1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Featured Watchtower: Jesus is not "a god"!

Discussion in 'Scriptural Debates' started by Oeste, Jul 16, 2020.

  1. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,400
    Ratings:
    +424
    Religion:
    Christian
    From my conversation and studies with Jehovah Witnesses they sincerely believe Jesus claims to be “a god” at John 10:33, but they would be wrong…not only from majority Christian standards but by Watchtower standards as well. I believe this is because the WT recognizes the dilemma of proclaiming Jesus “a god” at John 10:33 even if many Witnesses do not.

    Let’s take a look at a traditional (NIV) and the Watchtower’s New World Translation (NWT) paying special attention to verse 33:

    30 I and the Father are one.”

    31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”​

    33“We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” NIV

    OR:

    33 The Jews answered him: “We are stoning you, not for a fine work, but for blasphemy; for you, although being a man, make yourself a god.” NWT

    We’ll proceed with the “a god” translation as if it were correct, just to see how much mileage we get. Unfortunately this crashes us head first into our first dilemma.

    Dilemma #1: Blasphemy

    As soon as Jesus said “The Father and I are one” the Jews picked up stones. When Jesus asked why, the Jews explained it was for making himself “a god” according to the Watchtower’s translation.

    This presents us with our first dilemma. According to the NWT, the blasphemy was for abusing Jehovah’s name, not some “gods’” name:

    ScreenHunter_44 Jul. 15 22.07.jpg

    Source: https://www.jw.org/en/library/bible/nwt/books/john/10/#v43010033

    In effect, both JW.ORG and the NWT are giving backhand support for the Trinitarian translation that the crowd was about to stone Jesus for calling himself Jehovah, and not for simply referring to himself as “a god”.


    Dilemma #2: Biblical/Historical record

    Jehovah Witnesses and other Arians are quick to tell us that judges, magistrates, and other powerful people were routinely considered or called “gods”. The problem here is that the NWT tells us the Jews were about to stone Jesus for calling himself “a god”. It doesn’t matter if the Jews were wrong or correct in their interpretation, what matters is their explanation that Jesus should be stoned simply for calling himself “a god”.


    Let’s think about this…If Jews are stoning Jesus for being “a god” then all the other “gods”…their judges, magistrates, and other “powerful people”…were equally subject to being stoned by the Jews!

    Yet the biblical and historical record is absolutely silent in this regard. There is no record of Jews stoning their judges, magistrates, or other “powerful people” simply for considering themselves “gods”.

    So where’s the evidence?


    Dilemma #3: Watchtower claims Jesus is “a god” (John 1:1) but not “a god” (John 10:33)

    This is perhaps the most bizarre dilemma of all. Witnesses believe that the WT teaches Jesus is “a god”. Perhaps the Watchtower does, but as I am about to illustrate they just don’t teach it all the time. In fact, the WT claims that at John 10:33, Jesus specifically denies he’s “a god” at all! The reason for this will become clear.

    Let go back to the Watchtower’s biblical scenario:

    The mob is about to stone Jesus for blasphemy…calling himself “a god” according to the WT translation. They have rocks in hand, and they're itching to fly. But Jesus, having grabbed the crowd’s undivided attention does something curious. He quotes Psalm 82:6:

    I have said, “You are gods; you are all sons of the Most High. But like mortals you will die, and like rulers you will fail.” Psalm 82:6-7.​

    The last thing you want to do with a stone wielding crowd is compare yourself to Israel’s judges of old. Why? Because the judges of old were condemned by Jehovah God! In other words, Jesus is saying “The judges of old were “sons of God”, I am the son of God, the judges of old were “gods” and I just told you I was “a god”, the judges of old were condemned by God…so what on earth is taking you so long to condemn me?”

    If that doesn’t get a rock hurtling by your ear, I don’t know what would, and therein lays the Watchtower’s dilemma. They simply can’t have Jesus comparing himself to the corrupt judges of Israel by declaring he’s “a god” at John 10:33, and they certainly can’t have the crowd thinking that Jesus had just declared himself “God”.

    But our clever “truth finding” friends at the Watchtower have a solution. A “twofer” they gleaned straight out of the text. Not only does Jesus deny he’s God at John 10:33, he also denies he’s “a god”! :

    · 66 Jesus told those who wanted to stone him that he had not claimed to be God or a god, even though Psalm 82:6 had called some men, some Israelite judges, “gods.”

    - The Watchtower—9/15/1962 pp. 560-567​

    source: Prehuman Existence — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY (see paragraph 66)

    How the WT got Jesus to deny being God and/or “a god” at John 10:33 is baffling, but I suppose if you’re a Jehovah Witness it’s all there right there, embedded somewhere in the text.

    Unfortunately that still leaves us with a huge problem. Let’s not forget that Jehovah Witnesses tell us Jesus is “a god” at John 1:1 so it’s really disconcerting to see them claiming Jesus denies ever being “a god” by the time John 10:33 rolls around. But as the quote and link above shows, this is “current truth” even to this day.

    It’s a confusing, contradictory Christology.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,302
    Ratings:
    +240
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    If a man, as a human was always just a man and a human, but did God science, of the stone power of held fused and in the ground, God O the stone Earth, would he not be taught a lesson, life sacrificed if he pretended he was God the stone?

    So ask self why would a human male in science pretend he was God, the stone?

    His thoughts did.

    Ask that man/male so where did you first get your God ideas from?

    He would say from the burning light gases, water/oxygen and spatial void, that allowed O circular movement in light conditions to be mind notified FIRST.

    So he sought fake conscious information in thinking first about gases. Those gases were alight and burning first.

    Did God the stone upon which he stand own burning gases?

    No, only deep inside of the Earth is burning gases in volcanic mass.

    Did he release hot alight burning gases out of the body stone?

    Yes, he said it was Carpentry which is plate tectonics by referencing 12 natural light, which began with hot burning gases to be light.

    So he did a Satanic sacrifice science attack on self and taught self a less of the son.

    What a life lesson meant. Against self life survival for lying.
     
  3. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,302
    Ratings:
    +240
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Origin teachings against human male occult psyche, self possession/AI feed back, machine caused in extra radiation effect.

    To convert ground fission, dust nuclear chemicals.

    Mind first thinks about fusion. Knows fusion, highest state.

    Meanwhile dust goes into fission, human body/mind sacrificed in mind awareness chemicals, overtaken by radio wave/radiation feed back, gets to the place of nuclear fuel in male mind psyche awareness.

    Said to self, spiritually I am a resource. How it was psyche appraised and psychic healer spiritually aware known of the falsehood of a male psyche changed in occult conditions.

    Why he equated that he was a body of nuclear gas/spirit from stone fission of the ground of God the stone fusion.....as a mind statement.

    Why the answer as a data inferred study after the fact of his life sacrificed said and taught NO MAN is God, so that falsification of idealism could not be expressed as rational. For it is proven not rational.
     
  4. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,764
    Ratings:
    +930
    Witnesses are aware that God is separate from Jesus. When they call him god they're referring to God being manifested in the flesh. I mean the dude did rise from the dead after all.

    "Thunder lips in the flesh baby"
    Haha
     
  5. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,764
    Ratings:
    +930
    Am I God O stone power?
    I mean my name is Power Stone after all.
    ha ha
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  6. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,764
    Ratings:
    +930
    Manifesting meaning he had some attributes of God but he wasn't God.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,302
    Ratings:
    +240
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Historic occult science information says God O the planet owned the Immaculate spirit Heavens.

    Males, lying males, scientists, did conversion of the body O of stone the planet fusion....and changed the Immaculate gas spirits.

    Their owned human male baby life, born by human sex, was mutated murdered, as stated in the DNA genetic documents.

    Babies are born by human sex.

    When medical Healer biological science said the reason that DNA genetic had returned/reincarnated and healed in human babies, reborn...was due to seasonal ICE regained every year which kept the gas mass atmosphere in stable natural light evolution.

    A teaching.

    As the documents are a male life study, if the documents included the female biological life and newly born baby also, today you would not argue about why the documents were written as a study of AFTER the fact.

    But as males invented science, males inferred the science study just to their life body....when it is science, it was a medical science review of a sacrificed life, and as said, if only they said holy human female baby, no argument would even exist today about Satanic/occult UFO cause.

    Only due to the fact that a human being female Mother gave you back a healthy male baby life by her ovary being healed, is the reason your psyche claims that your Mother saved your life....the only place in biological reasoning.

    Yet the Satanist lying brothers always infers to womb out of space and Messenger gas spirits returning, which can take about 10,000 years of asteroid stone removal before it gets returned. Not any instant machine reaction is it!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  8. Jimmy

    Jimmy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2019
    Messages:
    2,764
    Ratings:
    +930
    I'm trying to joke around with you.
    Lol
     
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  9. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,302
    Ratings:
    +240
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    God in science themes O stone, in ancient spatial thinking theorising said gases were first burning in light.

    Males living say gases burning is why they own and live a life....but it is not natural reasoning is it.

    So when God demonstrated to them....demon strata that God in its STRING history is not a Holy spirit....then you got delivered your own realised theme....no life did not begin with hot burning gases.

    Seemingly however lots of Satanic male psyche today do not use that agreed teaching past life lesson, so you must need to learn it again to say, yes the stories were real.
     
  10. oldbadger

    oldbadger Skanky Old Mongrel!

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2012
    Messages:
    20,114
    Ratings:
    +6,976
    Religion:
    deist
    Ah! You're going to quote Apostle John, who placed the clearing of the Temple in the first week of Jesus's mission, rather than the last.

    And we've got to worry about a fine detail in his gospel...? OK......

    Well, that's John...
    In the above verses it is 'The Jews' who are in contention with Jesus and not the corrupt, greedy and hypocritical priesthood that Jesus was really against. With tragic errors like that in the verses, you've got a much bigger problem that the with a single line of speech.

    What language was Jesus speaking to 'The Jews' in? Eastern or Western Aramaic?

    Who translated that in to Greek?

    Who translated that in to Early English?

    All the Jews thought that they were the children of God, But Jesus called himself 'Son of Man' in the synoptics.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  11. rational experiences

    rational experiences Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2020
    Messages:
    5,302
    Ratings:
    +240
    Religion:
    spiritualist
    Israel is where the national life lived, in a country or DNA human origins.

    In text, science the JEW EL of God was the fused crystalline stone mass in the God stone body.

    Because the Temple in Jeru salem, jeru meaning where the circuit turned owned a ground history of huge volcanic mass releases, it was a dangerous place to live in ancient science history...temple pyramid themes.

    So the DNA land owners said that they had been the worst DNA sacrificed life by God JEW EL fission, nucleation of their life/sacrificed.

    They chose to change their land named title to Jew to own memory and teaching, worst affected/sacrificed human life DNA body in history, technology science, as the fact of it.

    All human life was ground God O planet released irradiated and sacrificed, why it occurred to the son of man....meaning newly born babies born mutated again.

    How human reasoning, witness to their own life destruction by Holy baby always realised that science of the occult UFO is a liar. If life came from a UFO mass it could not harm us, nor change us. Yet they use UFO MASS to convert the physical body. Why we named them Satanists. Actually science of the nuclear is a Satanic theme, not a God theme.
     
  12. stvdv

    stvdv Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2018
    Messages:
    13,072
    Ratings:
    +7,544
    Religion:
    Sanathana Dharma [The Eternal Religion]
    Not from my POV
    "The Father and I are One" to me means "The essence in me is of the same 'substance' as the Father's Essence", hence Father/Child analogy used

    IMO "Love is God" and "Consciousness is God" (Sanathana Dharma view as I see it; advaita part)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  13. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    7,664
    Ratings:
    +4,632
    Religion:
    Christian
    Oh, yeah....let’s go by that! They only started the Crusades and the Inquistion, and joined the nations in their wars, supporting the slaughter of their spiritual brothers in foreign lands — Protestants against Protestants, Catholics against Catholics!

    Am I wrong? Let’s see....

    Catholic historian E. I. Watkin acknowledged: “Painful as the admission must be, we cannot in the interest of a false edification or dishonest loyalty deny or ignore the historical fact that Bishops have consistently supported all wars waged by the government of their country. I do not know in fact of a single instance in which a national hierarchy has condemned as unjust any war . . . Whatever the official theory, in practice ‘my country always right’ has been the maxim followed in wartime by Catholic Bishops.”

    *********


    Protestant clergyman Harry Emerson Fosdick admitted: “Even in our churches we have put the battle flags . . . With one corner of our mouth we have praised the Prince of Peace and with the other we have glorified war.”

    *********


    Columnist Mike Royko of the Chicago Tribune wrote: "Nor have Christians ever been squeamish about waging wars on other Christians. If they had been, most of the liveliest wars in Europe would never have occurred.”

    *********


    Anne Fremantle wrote in the book Age of Faith: “Of all the wars men have waged, none have been more zealously undertaken than those on behalf of a faith. And of these ‘holy wars,’ none have been bloodier and more protracted than the Christian Crusades of the Middle Ages.”

    *****
    (Completely disobedient to Christ’s commands @ John 13:34-35, John 15:17; Matthew 5:44)

    And it can’t be ignored: almost all, support a trinity.

    So, yeah....let’s go with their understanding of Scripture!
    Titus 1:16

    I hope you get out from them, @Oeste !
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  14. oldbadger

    oldbadger Skanky Old Mongrel!

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2012
    Messages:
    20,114
    Ratings:
    +6,976
    Religion:
    deist
    Sorted........ :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  15. Deeje

    Deeje Avid Bible Student
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2009
    Messages:
    14,467
    Ratings:
    +8,142
    Religion:
    Christian JW
    Good point OB. One cannot rely on translation alone but on other scripture supporting what is believed to be truth. Who were the translators is the key question, and what biases did they bring into their translation?

    John 1:1, which is touted as THE trinity proof text, is undone by John 1:18, just a few verses later. "No man has ever seen God".....how many saw Jesus?

    If Jesus is described there as "the only begotten god" (theos) then he needs a begetter. He was God's "only begotten son" before he came to this earth. He is a creation of his Father who is also his God, even in heaven. (Revelation 3:12)

    We need to understand that "theos" in Greek does not only mean a divinity, but also one with divine authority. Jesus certainly qualified to be a "god" in that sense, as did Israel's human judges as he mentioned in the next verses. (John 10:34-36)

    If we look at John 10:25-33....(Strongs NASB) in context....

    “The Jews G2453 then G3767 gathered G2944 around G2944 Him, and were saying G3004 to Him, “How long G2193 will You keep G142 us in suspense? G5590 G142 If G1487 You are the Christ, G5547 tell G3004 us plainly.” G3954
    Jesus G2424 answered G611 them, “I told G3004 you, and you do not believe; G4100 the works G2041 that I do G4160 in My Father’s G3962 name, G3686 these G3778 testify G3140 of Me.
    “But you do not believe G4100 because G3754 you are not of My sheep. G4263. . . .


    My Father, G3962 who G3739 has given G1325 them to Me, is greater G3173 than all; G3956 and no G3762 one G3762 is able G1410 to snatch G726 them out of the Father’s G3962 hand. G549
    I and the Father G3962 are G1520 one G1520. . . .


    The Jews G2453 answered G611 Him, “For a good G2570 work G2041 we do not stone G3034 You, but for blasphemy; G988 and because G3754 You, being G1510 a man, G444 make G4160 Yourself G4572 out to be God.G2316

    "Theos" in verse 33 is without the definite article, just as it is in John 1:1, indicating that it does not relate to Jehovah, but that claiming Jehovah as his Father made him divine.....a god.
    Was Jesus claiming to be God? The Jews were looking to fix a charge of blasphemy on him so that they could get rid of him.....
    But he answered....
    "do you say G3004 of Him, whom G3739 the Father G3962 sanctified G37 and sent G649 into the world, G2889 ‘You are blaspheming,’ G987 because G3754 I said, G3004 ‘I am G1510 the Son G5207 of God’? G2316"

    He said he was "the son of God".....never once did he say he was God.

    John 17:22 proves that John 10:30 is not talking about Jesus and his Father being part of a godhead....because Jesus plainly states that..... “The glory G1391 which G3739 You have given G1325 Me I have given G1325 to them, that they may be one, G1520 just G2531 as We are one; G1520

    Was Jesus claiming to be part of a trinity with his disciples as well? :shrug:Or was he stating a unity of belief and purpose?


    There is no way to prove a trinity using the Bible because there is more that refutes it than there is to support it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  16. oldbadger

    oldbadger Skanky Old Mongrel!

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2012
    Messages:
    20,114
    Ratings:
    +6,976
    Religion:
    deist
    Wow!
    Powerful debate, right there.

    I will try to remember your points about John 1:1. and John 1:18.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  17. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,400
    Ratings:
    +424
    Religion:
    Christian
    Not exactly Old Badger. I was not looking for perceived "errors" in the temple cleaning timeline. I am quoting the Watchtower’s New World Translation of the apostle John and for purposes of this discussion, have asked the reader to accept their translation as “correct”. The reason for this is given in the OP.

    As stated in the OP, we are accepting the New World Translation of John 10:33 as correct in order to see how much mileage we get.

    Once we accept the New World Translation as the “correct” translation there is no need to ask who translated it into Greek, or what the “Early English” translation looked like because the Watchtower has done all the “heavy lifting” for us.

    Unfortunately, after accepting this dubious premise I ran into 3 specific dilemmas (there are more), all of which were specifically enumerated in the OP. Your post does not address either one, two or three.

    However if you are still interested in errors in the NWT and/or who translated what into Greek or English I’m sure there are JW’s available who can answer these questions for you.

    Lastly, if you are unable to hold the New Testament as correct, if only for purposes of discussion, then I'm not sure how you will be able to effectively respond to either question.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  18. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,400
    Ratings:
    +424
    Religion:
    Christian
    I did go by that, so why haven’t you? You appear to have missed the point that both Watchtower and traditional Christians agree Jesus is not claiming to be “a god” at John 10:33.

    Your answer is non sequitur HockyCowboy. You are at a loss as to how to respond to my Opening Post, and I am at a loss as to how to relate your comments to thread theme.

    Since Jesus is “a god” at John 1:1, why is he not “a god” at John 10:33? I don’t see how these questions relate to the Crusades at all.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,400
    Ratings:
    +424
    Religion:
    Christian
    I appreciate the conveyance of your POV @stvdv. I have a Trinitarian POV, but for purposes of this thread I am attempting to “walk a mile” in an Arians’ shoes so I can inquire with my “fellow Arians” how we resolve an “a god” interpretation of John 10:33.

    So far @Old Badger suggests we question or confirm the NWT’s veracity and @HockyCowboy suggests we immediately talk about the Crusades. Let’s see how @Deeje does.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  20. Oeste

    Oeste Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    1,400
    Ratings:
    +424
    Religion:
    Christian
    Okay, but did you actually read the OP?

    We’ve already accepted the NWT as “correct” Deeje. We did that in my opening post. Why now do we have to question it? You’ve been a JW for what, nearly 50 years or so? Shouldn’t questions about the NWT have come up before you became a Witness?

    HockeyCowboy threw out a non sequitur about the Crusades and now you throw out another. There is not need to go into whether John 1:1 is "God" or "a god" because, for purposes of this discussion, we've accepted the "a god" definition at both John 1:1 and John 10:33 as "correct".

    The point now is to determine where that leaves us. In other words, how do we exegete scripture with "a god" as a cornerstone of our Christology?

    We do that by asking a few questions, and If we can't get answers or have to avoid acknowledging them altogether, then there is great evidence our cornerstone is faulty.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
Loading...