Gods name

[kjw47]

Every bible scholar on earth knows 100% that God put his name --( YHVH(Jehovah) = the tetragramoton) in his bible in over 7000 spots because God wants it there. Thus wicked men by satans will removed Gods name to mislead and replaced it in OT( nearly 6800 spots) with GOD or LORD all capitols--quoted in NT over 200 spots where God willed his name.
Now in light of Jesus, who at the Lords prayer has clearly shown to all that his Fathers name( YHVH(Jehovah) is the #1 most important thing, followed by his Fathers kingdom and will. Thus to a true follower Gods name is #1 most important issue.
So then one must ask why is my religion using altered translations in support of satans will over Gods will on the matter of his name belonging in his bible? Would you say to mislead is the answer? Yes it is.
Here is a prime example of the misleading that it does
Joel 2:21-22--Whoever calls on the name of YHVH(Jehovah) will be saved---quoted 2 x in the NT at Acts 2:21-22--Romans 10:13--But since satan willed translations have LORD at Joel, Lord is at both spots of NT, and all who know Jesus is Lord will call on his name in error because they are being mislead. God is not called LORD in the OT by his will, his name belongs there. it is causing major confusion.
The New world translation corrected that matter, yet every religion using the altered translations condemned the NWT. Why because with that name back in it exposes all of those ones using the altered translations as false religion.
The sad fact is that they know Gods name belongs in all of those spots. So what are you going to do about being mislead?

[Capbook]

The definite article (the) is used before a noun to indicate that the identity of the noun is known.
The union of these three names in the form of baptism proves that the Son and Holy Spirit are equal with the Father. Nothing would be more absurd or blasphemous than to unite the name of a man or a force with the name of the ever-living God in this solemn rite.

Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
KJV

That doesn't show in any way that the three are equal. It just mentions three individual entities, and nothing about the relationship among the three except the Son, of course, would be subservient to his Father who gave him life. The Holy Spirit is just the Holy Spirit. It doesn't make it equal to any of the other two.

Is baptism not a solemn rite you?

Would it be not more absurd or blasphemous than to unite the name of a man or a force with the name of the ever-living God in this solemn rite?

Maybe so. Aren't you doing just that?

Yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Are you not?

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

[onewithhim]

That doesn't show in any way that the three are equal. It just mentions three individual entities, and nothing about the relationship among the three except the Son, of course, would be subservient to his Father who gave him life. The Holy Spirit is just the Holy Spirit. It doesn't make it equal to any of the other two.

Is baptism not a solemn rite you?

Would it be not more absurd or blasphemous than to unite the name of a man or a force with the name of the ever-living God in this solemn rite?

Maybe so. Aren't you doing just that?

Yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Are you not?

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

[Capbook]

Is baptism not a solemn rite you?

Would it be not more absurd or blasphemous than to unite the name of a man or a force with the name of the ever-living God in this solemn rite?

Maybe so. Aren't you doing just that?

Yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Are you not?

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

[onewithhim]

Maybe so. Aren't you doing just that?

Yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Are you not?

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

[Capbook]

Yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Are you not?

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

[onewithhim]

You are being blasphemous, unfortunately, by not attributing to the Father full Godhood and saying that God is a trinity. If He is not a trinity you are on slippery ground. I was baptized with the authority of the Father, which He also gave to Christ, and the Force of the Holy Spirit.

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

[Capbook]

I believe you have the same faith with JW, and JW accepts that Jesus is God. Why you are not?

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

[onewithhim]

JW does not believe that Jesus is God. If JW did, they would not be a JW anymore. If you look at their post you will see that they said that Jesus is a god, not God Almighty, but one of many.

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

No, "godhead" is a term made up by translators that already believed that Jesus is God even before embarking on their translation project. It should be "godship" or "divine quality." "All the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily." Jesus was a perfect reflection of God's being, having the fullness of the quality of God. It doesn't mean that Jesus is God.

NASB says: "For in him all the fullness of Diety dwells in bodily form." Not "Godhead." The New American Bible , the James Moffatt Translation, say the same thing. Not "Godhead," but "diety." The 21st Century New Testament uses "Godship" instead of "Godhead." Therefore stalls the idea of a trinity. The passage refers to Jesus being a reflection of his Father, God. No three-headed "Godhead."

[Capbook]

Didn't you see JW Post#77? Jesus is God. Uppercase G. You presume now that JW is not JW anymore?

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

No, "godhead" is a term made up by translators that already believed that Jesus is God even before embarking on their translation project. It should be "godship" or "divine quality." "All the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily." Jesus was a perfect reflection of God's being, having the fullness of the quality of God. It doesn't mean that Jesus is God.

NASB says: "For in him all the fullness of Diety dwells in bodily form." Not "Godhead." The New American Bible , the James Moffatt Translation, say the same thing. Not "Godhead," but "diety." The 21st Century New Testament uses "Godship" instead of "Godhead." Therefore stalls the idea of a trinity. The passage refers to Jesus being a reflection of his Father, God. No three-headed "Godhead."

Original Greek construction of Col 2:9, you will see the word Godhead and its corresponding Greek word "theotes".
And theotes defined by lexicon as the state of being God.
It is not a term made up by translators and your explanations are all wrong.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G846  dwelleth G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fulness G4138  of the G3588  Godhead G2320  bodily. G4985

Col 2:9 οτι G3754 CONJ  εν G1722 PREP  αυτω G846 P-DSM  κατοικει G2730 V-PAI-3S  παν G3956 A-NSN  το G3588 T-NSN  πληρωμα G4138 N-NSN  της G3588 T-GSF  θεοτητος G2320 N-GSF  σωματικως G4985 ADV 

Col 2:9 ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς,

[onewithhim]

They do not believe that Jesus is God Almighty. Don't you see what they meant? Jesus is a god like many other honored and revered persons in high positions. The uppercase "G" doesn't mean anything in their post.

So, God the Father in uppercase "G" could also mean "god" to you?
See again post #77, "Jesus is God", uppercase G. Yes, I know they don't believe that Jesus is the Almighty.
But that is a very opposite to your declaration that "JW does not believe that Jesus is God".

The Father in uppercase "G" is not "a god." He is the only one. That is why He has an article before "God."

If, the Father is God.
and, Jesus is God. (per JW)
Not the same to you? Why? Do the 2 uppercase G different?

There are not 2 uppercase "Gods" in John 1:1. The small "g" god is different than the "God" with an article before it. I tried to explain what JehovahsWitness meant, and you should go back and review their post where Jesus gets an upper case "G." I believe JW goes on to say that Jesus is a god.

Didn't you see JW's reply in his post #77?
The "Jesus is God" there. Why insist otherwise.

Because you refuse to read further and see where JW stated that Jesus is "a god."

Because that is my point. God and god is different.
Here in Col 2:8,9 lexicon defined Godhead as the state of being God. For in Jesus dwelleth the state of being God.
Do this does not prove that Jesus is God?

Col 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

G2320 θεότης theotēs
Thayer Definition:
1) deity
1a) the state of being God, Godhead

No, "godhead" is a term made up by translators that already believed that Jesus is God even before embarking on their translation project. It should be "godship" or "divine quality." "All the fullness of the divine quality dwells bodily." Jesus was a perfect reflection of God's being, having the fullness of the quality of God. It doesn't mean that Jesus is God.

NASB says: "For in him all the fullness of Diety dwells in bodily form." Not "Godhead." The New American Bible , the James Moffatt Translation, say the same thing. Not "Godhead," but "diety." The 21st Century New Testament uses "Godship" instead of "Godhead." Therefore stalls the idea of a trinity. The passage refers to Jesus being a reflection of his Father, God. No three-headed "Godhead."

Original Greek construction of Col 2:9, you will see the word Godhead and its corresponding Greek word "theotes".
And theotes defined by lexicon as the state of being God.
It is not a term made up by translators and your explanations are all wrong.

Col 2:9 For G3754  in G1722  him G846  dwelleth G2730  all G3956  the G3588  fulness G4138  of the G3588  Godhead G2320  bodily. G4985

Col 2:9 οτι G3754 CONJ  εν G1722 PREP  αυτω G846 P-DSM  κατοικει G2730 V-PAI-3S  παν G3956 A-NSN  το G3588 T-NSN  πληρωμα G4138 N-NSN  της G3588 T-GSF  θεοτητος G2320 N-GSF  σωματικως G4985 ADV 

Col 2:9 ὅτι ἐν αὐτῷ κατοικεῖ πᾶν τὸ πλήρωμα τῆς θεότητος σωματικῶς,

Not at all. Your sources are wrong. I have shown you that other translators do not render that Greek word as "Godhead," but godship or "divine authority." Jesus is not God but reflects the authority and characteristics of his Father so that he can be said to be the "fullness" of his Father's Godship.