. My belief is pretty different from that of the JWs. I hope I explained it adequately.

 

[Harel13]

Please give a quote or reference to where JWs state that Jesus' physical body was resurrected. (Hint JWs don't teach that the Bible doesn't either).

All the info is in my OP.
Besides, I've been corrected, so everything's alright.

 

[Eyes to See]

All the info is in my OP.
Besides, I've been corrected, so everything's alright.

Ok. That's cool. I know I did make a comment on that in my reply but it was a long one and a lot of stuff so totally understandable if you didn't see it. I will just reemphasize it here. Jesus died. He was dead for parts of three days. Sometime in that lapse God dematerialized his human body so that it would not see decay. Perhaps you don't understand what that means. It means God took the dead body of Jesus and snuffed it out of existence. Jesus was resurrected on the third days in a spiritual body. His fleshly body no longer existed. He was easily able to materialize from the spirit realm and appear before his followers while on earth.

I have had people in the past ask, well if it wasn't his physical body that was resurrected how was Thomas able to see the holes in his hands (probably wrists) where Jesus was nailed. I would reply, how also did Jesus appear in the middle of the locked room out of nowhere to show Thomas said holes? Jesus simply materialized human form from the spirit realm and put on a body that had the holes in his hands to show it to "doubting Thomas." Thomas then exclaimed "my lord! and my god!"

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!

 

[Katzpur]

Now some will also try and aruge 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!

I find that very hard to believe. Do you have any evidence at all that this expression was in use back in 34 A.D.? That usage actually dates back to about 1340.

 

[Eyes to See]

I find that very hard to believe. Do you have any evidence at all that this expression was in use back in 34 A.D.?

I don't know if it was in use at that time. Some have postulated that he was swearing in effect because of his feelings. It is very possible that was not the case. But that doesn't mean he was referring to Jesus as God Jehovah either though. For Jesus told Mary to tell them: "go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’"-John 20:17.

So Thomas knew that Jesus recognized Jehovah as his Father and God just like he is ours.

And John and the other apostles concluded this about our Lord and Master Jesus Christ:

"But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name."-same chapter a little further on John 20:31.

 

[Katzpur]

I don't know if it was in use at that time. Some have postulated that he was swearing in effect because of his feelings. It is very possible that was not the case. But that doesn't mean he was referring to Jesus as God Jehovah either though. For Jesus told Mary to tell them: "go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’"-John 20:17.

And John and the other apostles concluded this about our Lord and Master Jesus Christ:

"But these have been written down so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and because of believing, you may have life by means of his name."-same chapter a little further on John 20:31.

You know, it's entirely possible to reconcile the fact that Thomas was referring to Jesus Christ as His "God" with the fact that Jesus Christ referred to His Father as His "God." "God" is a title we give to the deity we as Christians worship. It's a title shared by both the Father and the Son.

 

[Eyes to See]

You know, it's entirely possible to reconcile the fact that Thomas was referring to Jesus Christ as His "God" with the fact that Jesus Christ referred to His Father as His "God." "God" is a title we give to the deity we as Christians worship. It's a title shared by both the Father and the Son.

Very true. And a lot of that has been discussed in this thread as well. He could have been doing as John did, and referred to Jesus as a god. John did so in John 1:1.

 

[Katzpur]

Very true. And a lot of that has been discussed in this thread as well. He could have been doing as John did, and referred to Jesus as a god. John did so in John 1:1.

But what god would he have been referring to? If Jesus was just "a god," does that mean that He was not the God Christians worship, but rather some false god? In John 20:28, Thomas specifically says, "My Lord and my God."

Also, read Hebrews 1:6-9. It states, "And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him. And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated iniquity; therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." Here the Father is directing His remarks to Jesus and referring to Him as "God." That does not mean that they two are one and the same, not does it mean that they are co-equal. It simply means that even the Father uses the word "God" (capitalized) in speaking to His Son.

 

[Eyes to See]

But what god would he have been referring to? If Jesus was just "a god," does that mean that He was not the God Christians worship, but rather some false god?

I will answer that if you can answer this. What did Jesus mean when he told Mary:

‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’"-John 20:17.

 

[Katzpur]

I will answer that if you can answer this. What did Jesus mean when he told Mary:

‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father and to my God and your God.’"-John 20:17.

Jesus made it quite clear that He looked to His Father as not only His Father, but as His God. He stated specifically that "The Father is greater than I." The Father is Jesus' God. He is also our God, but since they are "one" with respect to their will and purpose, Jesus can also be addressed as "God" -- exactly as Thomas did, without Jesus correcting him. I can't think of a single time in His life when Jesus let an error of that magnitude just slip by Him without correcting him, can you?

 

[Eyes to See]

Jesus made it quite clear that He looked to His Father as not only His Father, but as His God. He stated specifically that "The Father is greater than I." The Father is Jesus' God. He is also our God, but since they are "one" with respect to their will and purpose, Jesus can also be addressed as "God" -- exactly as Thomas did, without Jesus correcting him. I can't think of a single time in His life when Jesus let something that important just slip by Him without correcting him, can you?

It was inspired in the scriptures. So it is trustworthy. There are also many things said that are not recorded. John finished his gospel with these words:

"There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did, which if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written."-John 21:25.

I was curious as to your reply. My answer though was already given. I'll give you the link to it. As I see no need to repost it here. It on the first page of this thread, scroll down to my first post.

 

[Katzpur]

It was inspired in the scriptures. So it is trustworthy. There are also many things said that are not recorded. John finished his gospel with these words:

"There are also, in fact, many other things that Jesus did, which if ever they were written in full detail, I suppose the world itself could not contain the scrolls written."-John 21:25.

Yes, that is true. That's a verse I have often quoted to others.

I was curious as to your reply. My answer though was already given. I'll give you the link to it. As I see no need to repost it here. It on the first page of this thread, scroll down to my first post.

Thank you. I just read that post. I'd say that we agree in many respects. I'm not 100% sure of what you mean by a "spirit body," though. Do you mean a body that is incorporeal?

 

[Terry Sampson]

Jesus died. He was dead for parts of three days. Sometime in that lapse God dematerialized his human body so that it would not see decay. Perhaps you don't understand what that means. It means God took the dead body of Jesus and snuffed it out of existence.

And there's where I would differ from those who speak of "the spirit" or "a spirit" as some "non-physical" or "non-material" thing.
IMNO, "a spirit" and "a flesh-and-blood body" are both physical, material things. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul doesn't say: In the resurrection, the physical, material becomes spiritual. He says:

• 50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”

I'd have one thing less to grumble about if JWs used the word "transformed", as in "the dead are transformed into spirits." Both are physical and material, but one is mortal and perishable, and the other isn't. As marvelous as changing water into wine, but not, IMO, inconceivable or impossible. I just don't know how to do it myself.

 

[Eyes to See]

Yes, that is true. That's a verse I have often quoted to others.

Thank you. I just read that post. I'd say that we agree in many respects. I'm not 100% sure of what you mean by a "spirit body," though. Do you mean a body that is incorporeal?

Oh, I just realized are you Mormon? Because if so we are gonna get way off thread on this OP. I have had many discussions with Mormons about the nature of God and Jesus. The last one was about a year ago. They were actually at my house talking with me for about 2 hours, and we were having good conversation. I made them a pizza. We ate and talked. Later on, I knew where they lived. I bought a bottle of soda pop and went over to their house (they are serving as missionaries here in Mexico where I am) and offered them the soda pop and asked to talk some more.

You know in the park two other Mormon women were talking to me earlier that week. Now I asked the one where she was from and she said Mexico City. The other was from Utah. The same was with the two young men I visited. So I asked these young men. Let's say the United States were to go to war with Mexico (not saying it will happen I don't think it is) would you fight against your sister who is Mexican and kill her if your government told you too. The Mormon who was taking the lead said he would have to think about it. The other one who was far meeker and you could tell didn't know a lot said, No I would never do that. Later on the first one said that he would be obliged to kill his Mormon sister. I saw those two women later on at the park and I told them what their brother "elder" Mormon said he would do to the Mexican Mormon.

I also asked them if they knew what the Mountain Meadows Massacre was. Do you?

The one Mormon he said he felt like he was with a friend when I would visit them or they would drop by. He enjoyed our conversations and we picked up a friendship. He told me I made him realize he didn't know his Bible as well as he should. The other one had this almost hated in his eyes. He was always looking at my wife too. Like he needed to get married.

Anyway...

I realize they believe that God and Jesus are flesh and bone.

Notice I didn't say flesh and blood. Because I shared with one of them the scripture that says that "flesh and blood" cannot enter into heaven, and the reply was but flesh and bone can. I had to slap my face.

Jehovah is a spirit:

God is a Spirit.-John4:24.

Now Jehovah is the Spirit.-2 Corinthians 3:17.

God is an invisible spirit:

Now to the King of eternity, incorruptible, invisible, the only God.-1 Timothy 1:17.

The Bible indicates that God is a Spirit, the Spirit, and that he is so brilliant that darkness does not reside with him. In fact, it says that the anointed that go to heaven as spirit sons of God to rule as kings will never have night for God will always be their day:

Also, night will be no more, and they have no need of lamplight or sunlight, for Jehovah God will shed light upon them, and they will rule as kings forever and ever.-Revelation 22:5.

 

[Eyes to See]

And there's where I would differ from those those who speak of "the spirit" or "a spirit" as some "non-physical" or "non-material" thing.
IMNO, "a spirit" and "a flesh-and-blood body" are both physical, material things. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul doesn't say: In the resurrection, the physical, material becomes spiritual. He says:

• 50 I declare to you, brothers and sisters, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable. 51 Listen, I tell you a mystery: We will not all sleep, but we will all be changed— 52 in a flash, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53 For the perishable must clothe itself with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality. 54 When the perishable has been clothed with the imperishable, and the mortal with immortality, then the saying that is written will come true: “Death has been swallowed up in victory.”

I'd have one thing less to grumble about if JWs used the word "transformed", as in "the dead are transformed into spirits." Both are physical and material, but one is mortal and perishable, and the other isn't. As marvelous as changing water into wine, but not, IMO, inconceivable or impossible. I just don't know how to do it myself.

That's fair. I just made a post and made mention of this scripture and was thinking of going more into detail about it. And I would love to do so. But I don't have the time presently. Maybe later on tonight. Where I am. My wife is making popcorn and asking me to put a movie on.

 

[Katzpur]

Oh, I just realized are you Mormon? Because if so we are gonna get way off thread on this OP.

So, should we discontinue our conversation or what? Do you think you'd find you have more in common with a Catholic or a Baptist or a Lutheran?

I also asked them if they knew what the Mountain Meadows Massacre was. Do you?

Of course I do. It's not as if the Church has made any attempt to hide it. It happened. What's your point?

The one Mormon he said he felt like he was with a friend when I would visit them or they would drop by. He enjoyed our conversations and we picked up a friendship. He told me I made him realize he didn't know his Bible as well as he should. The other one had this almost hated in his eyes. He was always looking at my wife too. Like he needed to get married.

Well, you know, stereotyping generally doesn't yield very accurate results, but it's also pretty much human nature to do it. My experience with Jehovah's Witnesses on this forum (with the exception of @Hockeycowboy and, to some extent, with @nPeace) has not been good. Because of numerous first-hand experiences with the overwhelming majority of JWs, I go into pretty much any discussion with them expecting it to get nasty sooner or later. Most of the time, it does. I'm always willing to give anyone a chance, though.

Anyway...

I realize they believe that God and Jesus are flesh and bone.

Notice I didn't say flesh and blood. Because I shared with one of them the scripture that says that "flesh and blood" cannot enter into heaven, and the reply was but flesh and bone can. I had to slap my face.

Jehovah is a spirit:

God is a Spirit.-John4:24.

Now Jehovah is the Spirit.-2 Corinthians 3:17.

God is an invisible spirit:

Now to the King of eternity, incorruptible, invisible, the only God.-1 Timothy 1:17.

The Bible indicates that God is a Spirit, the Spirit, and that he is so brilliant that darkness does not reside with him. In fact, it says that the anointed that go to heaven as spirit sons of God to rule as kings will never have night for God will always be their day:

Also, night will be no more, and they have no need of lamplight or sunlight, for Jehovah God will shed light upon them, and they will rule as kings forever and ever.-Revelation 22:5.

I won't bother responding to these points if you feel it would take us too far off topic. Just let me know, so I don't waste my time.

 

[danieldemol]

@Eyes to See how would you respond to the question I put to Deeje in post #95? Some Qs about the JW view of Jesus and angels

 

[Deeje]

If you saw someone’s wedding video would you say you saw them in their wedding?

A vision from God affecting three individuals in one night is not a video. Jesus was fulfilling a promise he made that some of his apostles would see Jesus in his kingdom. The transfiguration was a foregleam of that. Jesus was transformed in spectacular fashion and the three representations of the Kingdom...it’s King, it’s laws and the role of the prophets in promoting this future kingdom was all there. Jesus called it a vision because it came from God......that is nothing like a video which is a mere recording of something that has already taken place. The transfiguration was about something future.

 

[danieldemol]

Jesus was fulfilling a promise he made that some of his apostles would see Jesus in his kingdom.

But was Jesus in His kingdom or was He just in a vision of His kingdom? You say He was actually transformed and yet claim God called it a vision, does your god lie?

 

[Deeje]

But was Jesus in His kingdom or was He just in a vision of His kingdom? You say He was actually transformed and yet claim God called it a vision, does your god lie?

If the apostles did not understand what they were seeing at that time, (often visions and prophesy about the future were not fully understood until well after the event) then all we can do is use other parts of the Bible to explain the meaning of this event. Jesus was the only one alive, participating in the vision. He wasn’t dead, like Moses and Elijah.

The apostles did not assume that Moses and Elijah were spirits, but thought (as Jews believed) that they had been resurrected. 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)

God caused the vision and it stands to reason that the apostles being told not to disclose it to anyone until after Jesus’ resurrection, would not understand the meaning of it until after their anointing with holy spirit at Pentecost. Like Jesus, the holy spirit imparted deeper understanding and gave them spiritual gifts.