Thank you so much. That was such a great way of breaking down the Scriptures. I have been reaching out to the Jehovah’s Witnesses for many years. It was just sharing the same point you’ve made in this video.
bro... you video series debunking JW is absolute fire ! I don't know if you are doing all this research on your own or if other people are helping you, but huge props to you and your crew. I'm impressed by the quality of this information and I am sure that many victims of the watch tower will be saved from their evil organization as a result of your work. Let's pray that they leave the cult and come go to Jesus Christ ! It is also good for non JW, regualr Christian or luke warm Christians to study this. It helps us reinforce our belief that Jesus is Lord, and he is UNCREATED, he his the Alpha and the Omega, 1rst born of the creation (with your new understanding reveiled in this video, AMEN), He's been given all the authority and the name above not all other names, but above ALL NAMES. PRAISE THE LORD, YHWH, this King of kings. Blessed be the El Gibbor, Father Eternal, yeeeesss let the Word shine bright. Powerful stuff reveilled in these scriptures. The Word became flesh. The Eternal became Flesh to save us. Alleluia
Thank you so much! I'm glad you've been enjoying the content as much as I've enjoyed making it! I agree we should definitely be praying for God to do a mighty work among the JW's and bring them to a knowledge of the truth! As far as my channel goes, from a technical standpoint, it's just me. But I've learned a TON from people who have been involved in this type of ministry far longer than I have. People and ministries like Light over Dark Ministries, Melissa Dougherty, Mike Winger, Ron Rhodes, Watchman Fellowship, Alpha & Omega Ministries, and many others. Their work has really helped me a lot in my own research and I highly recommend you check them out if you haven't already! I hope you continue to enjoy the rest of the series! I've got several more videos planned related to JW's and then, Lord willing, I'll move onto Mormonism either late this year or early next year. Your prayers are deeply appreciated!
@@theologywithsethhey would u be able to do one with SDA, they are very confusing or maybe manipulative. But there’s a guy that believes Jesus is god, but an angel as well n they call him Michael. N they believe Michael isn’t created as well…… like what
Hi @jonesjones4277! I could definitely see myself doing a series on SDA at some point. I've touched on them in the past here and there, but most notably in my introductory video on cults. I'll link it below if you're interested! ruclips.net/video/lbPFXyoLS74/видео.html
Ready to Harvest already did a long one hour video explaining Adventist beliefs from their own literature. It's clear from the video that Adventist are different but not a cult.
Michael the arch angel is a huge problem for JW. They believe the heresy that Jesus is some angel. SDA on the other hand, do not believe that nonsense. SDA say divine, savior, and Lord Jesus is the divine son of God and head over the Angels and as such is Michael the head of the Angels. There's no heresy here adding "Leader of Angels" to Jesus's long list of divine titles.
I love the work you put into these videos! Beautiful and powerful verses worth sharing again! Get wisdom; get insight; do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth. - Proverbs 4:5 Buy truth, and do not sell it; buy wisdom, instruction, and understanding. - Proverbs 23:23 Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever you had formed the earth and the world, from everlasting to everlasting you are God. - Psalm 90:2 Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done...He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! - Revelation 22:12, 20
My goodness! Right from the get-go in the NT, who did John the Baptist prepare the way for (Is 40:3+Jn 1:23)? Santa Claus!? Our JW brothers and sisters need Jesus and prayer. May the Holy Spirit enlighten their hearts, minds and souls to the true Jesus of Scripture🙏
Great video! Regarding Proverbs 8, when the JW's get to verses 29-30 they quote "When he set a decree for the sea That its waters should not pass beyond his order, When he established the foundations of the earth, Then I was beside him as a master worker." It appears that Wisdom was with whoever laid the foundations of the earth. Ask them who laid the foundations of the earth? They will say Jehovah or God. Then ask them to read Hebrews 1:10. In this passage, Jehovah is speaking about Jesus when He says "And: “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands" clearly indicating that Jesus is the one who laid the foundations of the earth. So therefore, Wisdom was with Jesus as He laid the foundations of the earth...
@@rickyoung360 Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes Psalm 102:25-27 and applies it to Jesus simply because the Son is the one THROUGH WHOM God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist. It is also interesting that at the end of Hebrews 1:5, the writer quotes from 2 Samuel 7:14. Those words were about Solomon, but the writer of Hebrews applies them to Christ also. Of course, no one should conclude that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon, according to Luke 11:31.
@FrankLee-gq8yc If the bible interprets itself, which I believe it does, then why is there so much extra biblical literature and books and pamphlets being printed every month and year? Which ones do you still use, and which ones are "old light". If the bible really interprets itself, then why did the WT say that if you were to read the bible ALONE, then you would be in "darkness within 2 years".? Do you even know that Russel said that? Or do you and the other trolls here just want to puff each other up? I do agree with the last thing you said. Soon it will be rectified, but I pity you for not believing the Son. Your knee will bow, but it will be forced.
@FrankLee-gq8yc Yes, that happened. But did the eunuch know about Jesus and who He was? Did the eunuch have the completed New Testament? Did the eunuch go thru 6 months of "bible studies" before he was baptized?
Thanks for your presentation. I've recently purchased a 'Journaling bible'. That's a bible with extra-wide margins for writing notes. I've devoted this bible exclusively for reasoning with JW's should they come to my door. I watch videos like this one and write notes that I've gleaned beside the verses in question. Just an idea.
Here are some important fact that most people do not know. The 6 Corporations, also known as the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses, created their own customized translation of the “Bible” in 1950, which included the New Testament. The King James Version (KJV) they were using before caused them many problems, so they had to stop using the KJV and create their own customized Bible, which includes significant alterations to support their core teachings. Over the years, they created many New Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete New World Translation (NWT) that included both the Old and New Testaments in 1961. Since then, newer revised editions have been released. Here are the remaining revised editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, and 2013, all of which included more and more and more drastic alterations, such as verces removed, words altered, new words added, punctuation moved, verses restructured, and parts of chapters removed in order to support their false doctrines.
You're exactly right about that! I actually made a video documenting some of their most egregious errors in the New World Translation and I'll link it below. Check it out if you're interested! ruclips.net/video/2SIfhiquBtU/видео.html
This is such a timely video for me. I've been engaging with unitarians and JW and, as you noted, they will use similar arguments and verses. I'd like to ask how you overcome the differences in the NWT and other translations. Obviously the NWT changes things to favor JW theology but how do we get JWs to accept this?
I'm glad it was helpful! Well, believe it or not, I actually made a video detailing some practical ways you can help JW's to see how the New World Translation deceptively mistranslates certain things. I'll link it below if you're interested! ruclips.net/video/2SIfhiquBtU/видео.html
@19:00 He can’t be Jehovah himself because Jesus refers to Jehovah as his Father and God . The son clearly has a source and that source is who Jesus prayed to at JOHN 17:3 calling him ‘ the only True God’. HEB 1:3 clearly states that he is a ‘reproduction’ of his father JOHN 20:17 Jesus states that he shares the same God and Father as Mary JOHN 5:26 shows that the Father possessed an attribute by nature . Jesus possessed the same attribute only because it was granted to him by his Father . REVELATION 1:1 shows that the vision that the glorified Jesus Christ gave to John was given to Jesus BY GOD 1 CORINTHIANS 15:27 shows that it was God that subjected all things under his (Jesus) feet and that the glorified Son was subject to his Father
Hi there! I actually answer most of those questions in my video linked below. I think you'd really benefit from it so check it out and let me know your thoughts! ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
Amen brother, enough of the theological fairytales of so called orthodoxy. Yahweh is the God of truth and who Jesus really is matters. John 20:31, 1 Tim 2:5.
This is very interesting, thank you for your vids! Something that I struggle with, is, if Jesus is in fact YHWH, why use 2 different names? YHWH in the old testament and Jesus in the New Testament? Thanks!
The simple fact that wisdom cannot be produced or had no beginning undoubtedly refers to Jesus as a created being. The apostle Paul says that Christ represents “the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24,30) (1 Cor 2:7,8) (Pro 8:1,10) If not Jesus is who or what is the text referring to? Being that wisdom has always existed?
Hi @FrankLee-gq8yc! I addressed both of those concerns in my last video and since you commented, I know you watched it. This means you should already know that Christ having an origin and dying is no challenge to Trinitarianism whatsoever, and is a vital part of classic Christian theology. If you need to re-watch it, I'll leave a link below for your convenience. Cheers! ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
When God speaks of not leaving Christ in the grave, he's speaking of his humanity. Psalm 16 was a promise that he wouldn't leave his body in the grave but would raise it up in a physical resurrection, which was why the tomb was found empty three days after his crucifixion. We know Jesus continued to live even after his death in some form because he expected to be with the thief in paradise that same day. (And yes, I know the NWT moves the comma around, but that's inconsistent with the way Jesus uses that language elsewhere in Luke's Gospel so I don't buy it) The reason I say it was Jesus's human nature that died is precisely because of what you've been saying all along. God in His Divine nature is immortal and cannot die. But since Jesus was a man, he was able to experience death just like we do. And so if Jesus is fully God (which we can derive from many other texts), and Jesus died, then we have no choice but to say his *human nature* died, rather than his divine nature. Let me know if any part of that needs further expounding.
But also remember, we need to keep that on balance with the rest of God's revelation. While I believe Jesus the man was truly dead, we also have to remember that *Jesus raised himself* from the dead. We see that in John 2:19-21 and John 10:17-18. The fact that Jesus raised himself from the dead should be enough to prove that he must have been alive *in some sense* even between his crucifixion and resurrection. Add to that the fact that he told the thief he'd be in Paradise with him that same day he died, and I think the case is pretty solid. I'm sorry to keep referring you to other videos I've made, but I actually did make a video talking about what happens after death and went into that story of the thief on the cross in more detail. I think you'd really benefit from it so I'll link it below. Let me know what you think! ruclips.net/video/8gHSU8uXs1c/видео.html
Yeah, I'm just going to have to keep pointing you back to the fact that as Christians, we have to believe *all* of Scripture, not just the ones our leaders like to quote. I don't have a problem with any of those verse you quoted because I do believe God raised Jesus. In fact, all three Persons of the Trinity were involved in raising Jesus. God the Father, as you quoted, God the Son in those two verses in John, and God the Spirit in Romans 8:11. Now, you seem to think Jesus was saying that he was only going to raise his body in the way we raise ourselves each morning. But surely you don't actually think Jesus was talking about waking up from bed in the morning in that passage! Friend, I can tell you're a better Bible expositor than that, so don't sell yourself short, lol. In that passage, he talks about having the "temple" destroyed, which John tells us is his body. And Jesus specifically says he will raise up his body again three days later, which can only be referring to his resurrection on the third day. In other words, Jesus is saying, "I will raise my own body from the dead three days after I'm killed." It's right there plain as day, even in the New World Translation. Therefore, Jesus didn't cease to exist after his death- his Divine Nature was still very much alive and actively working with the Father and Spirit to bring about his own resurrection. There's no way around it.
I can’t find a Hebrew interlinear NWT Bible, so how do you know which Hebrew word the JW are using if there is not Hebrew interlinear Bible to tell you?
There is no JW Hebrew interlinear but you can use the interlinear from Biblehub, Sudylight, or BlueletterBible. These are just a couple of many free resources. Once you find a Hebrew Interlinear, go look at Psalm 35:23 and see if the tetragrammaton is found in that verse because the NWT inserts the divine name in that verse.
I would consider most Hebrew interlinears to be accurate to compare their translation to as most passages are pretty consistent among the different manuscripts. But this is what they actually say in the back of their revised NWT regarding the Hebrew books: "Hebrew Text: The New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (1953-1960) was based on Biblia Hebraica, by Rudolf Kittel. Since that time, updated editions of the Hebrew text, namely, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and Biblia Hebraica Quinta, have included recent research based on the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient manuscripts. These scholarly works reproduce the Leningrad Codex in the main text along with footnotes that contain comparative wording from other sources, including the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Greek Septuagint, the Aramaic Targums, the Latin Vulgate, and the Syriac Peshitta. Both Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and Biblia Hebraica Quinta were consulted when preparing the present revision of the New World Translation."
Could you explain the first part of Revelation 1:1, in the light of your stating that Jesus is God - "The revelation from Jesus Christ, *which God gave him* to show his servants what must soon take place." I would appreciate your input on this. Thanks in advance.
Hi friend! That's a great question. As a Trinitarian, I believe God exists in three distinct Persons. So in that particular verse, I would understand "God" there to be a reference to God *the Father* . Basically I would interpret the verse to be saying that The Father gave Jesus the revelation. Since they're two distinct Persons, they can communicate and interact with one another. I made a video recently talking more about verses similar to that, and I'll link it below if you're interested! ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
it’s very sad that no one concentrates on the real pillars of JW theology. The main foundation of the JW theology is Matthew 24,45 - the true and discreet slave. For Christians Jesus is the main person but they don’t understand that for JWs he simply isn’t so important. Please concentrate on the governing body and the true and discreet slave as the spiritual foundation of this cult - says a 45 years old ex JW of the third generation and new born Christian.
The evilslave believes the master is delaying. Jude 1:3,4 Have the faithful slave ever believed the master is delaying. Acts 1:8 Everyone was Jesus Witnesses until 1931 Acts 1:6 Revelation 3:12 Jehovah’s Witnesses. YHVH Yehovah Jehovah God Psalm 83:18 Charles Taze Russell 1881 Zion's Watchtower Tract Society John 21:9 When they came ashore, they saw there a charcoal fire with fish lying on it and bread. 10 Jesus said to them: “Bring some of the fish you just now caught.” 11 So Simon Peter went on board and hauled the net ashore full of big fish, 153 of them. 1881 + 153 = 2034 The 3rd Seal of Revelation Do not harm the oil and the wine!
Hi friend! Thank you for sharing that with me. This video is part of a larger series I'm making and the first couple of videos were aimed at demonstrating how untrustworthy the Watchtower leaders are. I documented several false prophecies as well as several places where they deliberately tampered with the translation of the Bible. If there's a more obvious smoking gun than that, I may need you to share it with me! However, I think there is still great value in being able to intelligently refute JW teaching using the Bible, even if it's on a subject that isn't paramount to them. Especially if the subject happens to be paramount *to God* , which the nature of Christ most certainly is. I do hope you'll check out my other videos and let me know if you have any topics you'd like me to consider covering in the future. Also, praise God that He delivered you out of the Watchtower!
@@montanaguy51 I was born in, in 1959 and I know for a fact that Jesus Christ ALWAYS takes a back seat to the Governing Body. So I know your comment is BS. BTW, why are you no longer a witness? Couldn't take any more of their BS?
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Who is over all ? Jesus is. He was not created, Jesus is Jehovah Jesus created everything. The Watchtower are lying and the Governing Body wear Mormon undergarments because they are Masonic.
You also might benefit from the channel "LightoverDark". He has some really good videos on a variety of JW topics. If you're looking for a book that deals with the question of who Jesus is, I recommend "Putting Jesus in His Place" by Rober Bowman and Ed Komoszewski. It is not directed at JW _per se_ but by addressing the question of Jesus' deity, it hits at one of the core errors of JW. One of those books I would recommend every Christian read.
I see this question has gone unanswered. Do you mind if address it? Can you explain what your issue is since I view this passage as completely consistent with trinitarian theology? Is it regarding Paul's doxology to the Father or that the Father is called the God of our Lord Jesus?
@BasicBiblicalTruth I think that this would debunk God and Jesus being the same person since it directly says, "Praise be to God and the father of our lord jesus christ." Meaning that Jesus has a father to begin with.
Do you not understand trinitarian beliefs? We do not believe that God the Father and Jesus are the same person. They are subsistences (hypostases/persons) of the one God. The Father/Son language is anthropomorphic language to communicate how the Godhead interacts with itself. In the ANE brother gods were rivals (cf. Egyptian gods Osiris and Set), so how could one send the other? Male/female or husband/wife gods always involved a sexual aspect to the relationship (cf. Egyptian gods Geb and Nut). Not to mention they were often dualistic. A Father/Son relationship tells us that they are equal as to nature, there is a hierarchical aspect to the relationship, it is a loving but non-sexual relationship, honouring one is to honour the other. A son in the ANE had the same authority as the Father (Joh 5:18), could rule as co-regent (David-Solomon), and was owner of everything that was the fathers (Luk 15:31). A Father/Son relationship is the perfect way to communicate the relationship between the Father and Jesus. The Father is also the God of Jesus because the Son incarnated himself as a human. Thus, he has two natures-one divine and one human. This is a point that most unitarians fail to comprehend.
Ah, Roland thinks God literally had coitus with a female goddess and sired a son, like in the Greek and Roman pagan myths. JWs are pagans masquerading as monotheists.
You are absolutely right when you pointed to early church fathers for their interpretation of the Scripture or what they believed what the Apostles taught and believed. Amen to that.
The wisdom in Proverbs 8 is actually personified as a woman which can be seen in the grammar forms of the original Hebrew text, but not in the English translations.
The personification of lady wisdom as a woman can be seen in English: Does not wisdom call? Does not understanding raise her voice? On the heights beside the way, at the crossroads she takes her stand; beside the gates in front of the town, at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud: (Prov. 8:1-3 ESV) Notice, "her voice," "her stand," and "she cries." The problem is that JWs don't know what "personification" is. If they did, they would know a personification is not a person but personal attributes attributed to impersonal things. Lady Wisdom is being contrasted to lady folly (ch 9). The writer is writing as if providing the wise guidance of a father to a son (1:8-10). For this reason, Wisdom and Folly are pictured as two different woman between whom a young man will pursue. People should read the entire book of Proverbs instead of trying to rip verses out of context to use as proof texts. Oh, and when JWs insist that Wisdom is Jesus, ask them who created the things mentioned in 8:26-30-Wisdom or God? They will ignore the question and insist that the Hebrew word Amon, which is _usually_ (not always) translated as "master worker" means that Wisdom had to be assisting God, which it doesn't. My father is a "master worker" and he gives his workers advice or instructions and then goes around to various job sites to observe and ensure that they are doing the work the way they are suppose to. The writer of Proverbs tells people to get Wisdom so that we can image God and bring order out of chaos by listening to Wisdom. Wisdom doesn't do the work for us, she whispers in our ear, as it were, providing us the council to do the right thing. God is pictured as creating the world by means of Wisdom's council. Wisdom watches and rejoices at what God does, just as she watches and rejoices at the things that humans do when we act by her council. In vv. 26-30, God made the earth and established the heavens. In Heb 1:10, we are told that the Son is the one who laid the foundations of the earth and stretched out the heavens... which means the Son is Jehovah God-Jehovah the Son.
@@BasicBiblicalTruthyour statement regarding the witnesses is not accurate. Witnesses do and have known about personification usage Decades ago why do I know this? Because I have publications covering that subject (personification) going back to 1985 for one of the publications. In 1988 for another. There are also more that will go beyond that. So your statement is patently false .
the firstborn of all creation: That is, the first creation by Jehovah God. Six of the eight occurrences of the Greek term for “firstborn” (pro·toʹto·kos) in the Christian Greek Scriptures refer to Jesus. The usual Scriptural meaning of the term “firstborn” is the one born first in order of time, such as a firstborn child. Because Jesus was “the firstborn” child of Mary, he was presented at the temple in accordance with Jehovah’s Law. (Lu 2:7, 22, 23; Mt 1:25) At Col 1:18, the same Greek word is used of Jesus, “the firstborn from the dead,” that is, first in order of time. (Compare Ro 8:29.) Likewise, in the Hebrew Scriptures, the expression “firstborn” is most often used in the sense of “the oldest son of a father.” The same Greek word occurs in the Septuagint at Ge 49:3, where Jacob says: “Reuben, you are my firstborn.” Many like Seth who claim that Jesus was not created say that “firstborn” here means one who is preeminent in rank, not part of the creation, and they render the phrase “the firstborn over all creation.” While it is true that Jesus is preeminent in relation to all other creatures, there is no basis for the assertion that the term “firstborn” here takes on a meaning other than its usual one. A similar statement at Re 3:14 calls Jesus “the beginning of the creation by God,” confirming that here “firstborn of all creation” is used in the sense of being the first one created by God
We are not saying Jesus was delivered in a labour room. But had a beginning and is subject to his father otherwise 1Cor 15:24-28 will make no sense. My brother prayerfully consider this scripture. It tells us that after accomplishing all that Jehovah asked him to do Christ will hand over everything to his God and father. That when God put all things under his feet it doesn’t include Jehovah himself. Brother the truth is plain to see in the scriptures.
Typical JW, ignores the question and raises a totally separate objection. I'll deal with 1Cor 15 after we deal with Col 1:15. Can "firstborn" be used figuratively? Yes or no?
Just stumbled on to this discussion of is Jesus God or the Son of God. I am Born again and until my coming to the understanding of Jesus being the "First created being" I also was in the deception of the Trinitarian teaching. I use the word deception because it is very important to understand when you are under deception you cannot see the truth in the scriptures just as the Pharisees could not see and understand the truth Jesus was teaching. I found that until I sought the Father on matters of scripture that I was deceived in I wouldn't understand. So to start with if I or anyone seeks to find truth in and through the scriptures it only comes one way. God the Father by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit is how His children, born again, true believer or In Christ are to be taught. If we do not understand this and how God operates we fall into man's teaching. If we would just read who Jesus Himself said He was over and over we have to ask ourselves why so many times did He refer to God as His God and His Father. The self existing God created and gave authority to His Son the "First Created being" As Tammi 1914 referenced Rev 3:14 we also need to read vs 12-14 because the Resurrected Christ is speaking here and He says My God 4 times and then clearly states He is the " beginning of the creation of God. This can not be refuted unless your are under deception. The understanding of Jesus being the first created being has opened up the scriptures on the importance of knowing that He is truly the Son of God it absolutely does not diminish His role as savior, deliverer,and redeemer it actually magnifies and Glorifies Him much more. I will rest with that because I could go on and on about what has been revealed to myself by our Father on this subject as well as others that tie into this.
Wow. JWs really love to avoid answering questions and deflect the conversation. David, if you want to join the conversation, answer my question: Can "firstborn" be used figuratively? Yes or no?
Adding "(other)" or not doesn't change anything. Through the Son, all things were created, formed, or molded apart from himself. The verb is passive, indicating that a voice is directing Him to do so working THROUGH him (1 Corinthians 8:6). What about verse 18 of Colossians 1? You agree that you would have to add "(other)" to "the first in all things" or "preeminence." Either way, He would be the first in all things, other wise referring to creation, He is the first one created.. verse 15 If you interpret it as "preeminence of creation," it would mean He is the highest-ranking in or of creation, it states being "of" includes him within the created group. You mock Jehovah's Witnesses for this interpretation of adding other but you need "(other)" in verse 18 even more, even though it's not there. 🤣🤣 Also The beginning (the first one created) Revelation 3:14 .. the first born ( highest ranked/ first begotten from the father)infact the only one coming from the father directly excluding the Holy spirit.. so noooo Trinity friends
Your comment displays a severe lack of understanding about the Trinity. This is common among JWs because the leadership misrepresents Trinitarian beliefs and JW members assume the leadership is telling them the truth (once you start to fact-check the GB you will discover that they are often not honest about what Christians believe). The GB often presents the trinity as modalism, which is not what we believe. The one God subsists in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Son prayed to the Father. The second person of the triune God became human to die for his creation. This is the whole message of the gospel. My God loved me so much that he was willing to become human and die for me-JWs do have a god that loves them like that.
If Jesus is part of a trinity and fully God why does John 20:17 say that the Father is his God and in Revelation 3:12 Jesus is referring to God as his God?
If we accept your premise that 1 Colossians 1:15 refers not to order of creation but preeminence, and further, if we accept that Jesus could not be a created being because he did not create all "other" things, but "ALL things" that is everything outside of himself, since he is not created, then we must accept that Jesus created the holy spirit and Yehováh, the Father, since they are not mentioned and therefore would be included in "ALL things".
@@evanwindom Because the claim is that Jesus cannot be created because "all things" refers to everything created and so if he is created you end up with a self-referential loop, a logical paradox. Witnesses help the reader resolve that by adding "other" in their Bible, because it is implied when you consider the immediate context and the overall context of Scripture. However, Type Theory resolves this context by recognizing that Jesus is a different type of creation. So he is not in the set that includes "all things". That it evident by the way he is described. He is firstborn. There can be many born of God, but only one can be firstborn. Also all things were made through him and for him. I'm a creation, one of the "all things" set, but all things were not made through me nor for me.
@@BeroeanPickets And here we go with the deliberate ignoring any definition of firstborn that doesn't fit the paradigm. So, are you putting forth that there is created, non-created (eternal) and 'sorta created'? Based on what scripture?
In this context Jehovah did not procure wisdom from anyone. The context often determines or justifies the right usage of word. But you deliberately skipped the root meaning of “qanah” ie to create or to erect and choose the secondary meaning to procure or purchase and possess. So from who did Jehovah buy wisdom from?
Giovanni 1:1 Nel principio era la Parola, e la Parola era con Dio, e la Parola era Dio. Giovanni 1:2 Essa era nel principio con Dio. Giovanni 1:3 Ogni cosa è stata fatta per mezzo di lei; e senza di lei neppure una delle cose fatte è stata fatta.
1:30 I’m not a J w and I don’t believe Jesus is just the archangel Michael but, I would argue the archangel Michael is Jesus, or a prophetical character of Jesus, an archetype of Jesus and maybe Jesus himself. My arguments : in the book of Revelation, the archangel Michael is the leader of heaven’s army. If the leader is the commander, the chief of the army, comparing it to Old Testament, he is similar to the Angel of the Lord. Cf story of Joshua or Gideon. The commander of Heaven’s army is Yahweh Sabbaoth. The angel of the Lord is the Lord himself and not just an angel and yet, he’s denominated as an angel, a simple angel and not an archangel but that doesn’t change the fact that the angel of the Lord is the Lord. Another argument, in the book of Daniel, the angel revealing prophecy to Daniel says Michael is the prince of his people, Cf. Daniel 10 But Michael, as a simple angel or archangel can’t be the Prince. The Prince is the son of The King, the prince is the future king. The future king is The Messiah, the Christ, the chosen one. So Michael can’t be anybody but Jesus. Just like Emmanuel in Isaiah is Jesus, Michael in Daniel is Jesus.
Greetings! The problem with this is the Bible, your rule, is a Trinitarian book… History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, - the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, - the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century and ONLY the 27 books, - not only did they not agree but their individual lists of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time. Therefore, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church, guided by the Holy Spirit, that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 4th century, just 65 years AFTER the council of Nicaea which began the Trinitarian doctrine and subsequent councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved these scriptures by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself? Peace!!!
@@srich7503hello there, I’m not sure what is your argument there. The Bible is the problem for trying to connect and interpret passages? It’s a theological book, so interpretation is mandatory. But interpretation need logic and coherence. It isn’t about feelings or it will make no sense. Anyway compilation of the Bible was started by Jewish people. New Testament is seen by Christians as a successor to divine revelation to Jewish people. Jewish people already made a list of most reliable books and it’s by studying and trying to stay faithful to the same logic, scholars, and experts on the scriptures made the selection. It wasn’t decided with chance but with criteria. It follows a logic of “authorship” reliability and theology. You say the problem is the Bible? But its exegesis of the Bible that makes Christian believe. There is a narrative, a theology, a logic linking all the texts. This theology is the foundation of faith. After Jewish canon, Jesus did not left a book but his teachings transmitted by disciples. There are studies showing how apostles, disciples who were direct witnesses are most likely the ones who wrote the gospel. Church fathers selected and councils were not arbitrarily deciding but they chose according to the overall coherence. There are many videos on the subject here on RUclips. I’m not an expert so my statement might sound confusing, but your argument in my opinion doesn’t justify not trying to make sense of the scriptures.
@@racksityentertainment no. I said, “The problem with this is the Bible, your rule, is a Trinitarian book…” then i asked a question you did not answer…🤷🏽♂
Greetings Mr. Seth. Firstly, thank you for your videos and the gentleness and grace you show while addressing these issues. Secondly, I see many JWs fight back even on the Isaiah 9:6 passage by saying Jesus is not being called the "Almighty God." As i was looking words up in the interlinear I saw that Almighty amd Mighty are different words in the Hebrew. Mighty (gibbor) seems to refer to strength while Almighty (shadday) seems to indicate fullness and richness of God's grace or bountiful, and the Greek (pantokrator). In bith Greek and Hebrew it appears that when they are used in scripture dont seem to explicitly include the Son. How do we reconcile this? Also, in Isaiah 9:6 one of the names of Jesus will be Eternal Father. I can see how scripture. Clearly shows Jesus is Jehovah, but I think these are good points and im not sure how to address them. Thabk you again.
Hello @tweak04! Jesus is called "El Gibbor" in Isaiah 9:6 and Jehovah's Witnesses make much of the fact that we translate it merely as "mighty God" in our Bibles, as opposed to "Almighty God", which they believe gives them warrant to reduce Jesus to an inferior being. However, even Jehovah Himself is called "El Gibbor" in Isaiah 10:21 and Jeremiah 32:18 yet no one believes this means *He* is an inferior being. This is a strong indication that Jesus is equal to Jehovah, which the New Testament later affirms explicitly in John 5:18 and Philippians 2:6. I'm not aware of any passages that explicitly refer to Jesus as "El Shadday", but that is hardly surprising since Jesus's name is not referred to in the Old Testament much at all. So I wouldn't make much of that point. Jehovah's Witnesses are trained to try and lose people in the minutiae of biblical languages, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Have them paint a picture of Jehovah and no matter what they come up with, I can pretty much guarantee you there will be ample verses in the Bible that paint that exact same picture of Jesus. Blessings!
Not really... I've always just read it as a prophecy about the future. One day people will call Jesus "Mighty God" and indeed we do. It doesn't mean he's not currently a Mighty God at the time the prophecy was given. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Watchtower agree that Jesus was a Mighty God even in Isaiah's day?
Hi again Frank, I understand those verses to be referring to Jesus *as a man* . Jesus *as a man* didn't exist before coming to earth, and therefore he *wasn't* highly exalted beforehand and *didn't* have a name higher than every name. But afterwards, Jesus Christ the man *did* receive all of those things. I actually made a video a little while ago where I broke down that passage in Philippians 2 verse by verse and I think you'd find it very interesting. I'll link it below and would like to hear your thoughts on it! ruclips.net/video/UOIXWam1J7I/видео.html
Hi again @FrankLee-gq8yc, to answer your question, yes the reason I maintain that they are the same Being is because there are so many verses that state in no uncertain terms that there is only one God. Monotheism is arguably one of the most clear and emphatic teachings in the entire Bible so I'm bound to believe it. And so if I see evidence that there is more than one Person in the Bible that is presented as God Himself, my only option is to assume this one true God must somehow exist in more than one Person. How that works in real life goes way over my pay grade and I'm afraid I won't be able to exhaust that mystery for you, especially in a RUclips comment. But I believe it because I see it in the Bible and I want to be obedient to Scripture. And while it's true Jesus told us to worship God, there are plenty of times in the Bible where *Jesus himself* is worshipped. Such examples would include Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:17, Luke 24:52, John 9:38, and Hebrews 1:6. The New World Translation tries to obscure that by translating it as "obeisance", but it's the exact same Greek word that Jesus used when he commanded us to worship God alone (Matthew 4:10). Add that in with every other piece of evidence I've covered in my JW series and just on my channel in general, and my conscience is bound to believe it. I think Trinitarianism is inevitable when we let God be God
Yes, you're right that Satan is sometimes called the "god" of this world like in 2 Corinthians 4, but I would still categorize him as a "false god"- that is, one we shouldn't be worshipping with supreme adoration. The same could be said of demons or the false gods of other religions, both ancient and modern.
I just go off the nicene Creed, that created applies to everything that was created through Jesus. And because Jesus was not created that way and was begotten directly from the father he is in a different category. Thus begotten not made.
IMO, we should be less concerned about the theology of the Jehovah's Witnesses and more concerned about the nuclear arsenal that we have built without their help.
Couldn't we do both? Let's be concerned about the nuclear arsenal that could destroy our planet *and* false doctrines that could destroy people's souls. I don't think it has to be one or the other
@@theologywithseth My experiences in conversing with members of the JW sect does not lead me to believe that the souls of these people are being "destroyed" by a false doctrine. As for being "concerned about the nuclear arsenal that could destroy our planet," that "concern" does not seem to override the general population's delusion that their nuclear arsenal is necessary for their freedom. In Russia it is much the same. Every year its Orthodox bishops bless Russia's nuclear arsenal and justify its existence by saying that it is necessary to prevent Russia's enslavement by the West. The consequence of submitting to this delusion is nothing less than a global nuclear war, and the advent of such a war was predicted by the OT prophets. See Jeremiah 25:32-33. Freedom is not a religious value or virtue, but it is ofter represented as such. The great Persian prophet, Mirzah Husayn Ali, wrote "We see people who desired freedom boasting of it. They are in manifest ignorance. The consequences of freedom end in sedition, the fire of which is unquenchable."
@@evanwindom IMO, the fact that we are going to have a global nuclear war overrides the other issues, important as they may be. See; Jeremiah 25:32-33 It is in the cards, just a matter of time.
According to the Bible and ancient Christian creeds, God did not create Jesus, but rather Jesus was eternal and always existed as a member of the triune Godhead. The Son of God took on human nature and a human body when he came to earth. Jesus Christ was decidely not created by God! He has existed for eternity as a member of the Godhead. The Father did, however, make him the beginning of his family, a family where every human being has the potential of entering. Trinity, in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.❤❤❤
God didn't have an In the Beginning only Jesus had an in the beginning. God does have a woman, and he put enmity between her and Satan. Galatians 3:20 God is only one.
Yeshuah is the embodiment of God almighty so we could see Him and interact with Him since no one can see God himself, how does that work? I have no idea but that’s what makes Him God doesn’t it? Wisdom in Hebrew is Sophia the feminine aspect of the Holy Spirit
The Apostolic father’s contemporaries of some apostles should be familiar with apostolic teachings,the trinity being one of them. So, did they teach the trinity doctrine? One of the earliest non- biblical books “the Didache” circa 100 C.E says nothing about equality to support the trinity. Church fathers such as Clement,Ignatius, Polycarp, Hermas and Papias speak of God as a separate eternal, almighty, all knowing being and his son as a lesser subordinate spirit creature whom God created.
Apostolic fathers lived around the first century C.E. Soon after the apologist appeared such as Justin Martyr, Tatian,Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria. Did they teach coequal persons or trinity? They also taught the son was a creature.
Ignatius (AD 50-117) in his letter to the Ephesians said, We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh.” Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts. Now, how could Ignatius and the early church fathers refer to Jesus as "OUR God"?
@@BasicBiblicalTruth Also Ignatius:”The only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the lord of all, the father and begetter of the only begotten son. He has the son saying “the lord created me , the beginning of his ways”, he barely mentions the Holy Spirit as being part of the Trinity doctrine
No, sorry, Ignatius didn't say that. Please do your homework. Second, you didn't answer my question. How could Ignatius and the early church fathers refer to Jesus as "OUR God"?
Concerning the word translated “produced” in prov 8:22. Strongs exhaustive concordance says the root meaning of “qanah” or the primary meaning is “to create” or to “erect”But secondary meanings include to procure or purchase and possess. So it makes sense that Jesus the wisdom from God is saying Jehovah created him from ancient times an indefinite past long before the earth was created. He was created as an embodiment of wisdom not because wisdom did not exist before his creation. Think about it. Can a person without wisdom create an embodiment of wisdom. I’m happy I didn’t just take your word for it. I’m happy I checked for myself. But why do you take it upon yourself to deliberately deceive people and separate them from Jehovah the God of truth?
The word translated eternity in KJV is “olam” and it primarily means “concealed” or “a time that is out of mind past or future”, “a secret time” and not eternity. That’s why the new world translation translates the word as “ancient times or times immemorial “. What wisdom personified is saying is that at a concealed time in the ancient past, at the beginning of creation Jehovah created him as the beginning of his creative ways. Friends I want to encourage you to be like the Bornean’s of Acts 17:11 who verified everything they were told rather than swallowing it hook line and sinker. I don’t know Seth’s motive but from my little research everything he says cannot be trusted without verification. It appears Mr Seth has set out to deceive and deliberately mislead Jehovahs people. These videos deserve a rebuttal but I don’t have the time.
What you believe is irrelevant if it is not what Yehovah the true God has said. Yehovah the true God alone is God, there is no other. Jesus was created made formed like all other men. All men are created All menare sons of Adam Adam was created. A christ (mashiach, anointed) is a man anointed by God Lord Yehovah the Anointed to carry out his command
Jehovas witnesses believed that Michael archangel is another position in heaven, revelation 12:7 and revelation 19:12. Metion two army's one is by the name Michael and the army we see jesus coming,?you think that God have two different army in heaven absolutely not.
Jesus in the garden says I can send twelve legions of angels even so now. On earth Jesus for sure wasn't Michael the archangel. And as a Christ follower He isn't in heaven either.
@rhondahart2416 I'm not saying that jesus is Michael archangel, but before he came he was that angel of jehova, judges 13:17,18 and Zechariah 1:2 ,12:8
Hi Yeshuas birth was The second Person manifesting Himself into the human sphere. It's why John Ch 1 v 14 states that He was The Word- God, that BECAME flesh.
He wasn't just created like everything else,He was unique,He was actually birthed out of the Father.Jesus was the number 1 creation, before anything or anyone else.Alpha,the beginning.Thats what it says the Word ( was) God in the pastence.He came out of God and became His own self.
0:28 @@Fjmaster2023then why does the bible say that Jesus was the first of God's creative works??? I know a scripture stating so was posted for this video along with the scriptural reference.
@@rawbrutaltruth The bible NEVER said Jesus was the first of Gods creative works..NEVER! I hope the verse you are interpreting that way is not col 1:15-...firstborn over all creation?if that's it,then its your interpretation that is wrong
Jehovah, the Bible God says "do not add or substrut the word of God. YHWH No one has the right to change God's word. The birth of Jesus. On the 8 days circumcised.. Colossians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, Philippians 1:2 Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ". Philippians 2:9 Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,
The argument that firstborn means preeminent at the 11:00 timestamp is what I like to call a distinction without a difference. Seth is simply repeating an argument that Sam Shamoon made. David is the 'firstborn', not literally but in eminence . What Seth doesn't realise is that if I am of the highest position of a class, I AM STILL OF THAT CLASS. How on earth can I be in the highest position in a class if I am not of that class/group/category? The statement would have no ontological meaning. David being the firstborn of kings means that David IS STILL A KING albeit the most eminent and exalted. Israel being the "firstborn" of nations is STILL A NATION. Similarly, Jesus being the "firstborn of all creation" means that, for this statement to have any ontological meaning he has to be OF THAT CLASS i.e. of the class of creation. He is the most exalted and eminent of creation. When Sam Shamoon made this argument, at least he realized that even this is not enough to win his argument: it gets him past firstborn but he is still stumped by Jesus being of the creation class. So Sam to racheted up eminent to pre-eminent and lol, pre-eminent is still not enough so he hoiks that up to transcendental. But WAIT!!! The basis of the comparison is King David and Israel. Hence, if Jesus is transcendental and pre-eminent, then King David would have to be transcendental as well.
Jehovah is king of Israel (Zeph 3:15), which is the highest position of a class of humans (Israelites), so is Jehovah a human? If you say, "No," then you demonstrate the problem with your "class" argument. Paul tells us his reason in v. 16, but JWs don’t read the Bible in context. Does Paul say that Jesus is “Firstborn” because 1) he is the agent of creation, ie the one who created all things (positional) or 2) he was the first created thing (chronological, ie a created being)?
@BasicBiblicalTruth Respectfully sir there is no problem with my class argument. The problem with YOUR argument is that firstborn was not used to describe Jehovah so I have nothing to respond to. Have a good evening ( Mr Seth likes to brand me as disrespectful so I am taking extra care to be civil to everyone I dialogue with. Sorry if this comes across as being fake)
You're using the exact word fallacy. Since the Father isn't called "firstborn" you think we need not use the same logic applied to "firstborn" with other words. This is nonsense. Second, you didn't answer my question. What reason does Paul give for calling Jesus "firstborn"? Context is the death knell to JW.
Many translations translate archē in Revelation 3:14 as Origin (NRSV), source (NAB, REB), or beginning (KJV, NASB). This reading relates the word archē to Christ’s creative activity, either at the beginning of time or as part of the new creation. This verse does not have the sense that the Son is a created creature, as JWs interpret the verse. “Because both God and Christ are called archē, the term conveys a sense of deity (Bauckham, Theology, 56). Since God is the Creator, the same can be said of Christ.”[1] However, the context of Revelation 3:14-21 emphasizes Jesus’ authority to rule (which is why he is sitting on a throne), so the proper translation of archē is “ruler” (NIV).[2] Revelation 3:14 is a classic example of how JWs rip verses out of context in order to use them as a proof text. [1] Craig R Koester, Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 38A (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2021), ebook, 336. [2] See Michael J. Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή in Revelation 3:14,” _Bibliotheca Sacra_ 161 (2004).
The Bible doesn't say Jesus was the first creation. Sorry, you have to read that into the Bible. JWs love to rip verses out of context to make it fit their beliefs. Try reading the Bible in context.
Alot of things I disagree with in this video and most, if not all of it, can be challenged using bible and extra-biblical sources. But to focus on one point about firstborn. I think you are misusing the text and language to make your case. Firstly, your position really isn't preeminence as a meaning. If that's all you were saying a JW would agree. You're actually saying "not necessarily birth-order". In saying "not necessarily birth-order" you go to (for one) Psalm 89:27. That doesn't work to build a positive case: 1)David is the firstborn in a relationship with his heavenly father YHWH (Ps 89:26, 27) 2)David is the lastborn in a relationship with his earthly father Jesse (1 Sam 17:12-14) 3)Therefore firstborn can mean preeminence and not necessarily birth-order This is a non-sequiter because the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. (It would be something like: 'Davids birth-order depends on what relationship we refer to.') It's really a red herring to bring up his position with Jesse because Psalm is referring to his relationship with God! How do you resolve this? (I haven't made a positive case for birth-order, I'm just doing a internal critique of the Trinitarian position)
Hello @eew8060, what I was demonstrating on that slide was that "Firstborn" doesn't necessarily mean "first created", which is how JW's understand it. Rather, it can simply imply a position of supreme authority in a given sphere of influence, which is how its used of David in Psalm 89:27. Given that background, I see no problem in calling Jesus the "firstborn over all creation" since he has the position of supreme authority. I feel like that's pretty straightforward, but if I'm missing you somewhere, let me know!
@@theologywithseth Yes, I laid it out to challenge the logic of that argument. If I've correctly laid out the premises (1 and 2) then the conclusion (3) doesn't follow. How do you deal with that? And I said to bring up Jesse from Psalm 89 is a red herring. How do you deal with that also?
@eew8060 The reason I brought up those examples was to prove that "firstborn" doesn't necessarily mean "first created". That's all I need to answer the JW argument based on Colossians 1:15 and I think those examples accomplish that. So I don't think it's a red herring at all- I think it's responsible Bible study.
@@theologywithseth Ok so you're not following my challenge. You'd agree that firstborn _normally_ refers to a birth-order, right? In an effort to show how it doesn't necessarily mean that you go to Psalm 89. Therein David is called a firstborn in a relationship with YHWH. That in no way demonstrates what you set out to prove. Just because he's not a firstborn in a relationship with Jesse does _not_ show that he can't be a firstborn in someway with the heavenly Father. You haven't demonstrated not birth-order at all.
David is "firstborn" in relationship to his heavenly father YHWH? So, you think that YHWH had coitus with a female human and sired David, just as Zeus did when he sired Hercules. Sounds like you have pagan beliefs.
Jesus is not an angel, he is a human created by the Almighty as Luke 1:26-35 teaches us. Also, Only the Almighty has inherent immortality and He never dies otherwise that would not be true. 1 Timothy 6:16. So if Jesus died, it is plain that he cannot be the Almighty. Another good verse is James 1:17 that says that the Almighty does not change, and even Jesus said the Almighty is Spirit, therefore, the Almighty cannot become human or an angel otherwise that would mean a change in nature which disagrees with what James is saying. Jesus was created, he was completely human, but the Almighty because of his obedience, raised him up to immortality and put him in a level of authority second only to Himself, the only one above Jesus is the Almighty God, his Father. Jesus is the Messiah, from the Tribe of Judah descendent of David so he is human, to suggest he existed before, it is to refute what the Old Testament teaches about him. Jesus, by the Spirit of the Father displayed powerful signs and also his words were given to him by the Father as Jesus himself testifies when he says “ the words that I speak I do not speak of my own accord, my Father who lives in me does his work” John 14:10
Where did you read that - “the one who is and who was and who is coming” calls himself “Alpha and Omega” and according to Revelation 1:4,5, it’s not Jesus. “May you have undeserved kindness and peace from _‘The One who is and who was and who is coming,’_ and from _the seven spirits that are before his throne_ , and from _Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “The firstborn from the dead,” and “The Ruler of the kings of the earth”_ Revelation 1:4-5 So here in this verse, of Revelation chapter 1 we are introduced to three characters: 1) The One who is and who was and who is coming, 2) the seven spirits that are before 1)’s throne, and 3) Jesus Christ. Right away we learn in Revelation 1:4-5 that _“The One who is and who was and who is coming”_ *sits upon a throne*. Please keep that in mind. In Rev 1:8, we come across our first use of the title “The Alpha and the Omega”: “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.” So did you catch that? Of the three characters we have just been introduced to, which of them has told us upfront and right away that HE is the Alpha and the Omega? Yes, it was “The One who is and who was and who is coming”, who is mentioned separate from Jesus Christ.
@FrankLee-gq8yc yeah sure I am ok with ASV, who is coming then if He is not Jesus? The Bible established that the one coming is Jesus... and before that verse, the Rev. 1:7 tells about Jesus the one is coming, the key point that He is Jesus is the word "the one pierced"
@GsWitness REVELATION 1 1.Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. WHO IS COMING? 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. WHO SAYS HE'S THE ALPHA AND OMEGA AND CALLS HIMSELF " ALMIGHTY "? 9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, WHO HEARD A GREAT VOICE? 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. WHO IS TELLING JOHN TO SEND THE LETTERS TO THE CHURCH'S AND CALLS HIMSELF ALPHA AND OMEGA AND THE FIRST AND LAST. 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 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. WHO DID JOHN SEE WHO WAS THAT GREAT VOICE. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; WHO IS JOHN DESCRIBING. 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 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. WHO IS HOLDING THE SEVEN STARS, AND WHO HAS A TWO TWOEDGED SWORD FOR JUDGEMENT. 17 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: WHO DID JOHN BOW AND WORSHIP TO, AND WHAT DID HE SAY HE WAS. 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. WHO LIVETH AND DIED ON THE CROSS FOR YOU WHO WAS RESURRECTED TO LIVE FOR EVERMORE AND DEFEATED HELL AND DEATH. OH ! THIS IS JESUS CHRIST SPEAKING IN REVELATION TO JOHN, AND DESCRIBED HIMSELF SO THEIR WOULD BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO IS SPEAKING. THE ONE WHO DIED AND WAS RESURRECTED AND ALIVE FOR ETERNITY. YOU MUST BE A SPECIAL KINDA STUPID!
@@RG-qn2qmWell-done bro,its quite clear who Jesus is from Revelation.... Some persons just can't settle for truth...they love being deceived...ask him if the Father is the one coming and he should give you scripture where it is the father that's coming,he can't answer...
@Fjmaster2023 7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. WHO IS COMING? 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. WHO SAYS HE'S THE ALPHA AND OMEGA AND CALLS HIMSELF " ALMIGHTY "? 9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ. 10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, WHO HEARD A GREAT VOICE? 11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea. WHO IS TELLING JOHN TO SEND THE LETTERS TO THE CHURCH'S AND CALLS HIMSELF ALPHA AND OMEGA AND THE FIRST AND LAST. 12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks; 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. WHO DID JOHN SEE WHO WAS THAT GREAT VOICE. 14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; WHO IS JOHN DESCRIBING. 15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. 16 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. WHO IS HOLDING THE SEVEN STARS, AND WHO HAS A TWO TWOEDGED SWORD FOR JUDGEMENT. 17 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: WHO DID JOHN BOW AND WORSHIP TO, AND WHAT DID HE SAY HE WAS. 18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death. WHO LIVETH AND DIED ON THE CROSS FOR YOU WHO WAS RESURRECTED TO LIVE FOR EVERMORE AND DEFEATED HELL AND DEATH. OH ! THIS IS JESUS CHRIST SPEAKING IN REVELATION TO JOHN, AND DESCRIBED HIMSELF SO THEIR WOULD BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO IS SPEAKING. THE ONE WHO DIED AND WAS RESURRECTED AND ALIVE FOR ETERNITY.
I am not going to waste my time here.Just to tell you you are being extremely Blesfemous saying Jesus Yeshua is God.God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son Yeshua Jesus so who ever believes in him will never die but live forever Amen Halleluyah ❤❤❤God is YAHWEH
@danielarredondo-sj2js I think it's funny that you said you weren't going to "waste your time" here, but then you wrote out a comment on a video you didn't even bother to watch, thus wasting your time lol. Either watch the video or go find something better to do!
I am not JW. JW aren't allowed to watch this video anyways. Only begotten of the father. What does that mean? I don't know. I honestly don't care. Jesus is God, Lord and Savior. Divine. Holy. Perfect. Jesus lived. Died. Rose. Son of God. Immanuel with us. What does it matter if eons in the past, long before Creation, Jesus was somehow "begotten" is irrelevant. Now if someone wants to say Jesus was created into the womb of Mary and didn't exist before, that is heresy, of course. If someone claims Jesus isn't God, that's heresy also.
Franky, and other JWs, are not honest with the text of the Bible. JWs must consistently add to the text. When Jesus says that people will worship the Father in spirit and truth, does he say that people will not worship him? No, but JWs must read this into the text. Do people in the NT worship Jesus? Yes. Luke 24:52, Mat 28:19, Rev 5, etc.
Franky, why are you citing Rotherham's version? In Rev 22:9, Rotherham has "and he saith unto me--See [thou do it] not! A fellow-servant, am I, of thee, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them who keep the words of this scroll: unto God, do homage." Would you concede that the NWT is wrong to have "worship" in this verse instead of homage? No, you wouldn't. So you are not being honest. This is classic JW. Instead of arguing for why their translation is correct, they make the child's cry "But MOM! The other kids are doing it!" by citing another version. Is Jesus worshipped in Luke 22:52, Mat 28:19, and Rev 5? Yes.
Franky, I've never cry, "That's the NWT." I always appeal to the original languages. Proskuneō was “used to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before persons and kissing their feet or the hem of their garment, the ground, etc.; the Persians did this in the presence of their deified king, and the Greeks before a divinity or someth. holy.) to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to a high authority figure, (fall down and) worship, do obeisance to, prostrate oneself before, do reverence to, welcome respectfully…. This reverence or worship is paid (A) to human beings, but by this act they are to be recognized as belonging to a superhuman realm…. (B) to transcendent beings…. (α) of deity in monotheistic cult…. (β) of image worship in polytheistic cult…. (γ) the devil and Satanic beings…. (δ) angels…. (ε) The risen Lord is especially the object of worship: Mt 28:9, 17; Lk 24:52.”[1] Obeisance can be a proper translation of proskuneō when the object is a human, the (A) category. However, when the person is receiving proskuneō as a transcendent being (God, gods, angels, demons-the (B) category), then the proper translation is “worship.” The NWT abides by this for α (Mat 4:10), β (Acts 7:43), γ (Mat 4:9), δ (Rev 22:8), but not for ε, showing their inconsistency. The NWT incorrectly translate proskuneō as "obeisance" when the object is Jesus. [1] Walter A. Bauer, _A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature,_ 4th ed. (Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press, 2021), s.v. Προσκύνω.
Franky, when I cite someone, I source them. That's what honest people do. Where are you getting your information from?? Second, did Jesus tell people _not_ to worship him? Peter told the Centurian not to worship him (Acts 10) and the angel told John not to worship him (Rev 22)-where did Jesus tell his followers not to worship him? You're not being honest. As I pointed out earlier, which you ignored, the NWT translates proskuneō as "worship" when the person is receiving proskuneō as a transcendent being (God, gods, angels, demons), _except_ when it is Jesus. The NWT is inconsistent. The only thing JWs fulfill is the statement that false teachers will rise up and draw people away from the truth.
How can Jesus be God if he is “the image of God”? In our minds, the word “image” makes us think of an archetype and the copy, and while the degree of resemblance can range from partial to complete, they are nevertheless distinct. However, Kleinknecht points out that “since a representation of what is invisible is impossible, the meaning here is a revelation with substantial participation, as in Plato and Philo. The eikṓn is not alien to the object, nor present only in the mind, but is in fact its reality and illumines its inner essence.”[1] In other words, Jesus is the visible manifestation of the Godhead-that which can be seen of God. Col 1:15 is not saying that Jesus is essentially distinct from God the Father (ie. part of creation) as unitarians claim, but within the context of the book (cf. 1:19 & 2:9) is a claim that Jesus is the reality-God manifest. [1] H. Kleinknecht, II, “The Greek Use of Eikṓn,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament : Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985), 182.
@bunchlead LOL. You said, "All the very best bible scholars no longer believe Jesus is God." This is a "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Colossians doesn't say he was created. Rather, it says he is the uncreated creator of ALL things.
Was it an accumulation of being unwise that led to creating? Haha! WISDOM here is CHAKHMAH, a feminine form, or derivative from CHAKHAM. The whole TRINITY always were CHAKHAM, but the first step of preparing to create was ONE of THEM (JESUS) taking on the role of CHAKHMAH, the same WISDOM that always was being expressed to new witnesses for the first time ever, entering the role of the WORD breaking an eternal silence towards things that had never been before, beginning their existence upon JESUS as FOUNDATION of all things, communicating existence them these newcomers into knowledge of WISDOM. The first of YHWH's works or services does not mean creature, but bespeaks a newly entered role by an ETERNAL BEING, a new transaction occurring within the GODHEAD without change to any trait of GOD.
Jesus in his prehuman life as Michael the Arch Angel was the first created angel directly by his Father and God Jehovah.Michael was also known as the Word or as the Spokesman.This is the angel that Jehovah God sent on this Earth to become a perfect human Jesus and to die as a ransom sacrifice for our sins.
Consider how ridiculous the claim about Michael is: 1. Jehovah created Michael the archangel, a demigod who creates everything on behalf of Jehovah (contrary to Isa 44:24 & 45:12). 2. Michael ceases to exist. 3. Jehovah creates the human Jesus (who has no correspondence with Michael. There was no incarnation of Michael, rather, at some point Michael ceased to exist and Jesus was created. So why did Michael have to be annihilated? I do not know, do you? This belief also contradicts the Gospel’s account that Jesus “came down from heaven”). 4. Jesus lives, dies, and ceases to exist. 5. Jesus 2.0 is created (which JWs call resurrection, but is not the same as the Jewish/Christian concept of resurrection). 6. Jesus 2.0 (another human Jesus) hangs out with the disciples for 40 days and then … what? JWs aren’t really sure on this point. 7. Jesus 2.0 ceases to exist somehow and Jesus 3.0 (a spirit creature) begins, who is also called Michael (even though the Bible never makes that connection, and actually shows Michael and Jesus are separate entities; cf. Jude). 8. Heb 2:5 says that God did not put the world to come under the control of angles and then goes on to speak about how Jesus, a human (and God), has been given control of the world to come. Yet, this must be a different Jesus than Jesus/Michael 3.0 because Jesus/Michael 3.0 is an angel. So when does Jesus 4.0 come? This is just one more teaching of JWs that they accept without any semblance of critical thinking and they do so because men in NY tell them to believe it, in the same way they have been told they must believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BC (instead of 586/7 BC as ALL scholars affirm) and that they must believe that Jesus died on a "torture stake" and not a cross (even though ALL the evidence is on the side of cross).
Thank you so much. That was such a great way of breaking down the Scriptures. I have been reaching out to the Jehovah’s Witnesses for many years. It was just sharing the same point you’ve made in this video.
Thank you for watching! I'm very glad it was helpful. Praying that God would give you productive discussions with JW's in the future!
Keep the teachings coming my friend!!!! I will be watching all of your videos
I really appreciate that! I hope the content is very helpful
God bless you Seth! I love your videos , keep them coming. I'm learning so much on how to talk to jws ❤
I'm glad you're enjoying them! Thank you for watching
bro... you video series debunking JW is absolute fire ! I don't know if you are doing all this research on your own or if other people are helping you, but huge props to you and your crew. I'm impressed by the quality of this information and I am sure that many victims of the watch tower will be saved from their evil organization as a result of your work. Let's pray that they leave the cult and come go to Jesus Christ !
It is also good for non JW, regualr Christian or luke warm Christians to study this. It helps us reinforce our belief that Jesus is Lord, and he is UNCREATED, he his the Alpha and the Omega, 1rst born of the creation (with your new understanding reveiled in this video, AMEN), He's been given all the authority and the name above not all other names, but above ALL NAMES. PRAISE THE LORD, YHWH, this King of kings. Blessed be the El Gibbor, Father Eternal, yeeeesss let the Word shine bright. Powerful stuff reveilled in these scriptures. The Word became flesh. The Eternal became Flesh to save us. Alleluia
Thank you so much! I'm glad you've been enjoying the content as much as I've enjoyed making it! I agree we should definitely be praying for God to do a mighty work among the JW's and bring them to a knowledge of the truth!
As far as my channel goes, from a technical standpoint, it's just me. But I've learned a TON from people who have been involved in this type of ministry far longer than I have. People and ministries like Light over Dark Ministries, Melissa Dougherty, Mike Winger, Ron Rhodes, Watchman Fellowship, Alpha & Omega Ministries, and many others. Their work has really helped me a lot in my own research and I highly recommend you check them out if you haven't already!
I hope you continue to enjoy the rest of the series! I've got several more videos planned related to JW's and then, Lord willing, I'll move onto Mormonism either late this year or early next year. Your prayers are deeply appreciated!
@@theologywithsethhey would u be able to do one with SDA, they are very confusing or maybe manipulative. But there’s a guy that believes Jesus is god, but an angel as well n they call him Michael. N they believe Michael isn’t created as well…… like what
Hi @jonesjones4277! I could definitely see myself doing a series on SDA at some point. I've touched on them in the past here and there, but most notably in my introductory video on cults. I'll link it below if you're interested!
ruclips.net/video/lbPFXyoLS74/видео.html
Ready to Harvest already did a long one hour video explaining Adventist beliefs from their own literature. It's clear from the video that Adventist are different but not a cult.
Michael the arch angel is a huge problem for JW. They believe the heresy that Jesus is some angel.
SDA on the other hand, do not believe that nonsense. SDA say divine, savior, and Lord Jesus is the divine son of God and head over the Angels and as such is Michael the head of the Angels. There's no heresy here adding "Leader of Angels" to Jesus's long list of divine titles.
Very nice and clear presentation
Thank you! I hope it was helpful
This video came at the right time for me. I started evangelizing JWs last month and I plan to continue once a week. Thanks a lot! ❤
We are on the same mission😊❤❤🎉
I am an exjw, and yesterday I received three jws; I witnessed to them nicely😊
Glad to hear it! I'll be praying for some productive conversations!
@@theologywithseth Amen 🙏
So will I be😊
@user-xv1zr4ln7l
I’m a JWs and would love to dialogue with you ….
@@DannyG-dr3qo I'm a trinitarian and would love to dialogue with you. Interested.
Thank you Seth! Another excellent video! God bless you!
God bless you as well!
I love the work you put into these videos!
Beautiful and powerful verses worth sharing again!
Get wisdom; get insight;
do not forget, and do not turn away from the words of my mouth.
- Proverbs 4:5
Buy truth, and do not sell it;
buy wisdom, instruction, and understanding.
- Proverbs 23:23
Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.
- Psalm 90:2
Behold, I am coming soon, bringing my recompense with me, to repay each one for what he has done...He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!
- Revelation 22:12, 20
Thank you for watching!
My goodness! Right from the get-go in the NT, who did John the Baptist prepare the way for
(Is 40:3+Jn 1:23)? Santa Claus!?
Our JW brothers and sisters need Jesus and prayer. May the Holy Spirit enlighten their hearts, minds and souls to the true Jesus of Scripture🙏
Great video! Regarding Proverbs 8, when the JW's get to verses 29-30 they quote "When he set a decree for the sea That its waters should not pass beyond his order, When he established the foundations of the earth, Then I was beside him as a master worker."
It appears that Wisdom was with whoever laid the foundations of the earth. Ask them who laid the foundations of the earth? They will say Jehovah or God. Then ask them to read Hebrews 1:10. In this passage, Jehovah is speaking about Jesus when He says "And: “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands" clearly indicating that Jesus is the one who laid the foundations of the earth. So therefore, Wisdom was with Jesus as He laid the foundations of the earth...
That's an excellent point! Thanks for sharing
@@rickyoung360
Hebrews 1:10-12 quotes Psalm 102:25-27 and applies it to Jesus simply because the Son is the one THROUGH WHOM God performed the creative works there described by the psalmist.
It is also interesting that at the end of Hebrews 1:5, the writer quotes from 2 Samuel 7:14. Those words were about Solomon, but the writer of Hebrews applies them to Christ also. Of course, no one should conclude that Solomon and Jesus are the same. Jesus is “greater than Solomon” and carries out a work foreshadowed by Solomon, according to Luke 11:31.
@@Mr.DC3.1914 If Jesus was created, you should be able to support it with scripture. Are you able to do that?
@FrankLee-gq8yc If the bible interprets itself, which I believe it does, then why is there so much extra biblical literature and books and pamphlets being printed every month and year? Which ones do you still use, and which ones are "old light". If the bible really interprets itself, then why did the WT say that if you were to read the bible ALONE, then you would be in "darkness within 2 years".?
Do you even know that Russel said that?
Or do you and the other trolls here just want to puff each other up?
I do agree with the last thing you said. Soon it will be rectified, but I pity you for not believing the Son. Your knee will bow, but it will be forced.
@FrankLee-gq8yc Yes, that happened. But did the eunuch know about Jesus and who He was? Did the eunuch have the completed New Testament? Did the eunuch go thru 6 months of "bible studies" before he was baptized?
Amen
Amen indeed!
Thanks for your presentation. I've recently purchased a 'Journaling bible'. That's a bible with extra-wide margins for writing notes. I've devoted this bible exclusively for reasoning with JW's should they come to my door. I watch videos like this one and write notes that I've gleaned beside the verses in question. Just an idea.
That's an excellent idea! I've got a number of other JW-related videos so I hope those are helpful as well!
Here are some important fact that most people do not know. The 6 Corporations, also known as the organization of Jehovah's Witnesses, created their own customized translation of the “Bible” in 1950, which included the New Testament. The King James Version (KJV) they were using before caused them many problems, so they had to stop using the KJV and create their own customized Bible, which includes significant alterations to support their core teachings.
Over the years, they created many New Revised Editions, one of which was the first complete New World Translation (NWT) that included both the Old and New Testaments in 1961. Since then, newer revised editions have been released. Here are the remaining revised editions in order: 1970, 1971, 1981, 1984, and 2013, all of which included more and more and more drastic alterations, such as verces removed, words altered, new words added, punctuation moved, verses restructured, and parts of chapters removed in order to support their false doctrines.
You're exactly right about that! I actually made a video documenting some of their most egregious errors in the New World Translation and I'll link it below. Check it out if you're interested!
ruclips.net/video/2SIfhiquBtU/видео.html
Thanks for sharing 🙏🏿
Prayers going out for those who subscribe to the JW doctrine 🕊️
His grace and mercy be upon you and your loved ones 🕊️🥛🍯
An excellent presentation
Thank you! I'm glad it was helpful
This is such a timely video for me. I've been engaging with unitarians and JW and, as you noted, they will use similar arguments and verses.
I'd like to ask how you overcome the differences in the NWT and other translations. Obviously the NWT changes things to favor JW theology but how do we get JWs to accept this?
I'm glad it was helpful! Well, believe it or not, I actually made a video detailing some practical ways you can help JW's to see how the New World Translation deceptively mistranslates certain things. I'll link it below if you're interested!
ruclips.net/video/2SIfhiquBtU/видео.html
@19:00 He can’t be Jehovah himself because Jesus refers to Jehovah as his Father and God . The son clearly has a source and that source is who Jesus prayed to at JOHN 17:3 calling him ‘ the only True God’.
HEB 1:3 clearly states that he is a ‘reproduction’ of his father
JOHN 20:17 Jesus states that he shares the same God and Father as Mary
JOHN 5:26 shows that the Father possessed an attribute by nature . Jesus possessed the same attribute only because it was granted to him by his Father .
REVELATION 1:1 shows that the vision that the glorified Jesus Christ gave to John was given to Jesus BY GOD
1 CORINTHIANS 15:27 shows that it was God that subjected all things under his (Jesus) feet and that the glorified Son was subject to his Father
Hi there! I actually answer most of those questions in my video linked below. I think you'd really benefit from it so check it out and let me know your thoughts!
ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
Amen brother, enough of the theological fairytales of so called orthodoxy. Yahweh is the God of truth and who Jesus really is matters. John 20:31, 1 Tim 2:5.
This is very interesting, thank you for your vids!
Something that I struggle with, is, if Jesus is in fact YHWH, why use 2 different names? YHWH in the old testament and Jesus in the New Testament? Thanks!
The simple fact that wisdom cannot be produced or had no beginning undoubtedly refers to Jesus as a created being. The apostle Paul says that Christ represents “the power of God and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor 1:24,30) (1 Cor 2:7,8) (Pro 8:1,10) If not Jesus is who or what is the text referring to? Being that wisdom has always existed?
Just the opposite! Jezus is not created obviously!! John 1;1
Jesus is the Eternal Son of God, no beginning, no end.
Amen!
Hi @FrankLee-gq8yc! I addressed both of those concerns in my last video and since you commented, I know you watched it. This means you should already know that Christ having an origin and dying is no challenge to Trinitarianism whatsoever, and is a vital part of classic Christian theology. If you need to re-watch it, I'll leave a link below for your convenience. Cheers!
ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
When God speaks of not leaving Christ in the grave, he's speaking of his humanity. Psalm 16 was a promise that he wouldn't leave his body in the grave but would raise it up in a physical resurrection, which was why the tomb was found empty three days after his crucifixion.
We know Jesus continued to live even after his death in some form because he expected to be with the thief in paradise that same day. (And yes, I know the NWT moves the comma around, but that's inconsistent with the way Jesus uses that language elsewhere in Luke's Gospel so I don't buy it)
The reason I say it was Jesus's human nature that died is precisely because of what you've been saying all along. God in His Divine nature is immortal and cannot die. But since Jesus was a man, he was able to experience death just like we do. And so if Jesus is fully God (which we can derive from many other texts), and Jesus died, then we have no choice but to say his *human nature* died, rather than his divine nature. Let me know if any part of that needs further expounding.
But also remember, we need to keep that on balance with the rest of God's revelation. While I believe Jesus the man was truly dead, we also have to remember that *Jesus raised himself* from the dead. We see that in John 2:19-21 and John 10:17-18. The fact that Jesus raised himself from the dead should be enough to prove that he must have been alive *in some sense* even between his crucifixion and resurrection.
Add to that the fact that he told the thief he'd be in Paradise with him that same day he died, and I think the case is pretty solid. I'm sorry to keep referring you to other videos I've made, but I actually did make a video talking about what happens after death and went into that story of the thief on the cross in more detail. I think you'd really benefit from it so I'll link it below. Let me know what you think!
ruclips.net/video/8gHSU8uXs1c/видео.html
Yeah, I'm just going to have to keep pointing you back to the fact that as Christians, we have to believe *all* of Scripture, not just the ones our leaders like to quote. I don't have a problem with any of those verse you quoted because I do believe God raised Jesus. In fact, all three Persons of the Trinity were involved in raising Jesus. God the Father, as you quoted, God the Son in those two verses in John, and God the Spirit in Romans 8:11.
Now, you seem to think Jesus was saying that he was only going to raise his body in the way we raise ourselves each morning. But surely you don't actually think Jesus was talking about waking up from bed in the morning in that passage! Friend, I can tell you're a better Bible expositor than that, so don't sell yourself short, lol.
In that passage, he talks about having the "temple" destroyed, which John tells us is his body. And Jesus specifically says he will raise up his body again three days later, which can only be referring to his resurrection on the third day. In other words, Jesus is saying, "I will raise my own body from the dead three days after I'm killed." It's right there plain as day, even in the New World Translation.
Therefore, Jesus didn't cease to exist after his death- his Divine Nature was still very much alive and actively working with the Father and Spirit to bring about his own resurrection. There's no way around it.
Hello Seth, I need your help to critique Atavist Bible church eschatology.
Hello @WhattheNewTestamentReallySays! I'm not familiar with Atavist Bible Church. What do they believe?
I can’t find a Hebrew interlinear NWT Bible, so how do you know which Hebrew word the JW are using if there is not Hebrew interlinear Bible to tell you?
There is no JW Hebrew interlinear but you can use the interlinear from Biblehub, Sudylight, or BlueletterBible. These are just a couple of many free resources.
Once you find a Hebrew Interlinear, go look at Psalm 35:23 and see if the tetragrammaton is found in that verse because the NWT inserts the divine name in that verse.
I would consider most Hebrew interlinears to be accurate to compare their translation to as most passages are pretty consistent among the different manuscripts.
But this is what they actually say in the back of their revised NWT regarding the Hebrew books:
"Hebrew Text: The New World Translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (1953-1960) was based on Biblia Hebraica, by Rudolf Kittel. Since that time, updated editions of the Hebrew text, namely, Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and Biblia Hebraica Quinta, have included recent research based on the Dead Sea Scrolls and other ancient manuscripts. These scholarly works reproduce the Leningrad Codex in the main text along with footnotes that contain comparative wording from other sources, including the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Dead Sea Scrolls, the Greek Septuagint, the Aramaic Targums, the Latin Vulgate, and the Syriac Peshitta. Both Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia and Biblia Hebraica Quinta were consulted when preparing the present revision of the New World Translation."
Could you explain the first part of Revelation 1:1, in the light of your stating that Jesus is God - "The revelation from Jesus Christ, *which God gave him* to show his servants what must soon take place."
I would appreciate your input on this. Thanks in advance.
Hi friend! That's a great question. As a Trinitarian, I believe God exists in three distinct Persons. So in that particular verse, I would understand "God" there to be a reference to God *the Father* . Basically I would interpret the verse to be saying that The Father gave Jesus the revelation. Since they're two distinct Persons, they can communicate and interact with one another.
I made a video recently talking more about verses similar to that, and I'll link it below if you're interested!
ruclips.net/video/QDCNDaagox0/видео.html
@@theologywithseth Thank you for your quick reply. I will take a look at the video you linked. Thank you.
Anytime!
it’s very sad that no one concentrates on the real pillars of JW theology. The main foundation of the JW theology is Matthew 24,45 - the true and discreet slave. For Christians Jesus is the main person but they don’t understand that for JWs he simply isn’t so important. Please concentrate on the governing body and the true and discreet slave as the spiritual foundation of this cult - says a 45 years old ex JW of the third generation and new born Christian.
The evilslave believes the master is delaying. Jude 1:3,4
Have the faithful slave ever believed the master is delaying.
Acts 1:8 Everyone was Jesus Witnesses until 1931 Acts 1:6
Revelation 3:12 Jehovah’s Witnesses. YHVH Yehovah Jehovah God Psalm 83:18
Charles Taze Russell 1881
Zion's Watchtower Tract Society
John 21:9 When they came ashore, they saw there a charcoal fire with fish lying on it and bread. 10 Jesus said to them: “Bring some of the fish you just now caught.” 11 So Simon Peter went on board and hauled the net ashore full of big fish, 153 of them.
1881 + 153 = 2034
The 3rd Seal of Revelation
Do not harm the oil and the wine!
Hi friend! Thank you for sharing that with me. This video is part of a larger series I'm making and the first couple of videos were aimed at demonstrating how untrustworthy the Watchtower leaders are. I documented several false prophecies as well as several places where they deliberately tampered with the translation of the Bible. If there's a more obvious smoking gun than that, I may need you to share it with me!
However, I think there is still great value in being able to intelligently refute JW teaching using the Bible, even if it's on a subject that isn't paramount to them. Especially if the subject happens to be paramount *to God* , which the nature of Christ most certainly is.
I do hope you'll check out my other videos and let me know if you have any topics you'd like me to consider covering in the future. Also, praise God that He delivered you out of the Watchtower!
@@montanaguy51?????????? How should and could I??
@@montanaguy51 I was born in, in 1959 and I know for a fact that Jesus Christ ALWAYS takes a back seat to the Governing Body.
So I know your comment is BS.
BTW, why are you no longer a witness?
Couldn't take any more of their BS?
@@Mr.DC3.1914 Who is over all ? Jesus is.
He was not created, Jesus is Jehovah
Jesus created everything.
The Watchtower are lying and the Governing Body wear Mormon undergarments because they are Masonic.
Your videos are so helpful as I de-program all the JW propaganda. Thank You!
I'm so glad to hear that! Welcome to my channel and let me know if you ever have any questions about anything!
You also might benefit from the channel "LightoverDark". He has some really good videos on a variety of JW topics.
If you're looking for a book that deals with the question of who Jesus is, I recommend "Putting Jesus in His Place" by Rober Bowman and Ed Komoszewski. It is not directed at JW _per se_ but by addressing the question of Jesus' deity, it hits at one of the core errors of JW. One of those books I would recommend every Christian read.
Great video Seth!
I'm so glad you enjoyed it, K!
Can you explain 2 Corinthians 1:3 tho? I get a little caught up on this scripture.
I see this question has gone unanswered. Do you mind if address it?
Can you explain what your issue is since I view this passage as completely consistent with trinitarian theology?
Is it regarding Paul's doxology to the Father or that the Father is called the God of our Lord Jesus?
@BasicBiblicalTruth I think that this would debunk God and Jesus being the same person since it directly says, "Praise be to God and the father of our lord jesus christ." Meaning that Jesus has a father to begin with.
Do you not understand trinitarian beliefs? We do not believe that God the Father and Jesus are the same person. They are subsistences (hypostases/persons) of the one God.
The Father/Son language is anthropomorphic language to communicate how the Godhead interacts with itself. In the ANE brother gods were rivals (cf. Egyptian gods Osiris and Set), so how could one send the other? Male/female or husband/wife gods always involved a sexual aspect to the relationship (cf. Egyptian gods Geb and Nut). Not to mention they were often dualistic. A Father/Son relationship tells us that they are equal as to nature, there is a hierarchical aspect to the relationship, it is a loving but non-sexual relationship, honouring one is to honour the other. A son in the ANE had the same authority as the Father (Joh 5:18), could rule as co-regent (David-Solomon), and was owner of everything that was the fathers (Luk 15:31). A Father/Son relationship is the perfect way to communicate the relationship between the Father and Jesus.
The Father is also the God of Jesus because the Son incarnated himself as a human. Thus, he has two natures-one divine and one human. This is a point that most unitarians fail to comprehend.
@@BasicBiblicalTruth--The Bible doesn't teach what you're saying.
Ah, Roland thinks God literally had coitus with a female goddess and sired a son, like in the Greek and Roman pagan myths. JWs are pagans masquerading as monotheists.
Thanks Seth, amazing video!
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for watching
You are absolutely right when you pointed to early church fathers for their interpretation of the Scripture or what they believed what the Apostles taught and believed. Amen to that.
can I have these powerpoint
The wisdom in Proverbs 8 is actually personified as a woman which can be seen in the grammar forms of the original Hebrew text, but not in the English translations.
The holy spirit is also feminine in the Hebrew text
The personification of lady wisdom as a woman can be seen in English:
Does not wisdom call? Does not understanding raise her voice?
On the heights beside the way, at the crossroads she takes her stand;
beside the gates in front of the town, at the entrance of the portals she cries aloud:
(Prov. 8:1-3 ESV)
Notice, "her voice," "her stand," and "she cries."
The problem is that JWs don't know what "personification" is. If they did, they would know a personification is not a person but personal attributes attributed to impersonal things.
Lady Wisdom is being contrasted to lady folly (ch 9). The writer is writing as if providing the wise guidance of a father to a son (1:8-10). For this reason, Wisdom and Folly are pictured as two different woman between whom a young man will pursue. People should read the entire book of Proverbs instead of trying to rip verses out of context to use as proof texts.
Oh, and when JWs insist that Wisdom is Jesus, ask them who created the things mentioned in 8:26-30-Wisdom or God? They will ignore the question and insist that the Hebrew word Amon, which is _usually_ (not always) translated as "master worker" means that Wisdom had to be assisting God, which it doesn't. My father is a "master worker" and he gives his workers advice or instructions and then goes around to various job sites to observe and ensure that they are doing the work the way they are suppose to. The writer of Proverbs tells people to get Wisdom so that we can image God and bring order out of chaos by listening to Wisdom. Wisdom doesn't do the work for us, she whispers in our ear, as it were, providing us the council to do the right thing. God is pictured as creating the world by means of Wisdom's council. Wisdom watches and rejoices at what God does, just as she watches and rejoices at the things that humans do when we act by her council. In vv. 26-30, God made the earth and established the heavens. In Heb 1:10, we are told that the Son is the one who laid the foundations of the earth and stretched out the heavens... which means the Son is Jehovah God-Jehovah the Son.
@@BasicBiblicalTruthyour statement regarding the witnesses is not accurate. Witnesses do and have known about personification usage
Decades ago why do I know this? Because I have publications covering that subject (personification) going back to 1985 for one of the publications. In 1988 for another. There are also more that will go beyond that. So your statement is patently false
.
@@rawbrutaltruth What is personification? Provide us with a definition.
@@aksk5770 Which verses?
ST. IRENAEUS MENTIONED LET’S GOOO 5:07
the firstborn of all creation: That is, the first creation by Jehovah God. Six of the eight occurrences of the Greek term for “firstborn” (pro·toʹto·kos) in the Christian Greek Scriptures refer to Jesus. The usual Scriptural meaning of the term “firstborn” is the one born first in order of time, such as a firstborn child. Because Jesus was “the firstborn” child of Mary, he was presented at the temple in accordance with Jehovah’s Law. (Lu 2:7, 22, 23; Mt 1:25) At Col 1:18, the same Greek word is used of Jesus, “the firstborn from the dead,” that is, first in order of time. (Compare Ro 8:29.) Likewise, in the Hebrew Scriptures, the expression “firstborn” is most often used in the sense of “the oldest son of a father.” The same Greek word occurs in the Septuagint at Ge 49:3, where Jacob says: “Reuben, you are my firstborn.”
Many like Seth who claim that Jesus was not created say that “firstborn” here means one who is preeminent in rank, not part of the creation, and they render the phrase “the firstborn over all creation.” While it is true that Jesus is preeminent in relation to all other creatures, there is no basis for the assertion that the term “firstborn” here takes on a meaning other than its usual one. A similar statement at Re 3:14 calls Jesus “the beginning of the creation by God,” confirming that here “firstborn of all creation” is used in the sense of being the first one created by God
Can "firstborn" be used figuratively? Yes or no?
We are not saying Jesus was delivered in a labour room. But had a beginning and is subject to his father otherwise 1Cor 15:24-28 will make no sense. My brother prayerfully consider this scripture. It tells us that after accomplishing all that Jehovah asked him to do Christ will hand over everything to his God and father. That when God put all things under his feet it doesn’t include Jehovah himself. Brother the truth is plain to see in the scriptures.
Typical JW, ignores the question and raises a totally separate objection.
I'll deal with 1Cor 15 after we deal with Col 1:15.
Can "firstborn" be used figuratively? Yes or no?
Just stumbled on to this discussion of is Jesus God or the Son of God. I am Born again and until my coming to the understanding of Jesus being the "First created being" I also was in the deception of the Trinitarian teaching. I use the word deception because it is very important to understand when you are under deception you cannot see the truth in the scriptures just as the Pharisees could not see and understand the truth Jesus was teaching. I found that until I sought the Father on matters of scripture that I was deceived in I wouldn't understand. So to start with if I or anyone seeks to find truth in and through the scriptures it only comes one way. God the Father by Jesus Christ through the Holy Spirit is how His children, born again, true believer or In Christ are to be taught. If we do not understand this and how God operates we fall into man's teaching. If we would just read who Jesus Himself said He was over and over we have to ask ourselves why so many times did He refer to God as His God and His Father. The self existing God created and gave authority to His Son the "First Created being" As Tammi 1914 referenced Rev 3:14 we also need to read vs 12-14 because the Resurrected Christ is speaking here and He says My God 4 times and then clearly states He is the " beginning of the creation of God. This can not be refuted unless your are under deception. The understanding of Jesus being the first created being has opened up the scriptures on the importance of knowing that He is truly the Son of God it absolutely does not diminish His role as savior, deliverer,and redeemer it actually magnifies and Glorifies Him much more. I will rest with that because I could go on and on about what has been revealed to myself by our Father on this subject as well as others that tie into this.
Wow. JWs really love to avoid answering questions and deflect the conversation. David, if you want to join the conversation, answer my question: Can "firstborn" be used figuratively? Yes or no?
Adding "(other)" or not doesn't change anything. Through the Son, all things were created, formed, or molded apart from himself. The verb is passive, indicating that a voice is directing Him to do so working THROUGH him (1 Corinthians 8:6).
What about verse 18 of Colossians 1? You agree that you would have to add "(other)" to "the first in all things" or "preeminence." Either way, He would be the first in all things, other wise referring to creation, He is the first one created.. verse 15 If you interpret it as "preeminence of creation," it would mean He is the highest-ranking in or of creation, it states being "of" includes him within the created group. You mock Jehovah's Witnesses for this interpretation of adding other but you need "(other)" in verse 18 even more, even though it's not there. 🤣🤣
Also The beginning (the first one created) Revelation 3:14 .. the first born ( highest ranked/ first begotten from the father)infact the only one coming from the father directly excluding the Holy spirit.. so noooo Trinity friends
Thank you for continuing to answer JWs.
Thank you for watching! More to come
If Jesus wad fully God almighty, would it be would it be logical for Jesue to be praying to himself?
Your comment displays a severe lack of understanding about the Trinity. This is common among JWs because the leadership misrepresents Trinitarian beliefs and JW members assume the leadership is telling them the truth (once you start to fact-check the GB you will discover that they are often not honest about what Christians believe). The GB often presents the trinity as modalism, which is not what we believe.
The one God subsists in three persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Son prayed to the Father. The second person of the triune God became human to die for his creation. This is the whole message of the gospel. My God loved me so much that he was willing to become human and die for me-JWs do have a god that loves them like that.
No, as a part of the Godhead always has been.
Agreed!
If Jesus is part of a trinity and fully God why does John 20:17 say that the Father is his God and in Revelation 3:12 Jesus is referring to God as his God?
If we accept your premise that 1 Colossians 1:15 refers not to order of creation but preeminence, and further, if we accept that Jesus could not be a created being because he did not create all "other" things, but "ALL things" that is everything outside of himself, since he is not created, then we must accept that Jesus created the holy spirit and Yehováh, the Father, since they are not mentioned and therefore would be included in "ALL things".
So you're defining God as a "thing", then?
@@evanwindom Just following the logic, since we're looking at it as an absolute.
@ Who said we were looking at it as an absolute?
@@evanwindom Because the claim is that Jesus cannot be created because "all things" refers to everything created and so if he is created you end up with a self-referential loop, a logical paradox. Witnesses help the reader resolve that by adding "other" in their Bible, because it is implied when you consider the immediate context and the overall context of Scripture.
However, Type Theory resolves this context by recognizing that Jesus is a different type of creation. So he is not in the set that includes "all things". That it evident by the way he is described. He is firstborn. There can be many born of God, but only one can be firstborn. Also all things were made through him and for him. I'm a creation, one of the "all things" set, but all things were not made through me nor for me.
@@BeroeanPickets And here we go with the deliberate ignoring any definition of firstborn that doesn't fit the paradigm. So, are you putting forth that there is created, non-created (eternal) and 'sorta created'? Based on what scripture?
In this context Jehovah did not procure wisdom from anyone. The context often determines or justifies the right usage of word. But you deliberately skipped the root meaning of “qanah” ie to create or to erect and choose the secondary meaning to procure or purchase and possess. So from who did Jehovah buy wisdom from?
Read the whole book of Proverbs. Chapter 8 is about personified wisdom, not Jesus.
AMEN!!!!!
Giovanni 1:1 Nel principio era la Parola, e la Parola era con Dio, e la Parola era Dio.
Giovanni 1:2 Essa era nel principio con Dio.
Giovanni 1:3 Ogni cosa è stata fatta per mezzo di lei; e senza di lei neppure una delle cose fatte è stata fatta.
1:30 I’m not a J w and I don’t believe Jesus is just the archangel Michael but, I would argue the archangel Michael is Jesus, or a prophetical character of Jesus, an archetype of Jesus and maybe Jesus himself.
My arguments : in the book of Revelation, the archangel Michael is the leader of heaven’s army.
If the leader is the commander, the chief of the army, comparing it to Old Testament, he is similar to the Angel of the Lord. Cf story of Joshua or Gideon.
The commander of Heaven’s army is Yahweh Sabbaoth. The angel of the Lord is the Lord himself and not just an angel and yet, he’s denominated as an angel, a simple angel and not an archangel but that doesn’t change the fact that the angel of the Lord is the Lord.
Another argument, in the book of Daniel, the angel revealing prophecy to Daniel says Michael is the prince of his people, Cf. Daniel 10
But Michael, as a simple angel or archangel can’t be the Prince. The Prince is the son of The King, the prince is the future king. The future king is The Messiah, the Christ, the chosen one. So Michael can’t be anybody but Jesus. Just like Emmanuel in Isaiah is Jesus, Michael in Daniel is Jesus.
Greetings! The problem with this is the Bible, your rule, is a Trinitarian book…
History shows us that Jesus didn't leave us a bible, - the apostles didn't tell us which books belong in the bible, - the church fathers never agreed on the 27 books of the NT through the 4th century and ONLY the 27 books, - not only did they not agree but their individual lists of would-be NT canons were GROWING during this time.
Therefore, if it wasn't the Catholic/Orthodox church, guided by the Holy Spirit, that compiled the 27 books of the NT in the 4th century, just 65 years AFTER the council of Nicaea which began the Trinitarian doctrine and subsequent councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and preserved these scriptures by laboriously hand copying them over and over throughout the centuries before the invention of the printing press, the “rule of faith” for many, please tell us who did? And if this church no longer exists today, what good is the text which came forth from her if she couldn't sustain herself?
Peace!!!
@@srich7503hello there,
I’m not sure what is your argument there. The Bible is the problem for trying to connect and interpret passages? It’s a theological book, so interpretation is mandatory. But interpretation need logic and coherence. It isn’t about feelings or it will make no sense.
Anyway compilation of the Bible was started by Jewish people. New Testament is seen by Christians as a successor to divine revelation to Jewish people.
Jewish people already made a list of most reliable books and it’s by studying and trying to stay faithful to the same logic, scholars, and experts on the scriptures made the selection. It wasn’t decided with chance but with criteria.
It follows a logic of “authorship” reliability and theology.
You say the problem is the Bible? But its exegesis of the Bible that makes Christian believe. There is a narrative, a theology, a logic linking all the texts. This theology is the foundation of faith.
After Jewish canon, Jesus did not left a book but his teachings transmitted by disciples. There are studies showing how apostles, disciples who were direct witnesses are most likely the ones who wrote the gospel.
Church fathers selected and councils were not arbitrarily deciding but they chose according to the overall coherence.
There are many videos on the subject here on RUclips. I’m not an expert so my statement might sound confusing, but your argument in my opinion doesn’t justify not trying to make sense of the scriptures.
@@racksityentertainment no. I said, “The problem with this is the Bible, your rule, is a Trinitarian book…” then i asked a question you did not answer…🤷🏽♂
Greetings Mr. Seth. Firstly, thank you for your videos and the gentleness and grace you show while addressing these issues.
Secondly, I see many JWs fight back even on the Isaiah 9:6 passage by saying Jesus is not being called the "Almighty God." As i was looking words up in the interlinear I saw that Almighty amd Mighty are different words in the Hebrew. Mighty (gibbor) seems to refer to strength while Almighty (shadday) seems to indicate fullness and richness of God's grace or bountiful, and the Greek (pantokrator). In bith Greek and Hebrew it appears that when they are used in scripture dont seem to explicitly include the Son. How do we reconcile this?
Also, in Isaiah 9:6 one of the names of Jesus will be Eternal Father.
I can see how scripture. Clearly shows Jesus is Jehovah, but I think these are good points and im not sure how to address them.
Thabk you again.
Hello @tweak04! Jesus is called "El Gibbor" in Isaiah 9:6 and Jehovah's Witnesses make much of the fact that we translate it merely as "mighty God" in our Bibles, as opposed to "Almighty God", which they believe gives them warrant to reduce Jesus to an inferior being. However, even Jehovah Himself is called "El Gibbor" in Isaiah 10:21 and Jeremiah 32:18 yet no one believes this means *He* is an inferior being. This is a strong indication that Jesus is equal to Jehovah, which the New Testament later affirms explicitly in John 5:18 and Philippians 2:6.
I'm not aware of any passages that explicitly refer to Jesus as "El Shadday", but that is hardly surprising since Jesus's name is not referred to in the Old Testament much at all. So I wouldn't make much of that point.
Jehovah's Witnesses are trained to try and lose people in the minutiae of biblical languages, but a picture is worth a thousand words. Have them paint a picture of Jehovah and no matter what they come up with, I can pretty much guarantee you there will be ample verses in the Bible that paint that exact same picture of Jesus. Blessings!
Not really... I've always just read it as a prophecy about the future. One day people will call Jesus "Mighty God" and indeed we do. It doesn't mean he's not currently a Mighty God at the time the prophecy was given. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the Watchtower agree that Jesus was a Mighty God even in Isaiah's day?
Hi again Frank, I understand those verses to be referring to Jesus *as a man* . Jesus *as a man* didn't exist before coming to earth, and therefore he *wasn't* highly exalted beforehand and *didn't* have a name higher than every name. But afterwards, Jesus Christ the man *did* receive all of those things. I actually made a video a little while ago where I broke down that passage in Philippians 2 verse by verse and I think you'd find it very interesting. I'll link it below and would like to hear your thoughts on it!
ruclips.net/video/UOIXWam1J7I/видео.html
Hi again @FrankLee-gq8yc, to answer your question, yes the reason I maintain that they are the same Being is because there are so many verses that state in no uncertain terms that there is only one God. Monotheism is arguably one of the most clear and emphatic teachings in the entire Bible so I'm bound to believe it.
And so if I see evidence that there is more than one Person in the Bible that is presented as God Himself, my only option is to assume this one true God must somehow exist in more than one Person. How that works in real life goes way over my pay grade and I'm afraid I won't be able to exhaust that mystery for you, especially in a RUclips comment. But I believe it because I see it in the Bible and I want to be obedient to Scripture.
And while it's true Jesus told us to worship God, there are plenty of times in the Bible where *Jesus himself* is worshipped. Such examples would include Matthew 14:33, Matthew 28:9, Matthew 28:17, Luke 24:52, John 9:38, and Hebrews 1:6. The New World Translation tries to obscure that by translating it as "obeisance", but it's the exact same Greek word that Jesus used when he commanded us to worship God alone (Matthew 4:10).
Add that in with every other piece of evidence I've covered in my JW series and just on my channel in general, and my conscience is bound to believe it. I think Trinitarianism is inevitable when we let God be God
Yes, you're right that Satan is sometimes called the "god" of this world like in 2 Corinthians 4, but I would still categorize him as a "false god"- that is, one we shouldn't be worshipping with supreme adoration. The same could be said of demons or the false gods of other religions, both ancient and modern.
I just go off the nicene Creed, that created applies to everything that was created through Jesus. And because Jesus was not created that way and was begotten directly from the father he is in a different category. Thus begotten not made.
IMO, we should be less concerned about the theology of the Jehovah's Witnesses and more concerned about the nuclear arsenal that we have built without their help.
Couldn't we do both? Let's be concerned about the nuclear arsenal that could destroy our planet *and* false doctrines that could destroy people's souls. I don't think it has to be one or the other
@@theologywithseth My experiences in conversing with members of the JW sect does not lead me to believe that the souls of these people are being "destroyed" by a false doctrine.
As for being "concerned about the nuclear arsenal that could destroy our planet," that "concern" does not seem to override the general population's delusion that their nuclear arsenal is necessary for their freedom. In Russia it is much the same. Every year its Orthodox bishops bless Russia's nuclear arsenal and justify its existence by saying that it is necessary to prevent Russia's enslavement by the West. The consequence of submitting to this delusion is nothing less than a global nuclear war, and the advent of such a war was predicted by the OT prophets. See Jeremiah 25:32-33.
Freedom is not a religious value or virtue, but it is ofter represented as such. The great Persian prophet, Mirzah Husayn Ali, wrote
"We see people who desired freedom boasting of it. They are in manifest ignorance. The consequences of freedom end in sedition, the fire of which is unquenchable."
They're not mutually exclusive, right? Nuclear arsenals, false doctrines, abortion -- there are plenty of non-exclusive matters out there.
@@theologywithseth TY. If I had to choose, I would go with unilateral nuclear disarmament and take my chances with the false doctrines.
@@evanwindom IMO, the fact that we are going to have a global nuclear war overrides the other issues, important as they may be.
See; Jeremiah 25:32-33 It is in the cards, just a matter of time.
According to the Bible and ancient Christian creeds, God did not create Jesus, but rather Jesus was eternal and always existed as a member of the triune Godhead. The Son of God took on human nature and a human body when he came to earth.
Jesus Christ was decidely not created by God! He has existed for eternity as a member of the Godhead. The Father did, however, make him the beginning of his family, a family where every human being has the potential of entering. Trinity, in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.❤❤❤
God didn't have an In the Beginning only Jesus had an in the beginning.
God does have a woman, and he put enmity between her and Satan.
Galatians 3:20 God is only one.
Yeshuah is the embodiment of God almighty so we could see Him and interact with Him since no one can see God himself, how does that work? I have no idea but that’s what makes Him God doesn’t it?
Wisdom in Hebrew is Sophia the feminine aspect of the Holy Spirit
The Apostolic father’s contemporaries of some apostles should be familiar with apostolic teachings,the trinity being one of them.
So, did they teach the trinity doctrine? One of the earliest non- biblical books “the Didache” circa 100 C.E says nothing about equality to support the trinity. Church fathers such as Clement,Ignatius, Polycarp, Hermas and Papias speak of God as a separate eternal, almighty, all knowing being and his son as a lesser subordinate spirit creature whom God created.
Apostolic fathers lived around the first century C.E. Soon after the apologist appeared such as Justin Martyr, Tatian,Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria. Did they teach coequal persons or trinity? They also taught the son was a creature.
Ignatius (AD 50-117) in his letter to the Ephesians said,
We have also as a Physician the Lord our God, Jesus the Christ, the only-begotten Son and Word, before time began, but who afterwards became also man, of Mary the virgin. For “the Word was made flesh.” Being incorporeal, He was in the body; being impassible, He was in a passible body; being immortal, He was in a mortal body; being life, He became subject to corruption, that He might free our souls from death and corruption, and heal them, and might restore them to health, when they were diseased with ungodliness and wicked lusts.
Now, how could Ignatius and the early church fathers refer to Jesus as "OUR God"?
@@BasicBiblicalTruth
Also Ignatius:”The only true God, the unbegotten and unapproachable, the lord of all, the father and begetter of the only begotten son. He has the son saying “the lord created me , the beginning of his ways”, he barely mentions the Holy Spirit as being part of the Trinity doctrine
No, sorry, Ignatius didn't say that. Please do your homework.
Second, you didn't answer my question. How could Ignatius and the early church fathers refer to Jesus as "OUR God"?
@@BasicBiblicalTruth
Regardless of how you view his writings a trinity doctrine is not to be found in any of them.
Concerning the word translated “produced” in prov 8:22. Strongs exhaustive concordance says the root meaning of “qanah” or the primary meaning is “to create” or to “erect”But secondary meanings include to procure or purchase and possess. So it makes sense that Jesus the wisdom from God is saying Jehovah created him from ancient times an indefinite past long before the earth was created. He was created as an embodiment of wisdom not because wisdom did not exist before his creation. Think about it. Can a person without wisdom create an embodiment of wisdom. I’m happy I didn’t just take your word for it. I’m happy I checked for myself. But why do you take it upon yourself to deliberately deceive people and separate them from Jehovah the God of truth?
Do a word search in Proverbs. Tell me if qanah means "to create" in any of the other places it is found in Proverbs.
The word translated eternity in KJV is “olam” and it primarily means “concealed” or “a time that is out of mind past or future”, “a secret time” and not eternity. That’s why the new world translation translates the word as “ancient times or times immemorial “. What wisdom personified is saying is that at a concealed time in the ancient past, at the beginning of creation Jehovah created him as the beginning of his creative ways. Friends I want to encourage you to be like the Bornean’s of Acts 17:11 who verified everything they were told rather than swallowing it hook line and sinker. I don’t know Seth’s motive but from my little research everything he says cannot be trusted without verification. It appears Mr Seth has set out to deceive and deliberately mislead Jehovahs people. These videos deserve a rebuttal but I don’t have the time.
Asherah was Wisdom. She was conciderd Yeahwehs wife
What you believe is irrelevant if it is not what Yehovah the true God has said.
Yehovah the true God alone is God, there is no other.
Jesus was created made formed like all other men.
All men are created
All menare sons of Adam
Adam was created.
A christ (mashiach, anointed) is a man anointed by God Lord Yehovah the Anointed to carry out his command
Jehovas witnesses believed that Michael archangel is another position in heaven, revelation 12:7 and revelation 19:12. Metion two army's one is by the name Michael and the army we see jesus coming,?you think that God have two different army in heaven absolutely not.
Jesus in the garden says I can send twelve legions of angels even so now. On earth Jesus for sure wasn't Michael the archangel. And as a Christ follower He isn't in heaven either.
@rhondahart2416 I'm not saying that jesus is Michael archangel, but before he came he was that angel of jehova, judges 13:17,18 and Zechariah 1:2 ,12:8
Absolutely jesus is the christ the son of God on earth,that is why the have another name for him Emmanuel.
On heaven it was given the position of Michael archangel not on earth.
@rhondahart2416 also in heaven fillippians 2:5,6,7 said jesus never wanted be equal to his father,he emptied himself and took the form of men.
We know Jesus was created because he was born 2 AD of Mary
Hi
Yeshuas birth was The second Person manifesting Himself into the human sphere. It's why John Ch 1 v 14 states that He was The Word- God, that BECAME flesh.
Col, 1:15-18, if all things were created through Jesus, and for Jesus, why he said, I have no place to lay my head?
Keep preaching it. I'm sure the watchtower copy pasters will be out in force again 😂
There's always a handful! Thank you for watching
He wasn't just created like everything else,He was unique,He was actually birthed out of the Father.Jesus was the number 1 creation, before anything or anyone else.Alpha,the beginning.Thats what it says the Word ( was) God in the pastence.He came out of God and became His own self.
Do you have any verse to support this claim please?. Jesus was birthed out of father.
If Jesus came out of God then he has Gods nature and essence ---anything from God is eternal and uncreated,..so you are not making sense
0:28 @@Fjmaster2023then why does the bible say that Jesus was the first of God's creative works??? I know a scripture stating so was posted for this video along with the scriptural reference.
@@rawbrutaltruth The bible NEVER said Jesus was the first of Gods creative works..NEVER!
I hope the verse you are interpreting that way is not col 1:15-...firstborn over all creation?if that's it,then its your interpretation that is wrong
This thread is only for people who did not watch the video 😝
TDG SERVI NON DI DIO MA DEL CORPO DIRETTIVO !
Jehovah, the Bible God says "do not add or substrut the word of God. YHWH
No one has the right to change God's word.
The birth of Jesus. On the 8 days circumcised..
Colossians 1:1
Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God,
Philippians 1:2
Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ".
Philippians 2:9
Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name,
The argument that firstborn means preeminent at the 11:00 timestamp is what I like to call a distinction without a difference. Seth is simply repeating an argument that Sam Shamoon made. David is the 'firstborn', not literally but in eminence . What Seth doesn't realise is that if I am of the highest position of a class, I AM STILL OF THAT CLASS. How on earth can I be in the highest position in a class if I am not of that class/group/category? The statement would have no ontological meaning. David being the firstborn of kings means that David IS STILL A KING albeit the most eminent and exalted. Israel being the "firstborn" of nations is STILL A NATION. Similarly, Jesus being the "firstborn of all creation" means that, for this statement to have any ontological meaning he has to be OF THAT CLASS i.e. of the class of creation. He is the most exalted and eminent of creation. When Sam Shamoon made this argument, at least he realized that even this is not enough to win his argument: it gets him past firstborn but he is still stumped by Jesus being of the creation class. So Sam to racheted up eminent to pre-eminent and lol, pre-eminent is still not enough so he hoiks that up to transcendental. But WAIT!!! The basis of the comparison is King David and Israel. Hence, if Jesus is transcendental and pre-eminent, then King David would have to be transcendental as well.
Well you’ve been well trained by jws
Jehovah is king of Israel (Zeph 3:15), which is the highest position of a class of humans (Israelites), so is Jehovah a human? If you say, "No," then you demonstrate the problem with your "class" argument.
Paul tells us his reason in v. 16, but JWs don’t read the Bible in context. Does Paul say that Jesus is “Firstborn” because 1) he is the agent of creation, ie the one who created all things (positional) or 2) he was the first created thing (chronological, ie a created being)?
@BasicBiblicalTruth Respectfully sir there is no problem with my class argument. The problem with YOUR argument is that firstborn was not used to describe Jehovah so I have nothing to respond to. Have a good evening ( Mr Seth likes to brand me as disrespectful so I am taking extra care to be civil to everyone I dialogue with. Sorry if this comes across as being fake)
Good point
You're using the exact word fallacy. Since the Father isn't called "firstborn" you think we need not use the same logic applied to "firstborn" with other words. This is nonsense.
Second, you didn't answer my question. What reason does Paul give for calling Jesus "firstborn"? Context is the death knell to JW.
Revelation 3:14 mentions again the first creation,.
Many translations translate archē in Revelation 3:14 as Origin (NRSV), source (NAB, REB), or beginning (KJV, NASB). This reading relates the word archē to Christ’s creative activity, either at the beginning of time or as part of the new creation. This verse does not have the sense that the Son is a created creature, as JWs interpret the verse. “Because both God and Christ are called archē, the term conveys a sense of deity (Bauckham, Theology, 56). Since God is the Creator, the same can be said of Christ.”[1]
However, the context of Revelation 3:14-21 emphasizes Jesus’ authority to rule (which is why he is sitting on a throne), so the proper translation of archē is “ruler” (NIV).[2]
Revelation 3:14 is a classic example of how JWs rip verses out of context in order to use them as a proof text.
[1] Craig R Koester, Revelation: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 38A (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2021), ebook, 336.
[2] See Michael J. Svigel, “Christ as Αρχή in Revelation 3:14,” _Bibliotheca Sacra_ 161 (2004).
firstborn is not solely first physical born, especially in ancient culture. David was the last born of Jesse yet God called him the firstborn.
@BasicBiblicalTruth I'm saying what the Bible says, the first creation off all things.
The Bible doesn't say Jesus was the first creation. Sorry, you have to read that into the Bible.
JWs love to rip verses out of context to make it fit their beliefs. Try reading the Bible in context.
Alot of things I disagree with in this video and most, if not all of it, can be challenged using bible and extra-biblical sources.
But to focus on one point about firstborn. I think you are misusing the text and language to make your case. Firstly, your position really isn't preeminence as a meaning. If that's all you were saying a JW would agree. You're actually saying "not necessarily birth-order". In saying "not necessarily birth-order" you go to (for one) Psalm 89:27. That doesn't work to build a positive case:
1)David is the firstborn in a relationship with his heavenly father YHWH (Ps 89:26, 27)
2)David is the lastborn in a relationship with his earthly father Jesse (1 Sam 17:12-14)
3)Therefore firstborn can mean preeminence and not necessarily birth-order
This is a non-sequiter because the conclusion doesn't follow from the premises. (It would be something like: 'Davids birth-order depends on what relationship we refer to.')
It's really a red herring to bring up his position with Jesse because Psalm is referring to his relationship with God!
How do you resolve this?
(I haven't made a positive case for birth-order, I'm just doing a internal critique of the Trinitarian position)
Hello @eew8060, what I was demonstrating on that slide was that "Firstborn" doesn't necessarily mean "first created", which is how JW's understand it. Rather, it can simply imply a position of supreme authority in a given sphere of influence, which is how its used of David in Psalm 89:27.
Given that background, I see no problem in calling Jesus the "firstborn over all creation" since he has the position of supreme authority. I feel like that's pretty straightforward, but if I'm missing you somewhere, let me know!
@@theologywithseth
Yes, I laid it out to challenge the logic of that argument. If I've correctly laid out the premises (1 and 2) then the conclusion (3) doesn't follow. How do you deal with that?
And I said to bring up Jesse from Psalm 89 is a red herring. How do you deal with that also?
@eew8060 The reason I brought up those examples was to prove that "firstborn" doesn't necessarily mean "first created". That's all I need to answer the JW argument based on Colossians 1:15 and I think those examples accomplish that. So I don't think it's a red herring at all- I think it's responsible Bible study.
@@theologywithseth
Ok so you're not following my challenge. You'd agree that firstborn _normally_ refers to a birth-order, right? In an effort to show how it doesn't necessarily mean that you go to Psalm 89. Therein David is called a firstborn in a relationship with YHWH. That in no way demonstrates what you set out to prove. Just because he's not a firstborn in a relationship with Jesse does _not_ show that he can't be a firstborn in someway with the heavenly Father. You haven't demonstrated not birth-order at all.
David is "firstborn" in relationship to his heavenly father YHWH? So, you think that YHWH had coitus with a female human and sired David, just as Zeus did when he sired Hercules. Sounds like you have pagan beliefs.
Jesus is not an angel, he is a human created by the Almighty as Luke 1:26-35 teaches us. Also, Only the Almighty has inherent immortality and He never dies otherwise that would not be true. 1 Timothy 6:16. So if Jesus died, it is plain that he cannot be the Almighty. Another good verse is James 1:17 that says that the Almighty does not change, and even Jesus said the Almighty is Spirit, therefore, the Almighty cannot become human or an angel otherwise that would mean a change in nature which disagrees with what James is saying. Jesus was created, he was completely human, but the Almighty because of his obedience, raised him up to immortality and put him in a level of authority second only to Himself, the only one above Jesus is the Almighty God, his Father. Jesus is the Messiah, from the Tribe of Judah descendent of David so he is human, to suggest he existed before, it is to refute what the Old Testament teaches about him. Jesus, by the Spirit of the Father displayed powerful signs and also his words were given to him by the Father as Jesus himself testifies when he says “ the words that I speak I do not speak of my own accord, my Father who lives in me does his work” John 14:10
Read REVELATION 1 ....Jesus calls himself the first and last, the Alpha and omega and he's called the " Almighty ".
Where did you read that - “the one who is and who was and who is coming” calls himself “Alpha and Omega” and according to Revelation 1:4,5, it’s not Jesus.
“May you have undeserved kindness and peace from _‘The One who is and who was and who is coming,’_ and from _the seven spirits that are before his throne_ , and from _Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “The firstborn from the dead,” and “The Ruler of the kings of the earth”_ Revelation 1:4-5
So here in this verse, of Revelation chapter 1 we are introduced to three characters:
1) The One who is and who was and who is coming,
2) the seven spirits that are before 1)’s throne, and
3) Jesus Christ.
Right away we learn in Revelation 1:4-5 that _“The One who is and who was and who is coming”_ *sits upon a throne*. Please keep that in mind.
In Rev 1:8, we come across our first use of the title “The Alpha and the Omega”:
“I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “the One who is and who was and who is coming, the Almighty.”
So did you catch that? Of the three characters we have just been introduced to, which of them has told us upfront and right away that HE is the Alpha and the Omega? Yes, it was “The One who is and who was and who is coming”, who is mentioned separate from Jesus Christ.
@FrankLee-gq8yc yeah sure I am ok with ASV, who is coming then if He is not Jesus? The Bible established that the one coming is Jesus... and before that verse, the Rev. 1:7 tells about Jesus the one is coming, the key point that He is Jesus is the word "the one pierced"
@GsWitness REVELATION 1
1.Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
WHO IS COMING?
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.
WHO SAYS HE'S THE ALPHA AND OMEGA AND CALLS HIMSELF " ALMIGHTY "?
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
WHO HEARD A GREAT VOICE?
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
WHO IS TELLING JOHN TO SEND THE LETTERS TO THE CHURCH'S AND CALLS HIMSELF ALPHA AND OMEGA AND THE FIRST AND LAST.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
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.
WHO DID JOHN SEE WHO WAS THAT GREAT VOICE.
14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
WHO IS JOHN DESCRIBING.
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 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.
WHO IS HOLDING THE SEVEN STARS, AND WHO HAS A TWO TWOEDGED SWORD FOR JUDGEMENT.
17 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:
WHO DID JOHN BOW AND WORSHIP TO, AND WHAT DID HE SAY HE WAS.
18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
WHO LIVETH AND DIED ON THE CROSS FOR YOU WHO WAS RESURRECTED TO LIVE FOR EVERMORE AND DEFEATED HELL AND DEATH.
OH ! THIS IS JESUS CHRIST SPEAKING IN REVELATION TO JOHN, AND DESCRIBED HIMSELF SO THEIR WOULD BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO IS SPEAKING. THE ONE WHO DIED AND WAS RESURRECTED AND ALIVE FOR ETERNITY.
YOU MUST BE A SPECIAL KINDA STUPID!
@@RG-qn2qmWell-done bro,its quite clear who Jesus is from Revelation....
Some persons just can't settle for truth...they love being deceived...ask him if the Father is the one coming and he should give you scripture where it is the father that's coming,he can't answer...
@Fjmaster2023 7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.
WHO IS COMING?
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.
WHO SAYS HE'S THE ALPHA AND OMEGA AND CALLS HIMSELF " ALMIGHTY "?
9 I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.
10 I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet,
WHO HEARD A GREAT VOICE?
11 Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last: and, What thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
WHO IS TELLING JOHN TO SEND THE LETTERS TO THE CHURCH'S AND CALLS HIMSELF ALPHA AND OMEGA AND THE FIRST AND LAST.
12 And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks;
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.
WHO DID JOHN SEE WHO WAS THAT GREAT VOICE.
14 His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire;
WHO IS JOHN DESCRIBING.
15 And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters.
16 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.
WHO IS HOLDING THE SEVEN STARS, AND WHO HAS A TWO TWOEDGED SWORD FOR JUDGEMENT.
17 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:
WHO DID JOHN BOW AND WORSHIP TO, AND WHAT DID HE SAY HE WAS.
18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.
WHO LIVETH AND DIED ON THE CROSS FOR YOU WHO WAS RESURRECTED TO LIVE FOR EVERMORE AND DEFEATED HELL AND DEATH.
OH ! THIS IS JESUS CHRIST SPEAKING IN REVELATION TO JOHN, AND DESCRIBED HIMSELF SO THEIR WOULD BE NO MISUNDERSTANDING OF WHO IS SPEAKING. THE ONE WHO DIED AND WAS RESURRECTED AND ALIVE FOR ETERNITY.
I am not going to waste my time here.Just to tell you you are being extremely Blesfemous saying Jesus Yeshua is God.God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son Yeshua Jesus so who ever believes in him will never die but live forever Amen Halleluyah ❤❤❤God is YAHWEH
Sorry, but claiming Jesus isn't God is blasphemy.
@danielarredondo-sj2js I think it's funny that you said you weren't going to "waste your time" here, but then you wrote out a comment on a video you didn't even bother to watch, thus wasting your time lol. Either watch the video or go find something better to do!
the trinity is European doctrine of discovery teaching which allowed Europeans to subjugate and enslave those not white 2 Corinthians 11:20
I am not JW. JW aren't allowed to watch this video anyways.
Only begotten of the father. What does that mean? I don't know. I honestly don't care.
Jesus is God, Lord and Savior. Divine. Holy. Perfect. Jesus lived. Died. Rose. Son of God. Immanuel with us.
What does it matter if eons in the past, long before Creation, Jesus was somehow "begotten" is irrelevant.
Now if someone wants to say Jesus was created into the womb of Mary and didn't exist before, that is heresy, of course. If someone claims Jesus isn't God, that's heresy also.
Franky, and other JWs, are not honest with the text of the Bible. JWs must consistently add to the text. When Jesus says that people will worship the Father in spirit and truth, does he say that people will not worship him? No, but JWs must read this into the text.
Do people in the NT worship Jesus? Yes. Luke 24:52, Mat 28:19, Rev 5, etc.
Franky, why are you citing Rotherham's version?
In Rev 22:9, Rotherham has "and he saith unto me--See [thou do it] not! A fellow-servant, am I, of thee, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them who keep the words of this scroll: unto God, do homage."
Would you concede that the NWT is wrong to have "worship" in this verse instead of homage? No, you wouldn't. So you are not being honest.
This is classic JW. Instead of arguing for why their translation is correct, they make the child's cry "But MOM! The other kids are doing it!" by citing another version.
Is Jesus worshipped in Luke 22:52, Mat 28:19, and Rev 5? Yes.
Franky, I've never cry, "That's the NWT." I always appeal to the original languages.
Proskuneō was “used to designate the custom of prostrating oneself before persons and kissing their feet or the hem of their garment, the ground, etc.; the Persians did this in the presence of their deified king, and the Greeks before a divinity or someth. holy.) to express in attitude or gesture one’s complete dependence on or submission to a high authority figure, (fall down and) worship, do obeisance to, prostrate oneself before, do reverence to, welcome respectfully…. This reverence or worship is paid (A) to human beings, but by this act they are to be recognized as belonging to a superhuman realm…. (B) to transcendent beings…. (α) of deity in monotheistic cult…. (β) of image worship in polytheistic cult…. (γ) the devil and Satanic beings…. (δ) angels…. (ε) The risen Lord is especially the object of worship: Mt 28:9, 17; Lk 24:52.”[1]
Obeisance can be a proper translation of proskuneō when the object is a human, the (A) category. However, when the person is receiving proskuneō as a transcendent being (God, gods, angels, demons-the (B) category), then the proper translation is “worship.”
The NWT abides by this for α (Mat 4:10), β (Acts 7:43), γ (Mat 4:9), δ (Rev 22:8), but not for ε, showing their inconsistency. The NWT incorrectly translate proskuneō as "obeisance" when the object is Jesus.
[1] Walter A. Bauer, _A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature,_ 4th ed. (Chicago, Il: University of Chicago Press, 2021), s.v. Προσκύνω.
Franky, when I cite someone, I source them. That's what honest people do. Where are you getting your information from??
Second, did Jesus tell people _not_ to worship him? Peter told the Centurian not to worship him (Acts 10) and the angel told John not to worship him (Rev 22)-where did Jesus tell his followers not to worship him? You're not being honest.
As I pointed out earlier, which you ignored, the NWT translates proskuneō as "worship" when the person is receiving proskuneō as a transcendent being (God, gods, angels, demons), _except_ when it is Jesus. The NWT is inconsistent.
The only thing JWs fulfill is the statement that false teachers will rise up and draw people away from the truth.
He is the image of the invisible God. An image of an apple is not an apple.
How can Jesus be God if he is “the image of God”? In our minds, the word “image” makes us think of an archetype and the copy, and while the degree of resemblance can range from partial to complete, they are nevertheless distinct. However, Kleinknecht points out that “since a representation of what is invisible is impossible, the meaning here is a revelation with substantial participation, as in Plato and Philo. The eikṓn is not alien to the object, nor present only in the mind, but is in fact its reality and illumines its inner essence.”[1] In other words, Jesus is the visible manifestation of the Godhead-that which can be seen of God. Col 1:15 is not saying that Jesus is essentially distinct from God the Father (ie. part of creation) as unitarians claim, but within the context of the book (cf. 1:19 & 2:9) is a claim that Jesus is the reality-God manifest.
[1] H. Kleinknecht, II, “The Greek Use of Eikṓn,” in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament : Abridged in One Volume (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1985), 182.
@@BasicBiblicalTruth Amen!
Couldn't have said it better!
Agreed! Thank you @BasicBiblicalTruth for sharing that with us
@bunchlead LOL. You said, "All the very best bible scholars no longer believe Jesus is God." This is a "No true Scotsman" fallacy.
Colossians doesn't say he was created. Rather, it says he is the uncreated creator of ALL things.
@@BasicBiblicalTruthCool,perfectly nailed
Created " by" him.
So Paul in colosians is exactly like the gnostic beliefs but isn’t because firstborn is figurative not literal. Got it.
Was it an accumulation of being unwise that led to creating? Haha! WISDOM here is CHAKHMAH, a feminine form, or derivative from CHAKHAM. The whole TRINITY always were CHAKHAM, but the first step of preparing to create was ONE of THEM (JESUS) taking on the role of CHAKHMAH, the same WISDOM that always was being expressed to new witnesses for the first time ever, entering the role of the WORD breaking an eternal silence towards things that had never been before, beginning their existence upon JESUS as FOUNDATION of all things, communicating existence them these newcomers into knowledge of WISDOM. The first of YHWH's works or services does not mean creature, but bespeaks a newly entered role by an ETERNAL BEING, a new transaction occurring within the GODHEAD without change to any trait of GOD.
Jesus in his prehuman life as Michael the Arch Angel was the first created angel directly by his Father and God Jehovah.Michael was also known as the Word or as the Spokesman.This is the angel that Jehovah God sent on this Earth to become a perfect human Jesus and to die as a ransom sacrifice for our sins.
Consider how ridiculous the claim about Michael is:
1. Jehovah created Michael the archangel, a demigod who creates everything on behalf of Jehovah (contrary to Isa 44:24 & 45:12).
2. Michael ceases to exist.
3. Jehovah creates the human Jesus (who has no correspondence with Michael. There was no incarnation of Michael, rather, at some point Michael ceased to exist and Jesus was created. So why did Michael have to be annihilated? I do not know, do you? This belief also contradicts the Gospel’s account that Jesus “came down from heaven”).
4. Jesus lives, dies, and ceases to exist.
5. Jesus 2.0 is created (which JWs call resurrection, but is not the same as the Jewish/Christian concept of resurrection).
6. Jesus 2.0 (another human Jesus) hangs out with the disciples for 40 days and then … what? JWs aren’t really sure on this point.
7. Jesus 2.0 ceases to exist somehow and Jesus 3.0 (a spirit creature) begins, who is also called Michael (even though the Bible never makes that connection, and actually shows Michael and Jesus are separate entities; cf. Jude).
8. Heb 2:5 says that God did not put the world to come under the control of angles and then goes on to speak about how Jesus, a human (and God), has been given control of the world to come. Yet, this must be a different Jesus than Jesus/Michael 3.0 because Jesus/Michael 3.0 is an angel. So when does Jesus 4.0 come?
This is just one more teaching of JWs that they accept without any semblance of critical thinking and they do so because men in NY tell them to believe it, in the same way they have been told they must believe that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 BC (instead of 586/7 BC as ALL scholars affirm) and that they must believe that Jesus died on a "torture stake" and not a cross (even though ALL the evidence is on the side of cross).
@@BasicBiblicalTrutha. JW already answered this Michael the archangel controversy and left a very long comment you must not have seen it or Read it.
@@rawbrutaltruth Long posts have been provided but answers have not.
The “Word of God” was never called the Archangel Michael…can you quote a verse that shows the two are the same person.
JW propaganda
no such word as trinity in all the holy words
There's no such thing as governing body either so what's your point?
@rhondahart2416 what is your point? Is this what aboutism?