File: 1776932476232.gif (248 KB, 200x200)

248 KB GIF

>>544128608
The nicest lady I ever talked to on the phone was a Jehovah's witness lady from New (jew) York. Not joining the faith, though

>>544129034
I chase them around with my Bible.
>If there is only one savior, and it's God and you say Jesus is your savior, then who is Jesus?

I actually got one to admit that Jesus wasn't his Saviour because he doesnt believe Jesus is God and only God can save. I told him then he has nothing.

>>544128608
Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in salvation like that. They don't even understand the Bible

>>544129155
The Bible identifies God as the primary source of salvation, often referring to him as “Savior.” (1 Samuel 10:19; Isaiah 43:11; Titus 2:10; Jude 25) In addition, God used various men to deliver the ancient nation of Israel, and the Bible calls them “saviors.” (Nehemiah 9:27; Judges 3:9, 15; 2 Kings 13:5)

Likewise, since God provides salvation from sin through the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ, the Bible refers to Jesus as “Savior.”—Acts 5:31; Titus 1:4.

>>544129221
Jehovah’s Witnesses strive to adhere to the form of Christianity that Jesus taught and that his apostles practiced

>>544129155
I invited them them in, asked them whether they believed Satan would be destroyed after the final battle. They said yes and then read Revelation 20:10
>And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
I explained to them thats not what that verse says. They haven't visited again.

>>544130208
>the Bible refers to Jesus as “Savior.”
Oh it does.
That's your seeming contradiction to deal with. The Bible is explicitly clear that there is only one savior, and it is The LORD. Yet, the same Bible calls Jesus savior.

Who then, does that make Jesus?

>>544130649
>Who then, does that make Jesus?
The sovereign LORD God of Israel.

>>544130405
The word used for “torment” in the Bible can also mean “a condition of restraint.” For example, the Greek word for “tormentors” used at Matthew 18:34 is rendered as “jailers” in many translations, showing the connection between the words “torment” and “restraint.”

Likewise, the parallel accounts at Matthew 8:29 and Luke 8:30, 31 equate “torment” with “the abyss,” a figurative place of complete inactivity or death. (Romans 10:7; Revelation 20:1, 3) In fact, several times the book of Revelation uses the word “torment” in a symbolic sense.—Revelation 9:5; 11:10; 18:7, 10.

>>544130649
Note that Othniel and Ehud were raised up by Jehovah God as saviors. They were merely the agents through whom the great Savior, God, brought about liberation from enemy oppression. Othniel, Ehud and others like them did not proclaim themselves to be saviors. They acknowledged the One who was using them as being their Savior and God.

>>544130208
>Jehovah’s Witnesses strive to adhere to the form of Christianity that Jesus taught and that his apostles practiced
Who has the authority to speak like this?
>O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
A thirty something year old man? No.
A prophet? No.
An angel? No.
An archangel? Also no.
The living God? Yes.

It seems the solution to the paradox of Jehovahs witnesses is accepting that Jesus is who the prophets say He is, who Jesus Himself says he is, amd who His disciples said he is.

Jehovahs witnesses wont admit unless heavily pressed that they believe Jesus is the archangel Michael because in their heart they know scripture doesnt reflect it, they take one passage in Daniel and run with it. Discounting the fact that while "Prince" is one of Jesus' titles, others include "The mighty God, The Everlasting Father." The beginning and the end. The King of Kings and LORD of Lords. Yahweh, The proper name of The sovereign LORD God of Israel.

>>544130687
Jesus’ opposers accused him of making himself equal to God. (John 5:18; 10:30-33) However, Jesus never claimed to be on the same level as Almighty God. He said: “The Father is greater than I am.”—John 14:28.

>>544130890
Jesus is a god. “God” means a strong one. Christ is called “The mighty God” at Isaiah 9:6, “a god” at John 1:1, and “the only-begotten god” at John 1:18.

Jehovah is not the only god or strong one. The very fact that he is called the Almighty God indicates that there are other gods not so mighty, not almighty like him

>>544130805
>Note that Othniel and Ehud were raised up by Jehovah God as saviors
As Judges. The Bible calls them Judges. This isn't the first time I've had this debate.

>I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior.
There's no room to interpret that.

Admit Jesus isnt your savior. Admit Jesus can't save because only God can save and you don't believe Jesus is God. Admit your religion doesnt need Him. Admit your pastures are as dry fields, and as dust, without the fountain of living water.

>>544131015
The Bible does not limit the term “savior” to the Most High. In the past, men whom God used in freeing his people Israel from oppression were called saviors. We read: “Jehovah raised a savior up for the sons of Israel that he might save them, Othniel the son of Kenaz, the younger brother of Caleb.” (Judg. 3:9) Then again we are told: “The sons of Israel began to call to Jehovah for aid. So Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Ehud.”—Judg. 3:15.

In the original Hebrew text of the Bible, the same word is used for these human saviors as is used elsewhere in the Bible when referring to Jehovah God as Savior.—Psalm 7:10.

>>544130953
>Jehovah is not the only god
Does the JW bible not include Isaiah?
>I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.
I'm only joking. I know it does include it.

It's funny people like you claim to have the only correct understanding of scripture but then you dont just interpret a passage in a strange way. You see God explicitly, and repeatedly say there is no God but Him then you say that there are other "gods".

The word of The LORD.
>I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.
The JW interpretation of that verse.
>Jehovah is not the only god.

Repent, why should you die? For what purpose?

>>544131093
>The Bible does not limit the term “savior” to the Most High
Again, i think JWs need to brush up on Isaiah.
>I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior.
When The sovereign LORD God says there is no saviour beside Him, why would you jump through hoops trying to prove that there are saviors beside God.

You have nothing in Jesus because you don't know who He is. If He's not The sovereign LORD God of Israel then asking him to save you is blasphemous and heretical.

A very pretty Jehovas Witness girl showed up at my door one day.
I engaged her in highly intelligent theological discussion.
She came by more and more.
Then I noticed her skirts were getting shorter and she only came by when the wife's car was gone.
These visits became quite " lengthy" and one day two older women showed up with her, gauged the situation and I never saw her again.

>>544131158
Biblical monotheism is monolatrism, the consistent worship of only one divine person in the divine/supernatural realm inhabited by divine/supernatural persons. The one divine person who receives full devotion and worship is the almighty creator.

For instance, Psalm 8:5 calls the angels elohim, literally “gods”. Angels are called gods elsewhere too in Psalms 86:8 and 136:2.

Angels are also described as gods in the rest of the Bible, before and after Psalm 8:5, from Genesis to Revelation.

Some notable examples of such are found at Genesis 32:25; Judges 6:21; 13:19, 20; Daniel 3:25; 6:22; 7:10; 10:5, 6; Acts 12:6-10 and Revelation 8:5. Also note the supernatural power of the fallen angels, the demons, at Genesis 6:2 where they were able to produce male bodies for themselves, and at Job 1:14-19 where Satan directed groups of people and controlled the elements of fire and wind. Thus, all spirit creatures inferior to the Almighty God are described as supernatural and therefore are divine beings or gods by nature.

>>544131226
Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as being a Savior besides Jehovah, that is, as a rival of his Father. The Scriptures clearly establish that Jesus’ role as Savior was assigned to him by his Father. The Christian apostle John wrote: “We ourselves have beheld and are bearing witness that the Father has sent forth his Son as Savior of the world.” (1 John 4:14)

Aged Simeon, on seeing the babe Jesus at the temple, exclaimed: “Now, Sovereign Lord, you are letting your slave go free in peace according to your declaration; because my eyes have seen your means of saving.”—Luke 2:29, 30.

>>544131252
Ok youre getting a little ahead of yourself. Can we back up a bit and can you confirm that when God says that;
>I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me.
And
>I, I am the Lord, and besides me there is no savior.

You interpret that to mean that there are other Gods and other Saviors? I just want to ve clear on this before we move on.

>>544131290
You know what a 10.0 on the Richter scale is?

>>544131290
>Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as being a Savior
Thanks, all I wanted was some honesty.
Jesus isn't your savior, He is mine.

Enough to shake a 400 pound Jehovas Witness off a fifty foot porch.

>>544131329
Because salvation comes from Jehovah God through Jesus Christ

>>544131359
Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as being a Savior besides Jehovah, that is, as a rival of his Father.

Jesus saved faithful humans when he gave his life as a ransom sacrifice. (Matthew 20:28) Thus, the Bible calls Jesus the “Savior of the world.” (1 John 4:14)

>>544131383
>Because salvation comes from Jehovah God
Exactly.
You don't need Jesus.
I need Jesus.
More than anything.

When you come to a Christians house youre asking them to throw away everything they have, everything precious and valuable to them. As you have thrown away, everything precious and valuable.

>>544131465
As God’s means of salvation, Jesus Christ is called the Savior. Apart from him no one on earth can be saved from sin and death.

>>544131402
>Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as being a Savior
Exactly. Thats exactly what your religion teaches. The problem is that I need Him, I need Him to save me. How can you convince a Christian to throw away their most precious and valuable possession. Which is being saved by Jesus Christ our LORD.

>>544131529
be spoken of as being a Savior besides Jehovah, that is, as a rival of his Father.

As Jesus said in the clearest possible terms imaginable at John 17:1-5, the Father is God, and He is the only one to receive full worshipful devotion.

Now, since Trinitarianism advocates worshiping Jesus and the Holy Spirit as persons of the Godhead along with the Father, it unwittingly advocates idolatry. Only the Father is to be worshiped.

Thus, according to the Trinitarian “true God/false God” dichotomy, Trinitarianism unwittingly calls Jesus and the Holy Spirit false Gods and idols. Contrarily, Jehovah's Witnesses worship only the Father in monolatry.

Biblical theology is monolatrous and Trinitarianism is idolatrous.

>>544131501
Right but then Jesus therefore is just a means to an end for you then. He's just a tool of God. One of many, just like Othniel and Ehud theres nothing really special about Him.

>>544131550
>Jesus can't be spoken of as being a Savior
You keep saying that. I appreciate the honesty. You are absolutely bereft, I wish I could help you.

>>544131573
It is extremely important to realize that “God did not send some angel to rescue mankind. He made the supreme sacrifice of sending his only-begotten Son, “the one he was specially fond of.”—Proverbs 8:30; John 3:16.”

This is true because:

“Only Jehovah’s firstborn Son could measure up to the special needs of the situation involving sinful mankind. He is such an image of his heavenly Father in showing affection for members of the divinely produced family that he is without equal among the sons of God. Since all other intelligent creatures were brought into existence by means of him, his affection for them would certainly be abundant.” (The Watchtower. 1992 1/15 p. 10 par. 6 “Everlasting Happiness Awaits Godly Givers.”)

>>544128608
Can't even beat your wife these days!

>>544131550
>Jehovah's Witnesses worship only the Father
There it is again. Jehovahs witnesses do not worship Jesus. Jesus is just a tool, a means to an end, no different than Othniel and Ehud.

>>544131608
Jesus’ being referred to as the Savior does not mean that he is the same as Jehovah God.

The very name “Jesus” points to God as the source of salvation. It means “Jehovah Is Salvation” and thus honors the Father as the Savior to whom even the Son looked

>>544131645
Jesus himself, however, directed attention and worship only to Jehovah God. For example, when prodded to do an act of worship to the Devil, Jesus said: “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Matthew 4:10)

To a Samaritan woman, Jesus described the type of worship that individuals must give to God. Their worship must be based on spirit and truth. Indeed, “the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him.” (John 4:23, 24)

>>544131402
The Orthodox Church would emphatically agree that Jesus is not a rival to the Father. Your problem is the assumption that Jesus cannot be fully God without becoming a second, competing deity. As the other anon pointed out,
>”I, even I, am the LORD, And there is no savior besides Me.” Isaiah 43:11
>”so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” John 5:23
>”We have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world.” John 4:14
Concerning 1 John 4:14, you cite it as though the Father’s sending of the Son establishes that Jesus is a created being or lacks the divine nature. But it establishes neither of those things. It establishes that the Father sent the Son to save the world. The distinction between the Father and the Son does not require a distinction in their divine nature. The Orthodox Church confesses one God, not two competing deities. The Father accomplishes our salvation through His eternal Son, who shares fully in the divine nature.

>>544131678
Exactly.
Thats because Jesus is just a tool, a means to an end, no different than Othniel and Ehud.

I think we've come to an understanding here.

>>544131744
>”so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” John 5:23
Hello?

>>544131700
>>544131744
What the Bible says:

“My Father is greater than I [Jesus].”—John 14:28.

“I [Jesus] ascend unto my Father, and your Father, and to my God, and your God.”—John 20:17.

“To us there is but one God, the Father.”—1 Corinthians 8:6.

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”—1 Peter 1:3.

“These things saith the Amen [Jesus], . . . the beginning of the creation of God.”—Revelation 3:14.

>>544131700
The Orthodox Church believe in the Trinity. The Orthodox, Catholic and respectable protestant Churches all agree on the Triune God.

Its only fringe religions like JWs and Mormons that deny the Trinity.

>>544131869
“The Christian Bible, including the New Testament, has no trinitarian statements or speculations concerning a trinitary deity.”—Encyclopædia Britannica.

“The doctrine of the trinity . . . is not a product of the earliest Christian period, and we do not find it carefully expressed before the end of the second century.”—Library of Early Christianity—Gods and the One God.

“In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the [Catholic] Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin.”—Catechism of the Catholic Church.

>>544131790
Exactly.
Thats because Jesus is just a tool, a means to an end, no different than Othniel and Ehud.

I think we've come to an understanding here.

>>544131903
even a child can understand that the relationship between almighty God and Jesus Christ was that of a father and his beloved son, two different individuals.

Yet, this simple Bible truth is denied by the religions of Christendom. They insist that Jesus Christ is God Almighty himself, the second person of a Trinity, the third person being the holy spirit

>>544131880
When The LORD says in Isaiah that He will not share His glory with another. And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory. Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?

All thread youve just been copying and pasting from your watchtower resources without really engaging with anything. Youve said again and again that Jesus cant be called a Savior like God and therefore has no power to save. Youre still copying and pasting like every Christian cant see your heresy on display.

>>544130649
Its just a title. You must have an aneurism when people tell you there is more than one ruler despite their being lords and one king. Both rule, yet their is only one King. This must kill you. I am truly sorry.

>>544131790
>John 14:28
Orthodoxy acknowledges both the Father's monarchy, meaning that the Father is the eternal source of the Son, and Christ's genuine human nature. St. John Chrysostom addresses this very verse in Homily 75 on John. He allows that the Father can be called greater insofar as He is the cause of the Son, while explicitly rejecting the conclusion that the Son therefore possesses a different divine essence.
>John 20:17
Christ became fully human. As man, He truly worships and prays to the Father. Orthodox Christology does not deny this.
Notice, however, that Jesus says My Father and your Father, rather than simply our Father. His relationship to the Father is not identical to ours.
>1 Corinthians 8:6
Paul's complete statement also identifies Jesus as the one Lord, through whom all things exist. If identifying the Father as the one God necessarily excludes Jesus from divinity, does identifying Jesus as the one Lord necessarily exclude the Father from lordship?
>1 Peter 1:3: "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
Again, this establishes a relationship between the Father and the incarnate Son. It does not establish that the Son was created or that His divine nature differs from the Father's.
>Revelation 3:14: "The beginning of the creation of God."
The Greek word translated “beginning” is archē, which can also mean origin or source. The passage does not necessarily identify Christ as the first thing created, but can instead identify Him as the source of creation itself. This is consistent with John 1:3, which declares that all things came into being through Christ, and apart from Him nothing came into being. You’re assuming that Christ belongs to creation when the text does not establish that.

>>544131972
>even a child can understand that the relationship between almighty God and Jesus Christ
Yes, you keep repeating what you believe and I keep confirming it.
You believe that Jesus is just a tool, a means to an end, no different than Othniel and Ehud. You keep repeating it in different ways.

>>544131993
Reverent adoration should be expressed only to God. To render worship to anyone or anything else would be a form of idolatry, which is condemned in both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures.—Exodus 20:4, 5; Galatians 5:19, 20.

Additionally, any obeisance (proskuneo) given to Jesus is to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:11)

File: 1640359870767m.jpg (72 KB, 791x1024)

72 KB JPG

>>544128608

>>544132070
>”so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the Father who sent Him.” John 5:23
Hello?

>>544132030
When Jesus said "The Father is greater than I" He was a human man, obviously, obviously The Father was greater than Him.

However while we are on seeming contradictions from the book of Isaiah, The LORD says over and over again "There is none beside me" but then Jesus himself says that He will sit at the right hand of the father. You know JWs might be better off throwing the baby out with the bathwater at this point. Does God have no one beside Him? Or is Jesus sitting beside Him? Perhaps Jesus was, is and always will be LORD.

>>544132070
You're not answering the question.

>>544131993
>When The LORD says in Isaiah that He will not share His glory with another. And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory. Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?
Perhaps you can see another possibility.

>>544132030
The expression “Son of God” acknowledges that God is the Creator, or Source, of all life, including that of Jesus. (Psalm 36:9; Revelation 4:11)

God created Jesus before he created anything else. Regarding Jesus, the Bible says:

“He is the firstborn of all creation.”—Colossians 1:15.

He is “the beginning of the creation by God.”—Revelation 3:14.

The Trinity is a post-biblical, 4th-century development that retrofitted Greek philosophical definitions onto an ancient Semitic text.

>>544132038
Jesus certainly occupies a pivotal role in true worship, one worthy of honor and respect. (2 Corinthians 1:20, 21; 1 Timothy 2:5) He is the only way through which we are able to approach Jehovah God. (John 14:6)

Accordingly, true Christians do well to direct their worship only to Jehovah God, the Almighty.

>>544132132
Jesus is here rejecting the Pharisees idea that he is equal with God, highlighting that he only does what the Father commanded him to do, that the only authority he has is that given to him by the Father.

The Greek word translated here “just as” is καθώς (kathos). I may be also be translated as “in the same degree as”, or “exactly as”, but it is not the only way to understand it.

For example, the same writer, John, used the word καθώς is verses such as John 20:21:

Then Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you; as the Father has sent Me, I also send you (AMP).

And in 1 John 4:17:

By this, love is perfected with us, so that we may have confidence in the day of judgment; because as He is, we also are in this world (NASB).

The first verse does not mean that the disciples are sent from heaven to earth as divine persons to give their lives as a ransom for humanking. καθώς here does not imply exact correspondence.

And the second verse does not mean that Jesus’ disciples are coequal with the Son.

In both cases, there is a specific point of comparison.

>>544132187
Youre just copying and pasting watchtower resources. You're not engaging in debate you're just mindlessly copying and pasting resources from the watchtower.

Answer the question.
>When The LORD says in Isaiah that He will not share His glory with another. And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory. Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?
Perhaps you can see another possibility.

>>544132180
> Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory.

Chapter and verse?

>>544132235
>And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory.

Chapter and verse?

>>544132243
Oh now youre going to play dumb.
You like Daniel right?
>And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.
https://biblehub.com/daniel/7-14.htm

So...

>When The LORD says in Isaiah that He will not share His glory with another. And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory. Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?
Perhaps you can see another possibility.

File: 1737150608906340m.jpg (150 KB, 980x1024)

150 KB JPG

And how many other abused children does the abrahamic god ignore every day?

thousands? hundreds of thousands?

>>544132297
Acts 2:36 ►
“Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus both Lord and Messiah.”

Who made Jesus Lord?

>>544132214
You’re overlooking the most important part of the passage. Your central claim is
>"Jesus is here rejecting the Pharisees idea that he is equal with God"
Let’s examine what John actually records. In John 5:18, the evangelist explains that the Jewish opponents sought to kill Jesus because He called God His own Father, thereby making Himself equal with God. The text doesn't specifically identify these opponents as Pharisees. Jesus then responds:
>”Whatever the Father does, the Son likewise does.” John 5:19
>”Just as the Father raises the dead and gives life, the Son gives life to whom He wishes.” John 5:21
>”The Father has entrusted all judgment to the Son.” John 5:22
>”All must honor the Son just as they honor the Father.” John 5:23
>”Just as the Father has life in Himself, He has granted the Son to have life in Himself.” John 5:26
Verse 19 is especially important. Jesus doesn't merely say He obeys the Father's commands. He declares that whatever the Father does, the Son also does. You can bob and weave all you want, but your theology does not stand up to scrutiny.

>>544132339
God allows it for the same reason that he has permitted all human suffering: to settle moral issues that were raised long ago. The Bible clearly indicates that at present the Devil, not God, rules the world. (Luke 4:1, 2, 6; John 12:31)

>>544132339
Notice how it was only when the JW was completely routed the anti-christian shills appear. Notice how the anti-christian shills never challenge the JWs and notice how the JWs never challenge the anti-christian shills.

Its because at best JWs are doing this just to fill in their required hours and at worst its a coordinated attack on Jesus.

>>544132395
John 5:19 ►
Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.

>>544132354
>Who made Jesus Lord
The LORD.
Now weren't you pretending to be dumb about God sharing his Glory with Jesus which he says He will not share with another.

When you stop copying and pasting things fall apart for you. Posters like myself and >>544132395 actually want what's best for you.

>>544132404
Jehovah’s Witnesses preach to glorify God and to make known his name. (Hebrews 13:15)

We also want to obey Christ Jesus, who commanded: “Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.”—Matthew 28:19, 20.

>>544132476
>The LORD

Yes, Jehovah. Jehovah made him Lord. Jesus has been appointed as ruler of the Christians by his God and Father. There is nothing in Daniel that says he shares his glory. Agree?

>>544132440
>because whatever the Father does the Son also does.
Again isn't this Jesus sharing in God's glory? Which God says He will not share with another? How do JWs reconcile that?

Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?

>>544132537
>Jehovah made (Jesus) Lord.

>>544132257
>>And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory.
>Chapter and verse?
In the end you cited verses for me.
Thanks.

But again isn't this Jesus sharing in God's glory? Which God says He will not share with another? How do JWs reconcile that?

Does that make Jesus a usurper? God impotent or Isaiah a false prophet?

>>544132549
>Again isn't this Jesus sharing in God's glory?

No.

Jesus came to the earth (1) to teach the truth about God, (2) to set us an example in how to do God’s will even when we are in difficulties, and (3) to give his perfect life as “a ransom.”—Read Matthew 20:28.

>>544132593
>Jehovah made (Jesus) Lord
>And Jesus has taken at least some of Gods glory

Did David share God’s glory when he was appointed king?

>But again isn't this Jesus sharing in God's glory?

Where does it say that?

>>544132613
God giving Jesus His title "LORD" is not letting Jesus share in His Glory.

I think we're done.

>>544132650
God giving Jesus His title "LORD" is not letting Jesus share in His Glory.

I think we're done.

>>544132673
The Greek and Hebrew words rendered “lord” (or such related terms as “sir,” “owner,” “master”) are used with reference to Jehovah God (Eze 3:11), Jesus Christ (Mt 7:21), one of the elders seen by John in vision (Re 7:13, 14), angels (Ge 19:1, 2; Da 12:8), men (1Sa 25:24; Ac 16:16, 19, 30), and false deities (1Co 8:5).

>>544132440
Yes, that’s precisely the verse I cited. You’re emphasizing that the Son can do nothing independently of the Father, which Orthodoxy does not dispute, while overlooking Christ’s declaration that “whatever the Father does the Son also does.” The Son’s inseparability from the Father does not establish inferiority of divine nature.

Read the verses that follow. Christ declares that He gives life to whom He wishes (5:21), that all judgment has been entrusted to Him (5:22), and that all must honor the Son just as they honor the Father (5:23). You’re interpreting the Son’s dependence upon the Father as evidence that He is a creature. But where does Christ actually make that distinction? Can you identify a passage in which Jesus Himself declares that He was created or came into existence? Because you’ve repeatedly demonstrated that the Son is from the Father, but that isn’t what we’re disputing. We’re disputing whether the Son is a creature or eternally begotten of the Father. In the four Gospels, Jesus never explicitly identifies Himself as a created being, nor does He declare that He possesses an inferior divine nature to the Father. John 1:3 declares that all things came into being through the Word, and John 1:14 declares that the Word became flesh. Christ is eternally begotten, not created. He became incarnate, assuming our created human nature.

>>544132688
the designation “lord” denotes one who has ownership or authority and power over persons or things. (Ge 24:9; 42:30; 45:8, 9; 1Ki 16:24; Lu 19:33; Ac 25:26; Eph 6:5)

This title was applied by Sarah to her husband (Ge 18:12), by children to their fathers (Ge 31:35; Mt 21:28, 29), and by a younger brother to his older brother (Ge 32:5, 6). It appears as a title of respect addressed to prominent persons, public officials, prophets, and kings. (Ge 23:6; 42:10; Nu 11:28; 2Sa 1:10; 2Ki 8:10-12; Mt 27:63)

When used in addressing strangers, “lord,” or “sir,” served as a title of courtesy.—Joh 12:21; 20:15; Ac 16:30.

>>544132699
>while overlooking Christ’s declaration that “whatever the Father does the Son also does.”

So the Son is dependent on the Father, agree?

>>544128608
>>544129034
jw have historically been not only blasphemous but palpably evil, they haven’t had the benefits of Mormons affability at ground levels.
Maybe it’s changing in current year

>>544132697
Jeremiah calls Jesus "YAHWEH" Your translation probably says Jehovah. Which as you know is the proper name of the LORD God of Israel. You flop between pretending to be a Bible scholar and ptetending to be illiterate.

God allowing Jesus to be called by Gods proper name is not God sharing His glory with Jesus in your opinion. Thats fine. Maybe you could convince Charles to call you the King of England. Its not like youd be taking anything away from his position.

>>544132699
>John 1:3 declares that all things came into being through the Word

Jesus worked alongside God “as a master worker.” (Proverbs 8:30) Regarding Jesus, the Bible says: “By means of him all other things were created in the heavens and on the earth.”—Colossians 1:16.

God worked through Jesus to bring every other creation into existence. This creation included all other spirit creatures, as well as the physical universe. (Revelation 5:11) In some respects, this cooperation between God and Jesus was like that of an architect working with a builder. The architect creates the design; the builder brings the design to reality.

>Christ declares that He gives life to whom He wishes (5:21)that all judgment has been entrusted to Him (5:22),

So Jesus received this authority from God, correct?

> Orthodoxy

Consider the following regarding prominent religious leaders and the war in Ukraine:

“The head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill, has not said a word against Russian aggression. . . . His Church’s systematic propaganda campaign about Ukraine has been utilised in Putin’s justification for war.”—EUobserver, March 7, 2022.

“Patriarch Kirill . . . has sent his strongest signal yet justifying his country’s invasion of Ukraine—describing the conflict as part of a struggle against sin.”—AP News, March 8, 2022.

“Ukrainian Orthodox Church leader, Metropolitan Epiphanius I of Kyiv, on Monday blessed his people to ‘fight against the Russian invaders’ . . . [He] also stated that killing Russian soldiers isn’t a sin.”—Jerusalem Post, March 16, 2022.

“We [the Ukrainian Council of Churches and Religious Organizations (UCCRO)] support the Armed Forces of Ukraine and all our defenders, we bless them in their defense of Ukraine from the aggressor, and offer our prayers for them.”—UCCRO a Statement, February 24, 2022.

>>544132755
Yes because Jesus and the Father are one.
>30 I and the Father are one
Can't wait for the JW interpretation of that one. Jesus saying that Himself and The Father "are one" is definitely not Jesus sharing in Gods glory, according to JWs.

>>544132755
You’re trying to move from the Son's dependence upon the Father to the Son's supposed inferiority in divine nature. Those are not the same proposition. So, dependent in what sense?

If you mean that the Son is eternally begotten of the Father and does not act independently of Him, absolutely. If you mean that the Son is therefore a created being, inferior in divine nature to the Father, no. That conclusion does not follow.

John 5:19 establishes the inseparability of the Father’s and Son’s works, not the Son’s inferiority. You’re still overlooking the second half of the verse, where Christ declares that whatever the Father does, the Son likewise does.

The Son’s being from the Father does not make Him a creature. That’s precisely the distinction we’ve been trying to get you to address.

>>544132788
Of course, Bible names, when spoken in a modern-day language, probably sound nothing like the original Hebrew, and hardly anyone objects. This is because these names have become part of our language and they are easily recognized.

So it is with the name Jehovah.

>>544132831
Now youre back to mindlessly copying and pasting. You said that Jesus being given Gods titles and even Gods name is not sharing in Gods glory.

I think that it objectively is. You seem stuck in a conundrum, either Jesus is a usurper who stole Gods glory, or God is impotent and couldn't allow his glory not to be shared, or Isaiah is a false prophet.

I dont see another option for JWs.

>>544132856
One what? One God? It’s not what it says.

When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one substance", or "one God", or co-equal and co-eternal, but rather that he and the Father have a "unity of purpose",

The context indicates that Jesus was saying that they were "one" in pastoral work. The point being that the Father and the Son were united in the divine work of saving the 'sheep'.

>>544132905
Right but your opinion is that Jesus being given Gods titles and even being called by Gods proper name is not Jesus sharing in Gods glory.

>>544132893
>the Son's supposed inferiority in divine nature.

Where does it say the Father and the Son are the same God?

>>544132856
>30 I and the Father are one
>Can't wait for the JW interpretation of that one.


>>544132931
>When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one"

You did not disappoint.

>>544132916
>I think that it objectively is

1 Corinthians 11:3 ►
But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of Christ is God.

Jesus being made Lord of man does not make Jesus equal to God, agree?

>>544132986
>Jesus being given Gods titles and even being called by Gods proper name is not Jesus sharing in Gods glory, agree?
No I have to disagree.

>>544132932
God is called king, and he gave the title king to David. Is David God?

>>544133017
I will pray for you. Have a good day

>>544133051
>God is called king
No God is called The King of Kings, and LORD of Lords.
Now who else was called that?
Was it David? No, Solomon? No, perhaps it was Hezekiah? Ah my memory fails me.

>>544133066
Please dont.
You want to take away everything I have, everything precious and important to me you would take away if you had the power.

>>544133108
>No God is called The King of Kings, and LORD of Lords.

Also "God of gods". Is Jesus called God or Gods? No? Then nothing contradicts what I say, God appointed Jesus as King over the earth, he is second only to God.

File: 1740526049564266.jpg (89 KB, 800x600)

89 KB JPG

it's all jewish bullshit so who cares

the bible says in all seriousness that the earth is a dome and heaven is in the clouds lmao

>>544133135
>You want to take away everything I have

Yes, idolatry. Because idolatry will lead you to death.

Turn to the only true God, Jehovah to be saved

>>544132951
Even though you’re shifting the burden of proof yet again, at least you’re asking a legitimate theological question. Orthodoxy confesses distinct Persons sharing the one divine nature. There are three particularly relevant verses. John 1:1–3, 14, John 20:28–29, Hebrews 1:8–12.
>John 1:1–3, 14
John declares that the Word was with God, that the Word was God, that all things came into being through Him, and that the Word became flesh. The Word is distinguished from the Father without being excluded from divinity.
>John 20:28-29
Thomas addresses the resurrected Jesus as "My Lord and my God!" Jesus responds by affirming Thomas's belief, not correcting him.
>Hebrews 1:8-12
The Father addresses the Son as God in verse 8. The passage subsequently applies language about the Lord creating the heavens and earth to the Son, drawing from Psalm 102.

You’ve repeatedly cited passages establishing the distinction between Father and Son. I agree that they are distinct. But you have yet to establish from Scripture that the Son was created or possesses an inferior divine nature. What’s up with that?

>>544133153
>Is Jesus called God or Gods
Yes.

Isaiah 9:6 calls him "The almighty God." Then Isaiah goes on, as if knowing that people will try to downplay that verse, to call Jesus "The everlating Father."

These titles can only belong to God, to the God of gods. There is no one else.

>>544133170
>Yes, idolatry
Jesus isnt an idol.
He is my God.

>>544133158
Notice how it was only when the JW was completely routed the anti-christian shills appear. Notice how the anti-christian shills never challenge the JWs and notice how the JWs never challenge the anti-christian shills.

Its because at best JWs are doing this just to fill in their required hours and at worst its a coordinated attack on Jesus.

>>544128608
Hi there again French cultist foid, hope you're enjoing fall weather finally.

>>544133202
>John 1:1–3, 14, John 20:28–29, Hebrews 1:8–12.

None of these verses say that God is one essence shared by three co equal and co eternal persons

Can you answer my question?

>>544133221
Isaiah 9:6 says mighty god (el ghibbor), not Almighty God (El shaddai).

You have lied for all the world to see, vicious serpent. I will no longer entertain the heresies you vomit.

Repent

>>544133276
Is he equal to the Father? And if so, chapter and verse?

>>544133413
Sorry i made a mistake.

Isaiah 9:6 calls him "The mighty God." Then Isaiah goes on, as if knowing that people will try to downplay that verse, to call Jesus "The everlating Father."

These titles can only belong to God, to the God of gods. There is no one else.

>>544133413
>None of these verses say that God is one essence shared by three co equal and co eternal persons
Right but again.

>>544132856
>30 I and the Father are one
>Can't wait for the JW interpretation of that one.

>>544132931
>When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one"

You have some pretty loose interpretations.

>>544133439
>call Jesus "The everlating Father."

Yes because Adam was the first father of the human race. However, he lost the opportunity to be an “eternal father” when he sinned. He could no longer give his children everlasting life as an inheritance. Jesus, on the other hand, did not sin. And by sacrificing his sinless life for mankind, he opened the way to everlasting life for those who exercised faith. (John 3:16; 1 John 2:2) He thus will give them the everlasting life that Adam failed to give them. Hence, the Bible calls him “the last Adam,” “a life-giving spirit.” (1 Corinthians 15:45) He is properly called the “Eternal Father” of the future perfect human race.

And if you try to argue with me then you will be calling the Son as Father, committing the heresy of modalism

>>544133486

>30 I and the Father are one

One what?

>You have some pretty loose interpretations

And yet, see John 17:21, wherein Jesus prayed regarding his disciples: "That they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they may be in us," adding "that they may be one even as we are one".

The same Greek word (hen) for "one" throughout John 17 indicates that Jesus did not expect for his followers to literally become a single Being, or "one in substance", with each other, or with God, and therefore that Jesus also did not expect his hearers to think that he and God the Father were one entity either

File: HSsss-tXgAA9c1u.jpg (982 KB, 1647x2130)

982 KB JPG

>>544133413
>Can you answer my question?
I am finished spoonfeeding you. You pick and choose what questions you want to answer, dodge that which is inconvenient for you to answer, shift the burden of proof every other post, and have the audacity to ask this? You are not a serious person. You’re quoting shit Jehovah’s Witnesses translations and copy and pasting from jw.org. You deny the Son, and you will burn in hell. Pic related are your people, there is no doubt about it.

>>544133516
If I were to ask you.
"Who is the mighty God, who is The everlasting father" then you could tell me with a full heart its not Jehovah.

Thats on you.

>>544133548
I'm really, really jaded but do you think he's even a JW or do you think our leaders and the demons that control them just look to attack Jesus in any way they can.

You seem pretty bright im sure youve noticed that if you start a pre-Christian thread its immediately filled with dozens of anti-Christian shills and bots, but in these JW threads they are conspicuously absent. Its like theres some kind of agreement between the watchtower and FVEY, or the same shills that run the anti-Christian bots run these JW threads.

Because like you say, at the end of the day what Satan wants for us and what Jehovahs witnesses want from us are the same thing. To deny the Son and lose everything precious that we have.

>>544133548
Not a single verse you quoted says that God is one essence shared by three co equal and co eternal persons

Begone Satan.

>>544133551
>Abraham is called lord
>Jehovah is called lord
>therefore Abraham is Jehovah

And you guys have the audacity to call mormons blapshemers, lol

>>544133640
>To deny the Son and lose everything precious that we have.

I agree. You deny that Jesus is the Son of God.

>>544133641
Abraham is called lord not LORD.
I read the KJV. "The LORD" is often used in place of Gods proper name. You keep addressing points im not making.

Jesus was given God's titles and is even called by God's proper name. This is incomparable to Abraham or David. The highest praise Abraham gets is to be called Gods "friend" which is indeed high praise but not to be called Jehovah. Like Jesus.

>>544133724
>Abraham is called lord not LORD

The word "LORD" does not exist in the Hebrew text, it’s JEHOVAH

When will you stop corrupting the Scriptures with your mouth?

>>544133641
No biblical verse states, word for word, that God is one essence shared by three coequal and coeternal Persons. I supplied John 1, John 20, and Hebrews 1 as scriptural evidence supporting the Nicene interpretation.

Where does Scripture explicitly state that the preexistent Son was Jehovah’s first created being? Where does Jesus identify Himself as a creature? These are questions I’ve repeatedly asked, and you’ve yet to substantiate your position.

If you’re going to demand that I establish the scriptural foundation of the Trinity, then you ought to be willing to defend the scriptural foundation of your own Christology with the same rigor. Instead, you’ve repeatedly sidestepped my arguments and resorted to copying material from jw.org. You are not serious.

>>544133688
I believe Jesus is who the prophets say He is, I believe Jesus is who He says He is and I believe Jesus is who His disciples say He is.

Dont forget you're a tiny cult which will deny children blood transfusions, refuse to celebrate birthdays and destroy their own children with heresies. The Catholic Orthodox and respectable protestant Churches all agree with me. You're a tiny minority of people who are known for knocking on your door and telling you that Jesus cant be called Saviour.

Youve been so indoctrinated you argue like an athiest.

>>544128608
>beat someone up for years and nearly kill her
>18 month not even in jail
lmao

>>544133774
>The word "LORD" does not exist in the Hebrew text, it’s JEHOVAH
Exactly.
Abraham is called lord.
Jesus is called Jehovah.
Surely you see the distinction.

>>544133803
>I supplied John 1, John 20, and Hebrews 1 as scriptural evidence supporting the Nicene interpretation.

None of these support the nicean interpretation. Only JW theology makes sense.

>>544133863
>Jesus is called Jehovah.

Chapter and verse?

>>544131648
John 1:1
Then skip to John 8:44
You may get it

>>544133916
Why do you just pretend to be stupid when pressed?
Jeremiah 23:6.

You just ask for the verse so you can stall for time and come up with an interpretation like;
>>544132931
>When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one"

>>544133959
Where does John 1:1 say that the Word is the same God it was with?

It’s speaking of two different deities here. We believe in God’s and Christ’s distinct individual divinities. That is why accurate translations render it as "the Word was divine" or "the Word was a god".

Even your own fellow orthodox agree.

An Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible commentary notes:

This second theos could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is not God in the sense that he is the same person as the theos mentioned in 1:1a; he is not God the Father (God absolutely as in common NT usage) or the Trinity.

>>544134001
>Jeremiah 23:6.

Where does it say Jesus is Jehovah?

>When Jesus said, "I and the Father are one," he did not mean that they were actually "one"

Why do you quote only part of what I said, like your father the devil?

>>544133916
>only jw theology makes sense
That’s funny considering you haven’t demonstrated that the Son's reception of authority from the Father establishes His creation.
>None of these support the nicean interpretation.
You are making an assertion without even addressing the passages you dismiss. Let’s see what you left unconsidered, maybe you can even answer a question for once (hard mode no copying and pasting from jw.org):
>John 1:1–3: Why is the Word called God, and how does His role in bringing all things into existence relate to the claim that He was created?
>John 20:28–29: Why does Thomas address Jesus as "My Lord and my God," and why does Jesus respond by affirming his belief?
>Hebrews 1:8–12: Why does the author apply language concerning God's eternal existence and creation of the heavens and earth to the Son?

>>544134025
>Where does John 1:1 say that the Word is the same God it was with?

>and the word was God

Seriously how stupid do you need to be to defend your position. The entire Bible, every word in every verse sings of His glory and heralds His coming.

>>544134057
>That’s funny considering you haven’t demonstrated that the Son's reception of authority from the Father establishes His creation.

Does the Son have power and authority inherently? Or does he receive them?

>John 1:1–3: Why is the Word called God, and how does His role in bringing all things into existence relate to the claim that He was created?
>John 20:28–29: Why does Thomas address Jesus as "My Lord and my God," and why does Jesus respond by affirming his belief?
>Hebrews 1:8–12: Why does the author apply language concerning God's eternal existence and creation of the heavens and earth to the Son?

Where do they say the Son is the same God as the Father? How many times must I ask before you answer?

You can’t. Only JW theology are in harmony with these verses.

>>544134056
>look how stupid I can pretend to be.

>In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
https://www.biblehub.com/jeremiah/23-6.htm

Im using the KJV and "LORD" here is translated from the proper name of the LORD God of Israel.

>>544134064
>and the word was God

Why do you post a mistranslation?

Here, let me help you

1864: "and a god was the Word" – The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson, New York and London (left hand column interlinear reading)

1879: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (J. Becker, 1979)
1885: "and the Word was a god" – Concise Commentary on The Holy Bible (R. Young, 1885)
1911: "and [a] God was the word" – The Coptic Version of the New Testament in the Southern Dialect, by George William Horner.[17]
1924: "the Logos was divine" – The Bible: James Moffatt Translation, by James Moffatt.[18]
1935: "and the Word was divine" – The Bible: An American Translation, by John M. P. Smith and Edgar J. Goodspeed, Chicago.[19]
1955: "so the Word was divine" – The Authentic New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield, Aberdeen.[20]

1975 "and a god (or, of a divine kind) was the Word" – Das Evangelium nach Johnnes, by Siegfried Schulz, Göttingen, Germany
1975: "and the Word was a god" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes (S. Schulz, 1975);
1978: "and godlike sort was the Logos" – Das Evangelium nach Johannes, by Johannes Schneider, Berlin
1985: "So the Word was divine" - The Original New Testament, by Hugh J. Schonfield.[22]


1808: "and the Word was a god" – Thomas Belsham The New Testament, in an Improved Version, Upon the Basis of Archbishop Newcome's New Translation: With a Corrected Text, London.
1822: "and the Word was a god" – The New Testament in Greek and English (A. Kneeland, 1822.)
1829: "and the Word was a god" – The Monotessaron; or, The Gospel History According to the Four Evangelists (J. S. Thompson, 1829)

>>544134106
>Where do they say the Son is the same God as the Father?
How many Gods do JWs believe in?
Your argument seems to be "Just because The Son is called God it doesnt mean hes the same God as God. Which honestly is a little confusing.

>>544134127
You are proving my point. Jesus’ name means "Jehovah is salvation"

Jesus came to save in God’s name.

>>544134163
>mistranslation
Oh its another one of those "every single translation on Biblehub.com is wrong" arguments.

https://biblehub.com/john/1-1.htm

Scroll down the page.
The word was God.

>>544134176
>How many Gods do JWs believe in?

See: >>544131252

>>544134209
>Jesus came to save

>>544131290
>Jesus Christ cannot be spoken of as being a Savior

I think we're done.

I'd love to post the answer here. Just to watch you all flail in trying to understand, or justify your understandings of it all.
10 laws you had to follow. That was it. Not deconstruct everything, everyone ever fucking said about the cunt.
Majority of them didn't even know the bloke, and wrote stories based on others tales.

>>544134213
So you admit your own fellow orthodox are wrong?

An Eastern/Greek Orthodox Bible commentary notes:

This second theos could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is not God in the sense that he is the same person as the theos mentioned in 1:1a; he is not God the Father (God absolutely as in common NT usage) or the Trinity.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090206004221/http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/download/nt6x9.pdf

>>544134222
Right but can you give us a number?
How many God's do JWs believe in?

>>544134253
>Jesus came to save

Yes, he was sent by God. Thus God saves through Jesus

>>544134259
>This second theos could also be translated 'divine' as the construction indicates "a qualitative sense for theos". The Word is not God in the sense that he is the same person as the theos mentioned in 1:1a; he is not God the Father (God absolutely as in common NT usage) or the Trinity.
>https://web.archive.org/web/20090206004221/http://www.orthodox-church.info/eob/download/nt6x9.pdf
You don't understand the Trinity at all do you? Are you even trying to understand?

>>544134273
The word 'god' can describe several characters in the Bible, with various senses and in various degrees.

'God' (El/Theos) basically means "powerful one".

It can be used of angels (Psalm 8:5), prophets (Exodus 7:1), human judges (Psalm 82:6), kings (Psalm 45:6) and even Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4)

Moses was called god because God gave him the power to accomplish miracles in front of pharaoh.

Judges were called gods because they had authority over Israel.

Jesus is called god because he is a mighty being, who was granted rulership in heaven and on earth.

When it says there is only one God it is the sense of being the eternal, omniscient and omnipotent Creator. And I agree that only one person fits this description: Jehovah.

Jesus, as King of King and Lord of Lords, can also be said to be our God because the "head of every man is Christ". But the same verse also says "the head of Christ is God" (1 Corinthians 11:3)

>>544134282
>God saves
Not Jesus.
Jesus isnt your savior, you cant call him your Saviour.
He is mine.

>>544134299
Is the second theos qualitative yes or no?

>>544134318
Right but can you give us a number?
How many God's do JWs believe in?

>>544134336
You just quoted the orthodox position that the Trinity is three people in one God like it's not what I believe. I dont think youre even following the thread anymore.

>>544134322
>Not Jesus

He does too, but God is the source of salvation.

Jesus accepted God’s plan to leave heaven and come down to earth and die for us.

Thus the primary savior is God, the second is Jesus

>>544134365
Right Jesus isnt your savior, He is mine.

>>544134340
In the sense of nature or the sense of authority?

>>544134393
If you refuse to say how many Gods JWs believe in thats ok too. But I wanted to know. Should be easy.
Christians believe in one God.

>>544134363
Is the second theos qualitative yes or no?

>>544134375
He is

but God is the source of salvation

>>544134106
“Answering” questions with questions is some of the laziest faggot shit you could possibly pull, but since I’m not an asshole like you I can actually answer the questions.
>”Does the Son have power and authority inherently? Or does he receive them?”
The Son possesses divine power by nature, eternally from the Father, while also receiving authority in His incarnate mission. These are not contradictory propositions. The Son is eternally begotten of the Father, not created by Him. His divine power is not something externally bestowed upon a creature. It belongs to Him because He possesses the same divine nature as the Father. *You* are treating receiving something from the Father as necessarily meaning being inferior in divine nature. *You* have failed to establish this in scripture.
>Where do they say the Son is the same God as the Father? How many times must I ask before you answer?
I know you’re a lazy unserious piece of shit because I answered this here >>544133803 but let’s go further.
>”who is the radiance of his glory and the representation of his essence, sustaining all things by the word of his power. When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high." Hebrews 1:3
>"All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you." John 16:15
Neither verse independently spells out the Nicene Creed. But together with John 1, John 5, and Hebrews 1, they provide substantive grounds for understanding the Son as sharing the divine nature, not merely exercising authority delegated to a creature.

>>544134424
In ethe sense of nature, there are as many as there are angels. Because angels are called elohim

>>544134025
>It’s speaking of two different deities here.
BLASPHEMY!
It would be more honest for jw if they stated openly that they are not Christian but Jehovists. But you lot act like jews, pretending to be what you are not to sow discord.
You did not read John 8:44 enough, or Rev. 3:9 for that matter