- This topic has 18,300 replies, 268 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
A question for 'Ambassador' –
If I do not subscribe to/accept the Trinity Doctrine are my chances for salvation shot?Hi Nick,
Matthew 24:30 is speaking about gathering faithful people during/just before Armageddon. After that the rest are destroyed. It is not about resurrection.
Also an interesting point – Mat 24:30 says that Son of God has his angels. Michael is also said to have his angels as in Rev 12. Nowhere it says that Son of God has archangels. “archangel” is always in sigular in Bible. The Bible does not provide a definition for an archangel. Therefore, an archangle can also be the second greatest being in the universe – right after God YHWH. It does not have to be a simple angel.
Nick, please also comment on the following question I posted in my previous reply!
When you say that the “kings and priests” will be physically present on earth during the millenium rule, how do you then understand the following verses?
John 15:2-3 In My Father's house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.
Luke 17:20 Some Pharisees asked Jesus when God's kingdom would come. He answered, “God's kingdom isn't something you can see.
Where is Jesus going to be (remeber that God's kings and priests will be with Jesus)?
1 Peter 3:22 Christ is now in heaven, where he sits at the right side of God. All angels, authorities, and powers are under his control.
Hi Human,
The gathering together at the return of the Son of Man is the resurrection and rapture in my view. Before the Son of Man returns[Lk 21.27] Jerusalem will be surrounded by armies[Lk 21.20,Zech 14.]. Yeshua comes as king to rescue his people[Rev 19.11].
Yeshua is not stated to be any form of angel in the Word but he was involved in the creation of all angels. THAT IS GOING BEYOND THE TEACHING OF THE WORD OF GOD[2 jn].It is also denying the Glory of the Son of God. You have to decide whether the JWs teaching is equal to the Word of God-that is what the Pharisees said about their teachings[Mk7] and they stumbled.
It is hardly logical to say that because both the Son of God and Michael have angels under their authority they must be the same person. The Son of God has TOTAL authority under God. Michael is one of the chief Princes [dan 10.13]and a great prince [dan 12.1]but Yeshua is the prince of princes[dan 8.25,9.25]
AS I said I do not know where the Father's House for the waiting spirits of the saved is. Yes we will be with Yeshua[Jn 14.3] there awaiting the resurrection and gathering together of the saved living. Then comes the millenial Kingdom when we will be priests and rulers.Thanks for your answers, Nick!
Michael was called “one of the foremost princes” and “the prince of you people.” Later, Michael was referred to as “the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of Daniel’s people.” (Daniel 10:21; 12:1) This points to Michael as the angel assigned by Jehovah to lead the Israelites through the wilderness.—Exodus 23:20-23; 32:34; 33:2.
Lending support to this conclusion is the disciple Jude’s statement that “Michael the archangel had a difference with the Devil and was disputing about Moses’ body.” (Jude 9) Michael’s position, power, and authority made him truly “the archangel.”Scriptural evidence indicates that the name Michael applied to God’s Son before he left heaven to become Jesus Christ and also after his return. Michael is the only one said to be “the archangel,” meaning “chief angel,” or “principal angel.” The term occurs in the Bible only in the singular. This seems to imply that there is but one whom God has designated chief, or head, of the angelic host. At 1 Thessalonians 4:16 the voice of the resurrected Lord Jesus Christ is described as being that of an archangel, suggesting that he is, in fact, himself the archangel. This text depicts him as descending from heaven with “a commanding call.” It is only logical, therefore, that the voice expressing this commanding call be described by a word that would not diminish or detract from the great authority that Christ Jesus now has as King of kings and Lord of lords. (Mt 28:18; Re 17:14) If the designation “archangel” applied, not to Jesus Christ, but to other angels, then the reference to “an archangel’s voice” would not be appropriate. In that case it would be describing a voice of lesser authority than that of the Son of God.
There are also other correspondencies establishing that Michael is actually the Son of God. Daniel, after making the first reference to Michael (Da 10:13), recorded a prophecy reaching down to “the time of the end” (Da 11:40) and then stated: “And during that time Michael will stand up, the great prince who is standing in behalf of the sons of [Daniel’s] people.” (Da 12:1) Michael’s ‘standing up’ was to be associated with “a time of distress such as has not been made to occur since there came to be a nation until that time.” (Da 12:1) In Daniel’s prophecy, ‘standing up’ frequently refers to the action of a king, either taking up his royal power or acting effectively in his capacity as king. (Da 11:2-4, 7, 16b, 20, 21) This supports the conclusion that Michael is Jesus Christ, since Jesus is Jehovah’s appointed King, commissioned to destroy all the nations at Har–Magedon.—Re 11:15; 16:14-16.
None of these thoughts is beyond the Word of God. However, there is no much point in arguing about what titles can be applied to Jesus. Most importantly we must understand what role Jesus plays in the God's plan in restoring the paradise.
Hi Human,
I am beginning to realise your ideas are fairly fixed on these matters and you seem to prefer JW church doctrine to the Word of God. Your doctrine makes assumptions that are not sustainable. I write, therefore, only for the sake of those who are listening.
If Yeshua is Michael then scripture says he is only one of the chief princes. That is an insult to him. He is a prince[Dan 9.25],in fact the Prince of princes, according to Daniel which makes him prince of Michael. He is shown there as the Son of Man[Dan 7.13] and the Messiah [Dan 9.25].Why would God call him by another name in this book? God is not a God of confusion but of peace.Michael is never identified as Yeshua. That is a derived teaching that has a very weak assumed justification. He is the Archangel and a prince. Since there are other princes[“one of the chief princes”]then it seems logical that there are other archangels, called princes in Daniel.
So Michael is not the only one. He has special responsibility for the Jews [D12.1]but if he was Yeshua would his responsibilty be limited to the jews or should it not cover all men, jews and gentiles?
Yeshua is not a created angel of any kind. He deserves more respect than your views indicate.
His superiority over the angels [including archangels] is shown in Heb 1.4-9,Heb1. 13-14, Heb 2.7-9Heb 1.3
“…When he had made purification of sins he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high;having become as MUCH BETTER THAN THE ANGELS,as he has inherited a more excellent name than they”Hi Nick,
Well, for example, Satan also was one of the strongest angels in the heaven – Ezek 28:12-19. In fact, he is called “the anointed cherub”. He has millions of fallen angels under his command, therefore he is also a prince – one of the strongest princes. Most probably he is the next strongest person after Jesus, though we do not know for sure. There are others, but Jesus is still the greatest and strongest – he was created first and through him the rest.
Interestingly, Heb 1:4 you quoted states that after going to heaven Jesus has become greater than angels.
Is this the only teaching that you do not agree with JWs?
Quote (t8 @ Jan. 31 2005,04:31) Amen. Come out of her all you who belong to God.
Has the identity of Babylon been established here yet? By my reckoning what Babylon represents in scripture is yet to be fully explained in this message board site. When you both say “come out of her”, who are you writing to?HI MM,
It is not us pleading but God so see what He teaches you.Read Rev 17 and 18 with these things in mind.
The famous city of 7 hills is Rome ,as any encyclopaedia will tell you.
God's symbolism of colours is shown in Exodus and other places when the temple is being designed and built[Check internet sites also on colours in the bible]
Blue for God
Red or scarlet for man
Purple or violet for religion, the interface between God and man.Hi Human.
NO. I have no time for false religion.
What do the JWs teach about salvation? Do they agree with Yeshua that you must be born again of water and the Spirit?
Yeshua was made for a little while lower than the angels[Heb 2.7]
He emptied himself and became as a servant[Phil 2.7]Nick,
I wrote:
Quote Nick and T8, For me it comes down to one simple question: How many gods were involved in creation? I tend to agree with Yahweh when He said that it was Him alone.
Isaiah 44:24Thus says [Yahweh], your Redeemer,
And He who formed you from the womb:
“I am [Yahweh], who makes all things,
Who stretches out the heavens all alone,
Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself;”What do you say?
You wrote:
Quote Hi WIT,
Do you also agree with Paul and John that everything was created through Yeshua?Two points:
1. No, I do not agree with you that Yeshua created all things. I agree with Yahweh, and His words are plain and simple, unless you would like to explain to me how the words “alone” and “by Myself” do not mean what they normally mean.
2. According to most modern English translations, Colossians 1:16 says “by him all things were created” – (not “through him” as you like to say). In other words, those translations are saying that everything in the universe was created by Yeshua. So, either Paul is claiming here that Yeshua is the Creator of the universe, or his words have been mistranslated into our modern English bibles. Of course, we have had this discussion already, and you have already refused to accept any other possible translation for this passage other than the Trinitarian one.
I just don't know how you can believe both that Yahweh created the universe alone, and that Yeshua created the universe as well – unless you simply discount Yahweh's testimony!
********************************************
By the way, as an aside to your conversation with Human, circumcision of the heart is not a New Covenant concept. It comes directly from the Torah:
Deuteronomy 10:16Therefore circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and be stiff-necked no longer.
Hi WIT,
You struggle to discern the difference between responsibility and ultimate responsibility.The use of servants by God in all His works is a major facet of understanding the Word of God so I can understand how you would find these concepts confusing.Major dams are built worldwide by Downer and Co. I am sure Mr Downer is very proud of all the dams he has built. I know he does not put his own hand to the shovel and also very much doubt that he ever leaves his office to see one of them.
Nick,
I am not confused by the words “alone” and “by Myself”. Are you?
From Webster's Dictionary:
Quote
Main Entry: alone
Function: adverb
1 : SOLELY, EXCLUSIVELY
2 : without aid or supportBy the way, find me a press release that states that Mr Downer builds dams alone – by himself! – and we can talk. Otherwise, you are comparing apples to oranges. Yahweh has claimed to do certain things alone. Mr Downer has not.
Either you believe Yahweh, or you don't. Personally, I believe Yahweh. How about you?
Hi WIT,
All I am saying is that your black and white and narrow view here causes you to find conflict in scripture that does not exist if you lose that legalistic rigidity.Who gave the Law to Moses?
Nick,
My respect for Yahweh's words causes me to conflict with how certain passages have been translated – not with scripture itself.
By the way, if my taking Yahweh at His word is considered legalistic in your view, does that not make scripture interpretation completely whimsical? Am I only to take Yahweh seriously when He reaffirms your preconceived doctrine?
Better yet, how can you dismiss Yahweh's testimony so easily? Is He not ultimately the God you serve and love? Do you believe what He says, or don't you?
(To answer your other question, which has no bearings on this matter, Yahweh gave the law to Moses through His angel. Scripture specifically says so. It does not say that Yahweh gave the law to Moses by Himself, so again, there is no comparison.)
Hi WIT,
God gave the Law through angels and created all things through His servant Yeshua.
He spoke to us through His servants the prophets and His servant Yeshua and His servants the apostles.
He ruled the Jews through His servants the Kings. He still uses rulers as his servants as Rom 13 tells us.
He helps us through the work of his servants, the angels.
He will come to rule the Earth through His servant Yeshua.He is entirely responsible for all these actions and deserves all the glory for the work of His servants.
The work is His alone.
Nick,
So what you are saying is that Isaiah 44:24 would better read like this:
Thus says Yahweh, your Redeemer,
And He who formed you from the womb:
“I am Yahweh, who makes all things [through my servant Yeshua],
Who stretches out the heavens all alone [with the aid of Yeshua, of course],
Who spreads abroad the earth by Myself [but with Yeshua's help];”Sounds pretty confusing – (and debasing) – to me. I don't think your doctrine fits into this passage. But, you can force it in there if you like.
Note for comparison how easily the alternate translation of Colossians, (based on a study of the actual Greek words), fits into the overall context of Paul's point about the Messiah's preeminence:
Colossians 1:
15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16[For the sake of] Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created [because of] Him and for Him. 17And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. 18And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence.But, I already know that your doctrine is immovable, so I will not push the point any further.
Hi WIT,
I know you love God and His word and you are faithfully trying to discern the truth here. So am I.As you know the New Testament reveals the OT. The Jews could not fit the scripture about his birthplace in Bethlehem with his family residence in Galilee. Likewise the scripture about God's Son being called out of Egypt. They expected a King and found a servant.
Yeshua's life revealed the full meanings which were veiled. Yeshua himself is God's secret and mystery.[Eph 3.3-9,Coll 2.2,4.3.] He himself was as a stumbling stone to those who loved knowledge but not God.
So the OT did not reveal the role of Yeshua in creation to avoid confusion with the chosen people. That fact was only shown only in the NT in the verse you quoted but also in Heb 1 and Jn 1.
Nonetheless it is truth.
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Feb. 02 2005,11:56) The concept of there being two deities, two uncreated beings, is completely unscriptural. Just as you will find no verses in scripture that talk about God being three in one, you will also not find any verses in scripture that talk about there being two uncreated beings. There is only one Deity.
Why so?God is uncreated and he created all things through Yeshua.
So neither God, nor his son can be created if the above is true.So what do the scriptures say:
That Yeshua was begotten. It also says that he is the only begotten. I have taught this clearly and I challenge you to show me that Yeshua was not begotten.
I hope that you can see what scripture teaches regarding this.
To Human,
I disagree with all denominations. Denomination is just another name for division and it is not the will of Christ that his church be divided in such a way. But men have done this because they are carnal in nature. Yeshua desires a unified body of which he is the head. He is also the one that builds his church, but this is not the case with the churches of men. Men cannot help themselves, they will always build the Tower of Babel and try and make a name for themselves. (Catholic, Jehovah Witness, Baptist). God will divide such people. Denominations are those divisions. The tithe is the same tithe that God made the Israelites pay when they desired a King like the other nations.
If we are spiritual we will not feel secure by belonging in a denomination. We will only feel secure when we are one with our creator. Nothing more and nothing less.
Denominations of all types are part of the world system. They are worldy divisions. The JWs are no better than any other denomination. They teach (like the Catholics) that they are the way and the truth. But it is the head who is those things to us.
If you saw with spiritual eyes, you would see that true brothers and sisters of Christ exist inside and outside of the denominational structure. You would also not need to promote a denomination nor ask people what Church they go to.
For surely any mass murder is free to say they are Catholic or a JW. So of what benefit is it saying I am this or I am that. Is it not your fruit that proves your character?
So are you a follower of Paul or Cephas? Are we not mere men when we ask such things.
My advice to you is to come out of her and seek God for yourself and then you will have eyes to see what God is doing and how his Church is not of this world and is not defined by human standards.
And yes sure the JWS do preach truth to a degree just as the Catholics, Moslems and Buddhists do. I also say to you that just because the JWs understand the false teaching of the Trinity, it doesn't make them right. Just like Adam tried to justify himself by pointing to the fault of the woman, so a denomination is not right by pointing to the faults of another. To be right we must do the will of God. The JWs if anything have prophecied falsely many times. I feel that I should say that the Watchtower is made up of false prophets.
Human, being a JW doesn't save you. It is your faith before God who gives you salvation freely. Keep away from the denominations they will mold you in their image and take your money. You will never realise your potential within the confinds of a denomination as their doctrines and traditions are the bars of a prison cell.
Break away from her and serve God, or should I say serve God and all the doctrines and traditions of men will crumble in your life.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
