What do JWs know?

[2ndpillar2]

I just had two JWs come to my house. They said that they do not believe in the Trinity, yet they were quoting from a bible whose canon was produced by Athanasius in 367 A.D., the same guy who was the main proponent of the Trinity doctrine at Constantine's Council of Nicaea. They apparently did not know that Athanasius produced the canon they used, and that he proposed doctrine which is opposite of what they believe. Is this a one off, or is lack of historical context part of the JWs normal routine? They gave their quote of the day, Rev 21:4, without context, and didn't know that Rev 22:15 applied to the same Jerusalem, and that those "who practice lying" would not "enter". As soon as I told them, they turned and walked quickly away. The second time in around so many weeks, that JWs came, and quickly walked away when confronted with their inconsistencies.

[Capbook]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

[onewithhim]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

[Capbook]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

[slowrider]

I just had two JWs come to my house. They said that they do not believe in the Trinity, yet they were quoting from a bible whose canon was produced by Athanasius in 367 A.D., the same guy who was the main proponent of the Trinity doctrine at Constantine's Council of Nicaea. They apparently did not know that Athanasius produced the canon they used, and that he proposed doctrine which is opposite of what they believe. Is this a one off, or is lack of historical context part of the JWs normal routine? They gave their quote of the day, Rev 21:4, without context, and didn't know that Rev 22:15 applied to the same Jerusalem, and that those "who practice lying" would not "enter". As soon as I told them, they turned and walked quickly away. The second time in around so many weeks, that JWs came, and quickly walked away when confronted with their inconsistencies.

Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind.
And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

[onewithhim]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

[Capbook]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

Are there any JW that can assist you with that Greek text?
I think there are many of you here.

[onewithhim]

Many scriptures have been shown to you that show Jesus being taught and instructed by the Father. Is John 5:19 a figment of someone's imagination?

"Then answered Jesus and said unto them, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever He doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.'" (John 5:19, KJV)

"For I have not spoken of myself: but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say....Whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak." (John 12:49,50, KJV) That is how Jesus is the representation of his Father, the image of the invisible God.

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..

"Jesus lessened himself and placed aside his Heavenly Glory and subjected himself to the authority of the "Father" (Phil 2:5-9).

Jesus willfully took the subordinate role as a Son, to the "Father".

It wasn't a position that he had/held from his moment of creation (as you believe).

This is something he did willfully from a previous gloried position of sovereign power.

So, those scriptures you shared of him saying those kinds of things, that is why."

Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

Are there any JW that can assist you with that Greek text?
I think there are many of you here.

No, no one knows Greek so we have to rely on comparing translations, like most people in the world. We have Greek members in Greece that could help, but I don't know how to contact them. I seriously think that you don't really know what you are posting when you post the Greek text of anything. If you did, you would see that there are two "gods" mentioned in John 1:1. One is THE god and one is just "god." The Greek article goes before the first "god," and there is no article before the last "god." You can see it when you look at the Greek text. A person doesn't need to know Greek to see that.

[Capbook]

Um, I already responded to this in a prior post when I said..



Let's see if you respond to this now, or will you ignore it again like you did the last time.

Ignoring it won't make it go away.

I understand you have your pre-rehearsed Watchtower talking points, but that won't work here.

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

Are there any JW that can assist you with that Greek text?
I think there are many of you here.

No, no one knows Greek so we have to rely on comparing translations, like most people in the world. We have Greek members in Greece that could help, but I don't know how to contact them. I seriously think that you don't really know what you are posting when you post the Greek text of anything. If you did, you would see that there are two "gods" mentioned in John 1:1. One is THE god and one is just "god." The Greek article goes before the first "god," and there is no article before the last "god." You can see it when you look at the Greek text. A person doesn't need to know Greek to see that.

When we interpret Bible text by human contribution without consulting Hebrew or Greek lexicons we might fell to eisegesis.
Eisegesis defined as the act of interpreting a text by introducing one's own ideas, biases, or agendas, rather than the text's meaning.

[slowrider]

It's very unkind of you to insinuate that I have issued "pre-rehearsed talking points." That is untrue. We are encouraged to think for ourselves and that is what I do. I came to my conclusions on my own, and they just so happen to match the Watchtower's. I have not ignored anything you have posted. I stand by what I've already provided.

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

Are there any JW that can assist you with that Greek text?
I think there are many of you here.

No, no one knows Greek so we have to rely on comparing translations, like most people in the world. We have Greek members in Greece that could help, but I don't know how to contact them. I seriously think that you don't really know what you are posting when you post the Greek text of anything. If you did, you would see that there are two "gods" mentioned in John 1:1. One is THE god and one is just "god." The Greek article goes before the first "god," and there is no article before the last "god." You can see it when you look at the Greek text. A person doesn't need to know Greek to see that.

When we interpret Bible text by human contribution without consulting Hebrew or Greek lexicons we might fell to eisegesis.
Eisegesis defined as the act of interpreting a text by introducing one's own ideas, biases, or agendas, rather than the text's meaning.

Why do you need to interpret the bible? Why do you even need the bible?
Is it because you have not the Spirit of God?

[onewithhim]

Do your own thoughts and beliefs goes beyond the teaching of Watchtower?
Or always just within.

It has come to be seen that my beliefs harmonize with the Watchtower. I don't disagree with anything they say, other than the new allowance that women can wear pants to meetings and out in the ministry.

Do it mean that you are not open to Bible text to Bible text interpretation rather than the Governing Body interpretation?
Like John 1:1, original Greek said, "God is the word" than the NWT interpretation/translation?

No, the original Greek said: "and a god was the word." The NWT is not the only Bible version that says that. Look at The Emphatic Diaglott by Benjamin Wilson.

Are you kind enough to show me the original Greek text that says, and "a" God was the word?

I don't know how to print here with Greek words. I'm technologically challenged, you might say. But if you actually look at The Emphatic Diaglott you can clearly see that the Greek is translated as "a god was the word." If you knew Greek you would see also that the verse has two gods, THE god and "god." Jesus is not THE god. There is no article before "god" in his case.

Are there any JW that can assist you with that Greek text?
I think there are many of you here.

No, no one knows Greek so we have to rely on comparing translations, like most people in the world. We have Greek members in Greece that could help, but I don't know how to contact them. I seriously think that you don't really know what you are posting when you post the Greek text of anything. If you did, you would see that there are two "gods" mentioned in John 1:1. One is THE god and one is just "god." The Greek article goes before the first "god," and there is no article before the last "god." You can see it when you look at the Greek text. A person doesn't need to know Greek to see that.

When we interpret Bible text by human contribution without consulting Hebrew or Greek lexicons we might fell to eisegesis.
Eisegesis defined as the act of interpreting a text by introducing one's own ideas, biases, or agendas, rather than the text's meaning.

Why do you need to interpret the bible? Why do you even need the bible?
Is it because you have not the Spirit of God?

Jesus knew the Bible that existed then---Genesis through Malachi---and he quoted it many times. Why wouldn't we want to know the Sacred Scriptures, as he did? He said later to his Father, "Your word is truth." (John 17:17) I believe that means that all the things written in the Scriptures at that time were God's Word, and those written words were Truth. The Spirit of God helps others to understand the Bible, and it is to our benefit. You know, without the Bible we wouldn't know anything about who God is, who Jesus is and knowledge about his life and the reason he came to Earth. We wouldn't know anything about the Truth. Thankfully we have the Bible.