Thanks to all who have given their advice on the upcoming visit from the Jehovah's Witnesses. Just from taking their pamphlets for all these months, I think if I were going to be dismissive I should have started that from the beginning, so I'm going to see the conversation through even if it does turn out to be a clunker. And as you all have said, any argument which is over their heads is one they're likely to take back to their supervisor rather than ponder themselves.
So I'm thinking I may start with what they do acknowledge. It seems that their usual script covers retranslating "the Word was God" into "the Word was a god" and expecting the Christian (Nicene) to drop it there, rather than run with it. If they translate the beginning of John as "the Word was a god", I think I could ask them exactly how many gods there are, and whether it's ok to worship this god. I'll also see if they have any understanding at all of what the Word of God becoming flesh really means and why it's big news for who Christ is. If they bite, I might even explain how Christ replaced the Temple ...
Comments and advice are welcome. So are prayers.
Thank you much for the comments and advice. It's been helpful in putting together my thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Anne,
My wife has a friend who is a Jehovah Witness. Her friend is pretty uninformed and unclear on the Nicean notion of Trinity, it's defense from Scripture as well as the implications. That might be a tack to take.
Dear JohnOneOne:
I don't mind alternate views, and my policy is to let comments stand regardless of tone, viewpoint or helpfulness. However, I do draw the line at novelettes. If you have that much volume, please use your own blog and post a link.
Re: the novelette you'd in the comments, (anyone following along: long story short he's mentioned the various other uses of 'god' for Moses, the judges, and those to whom the word of God came, used that to make an argument that Christ as Messiah is merely God's representative)
I'm familiar with the material you've covered but it leaves out important points. Jesus is unique among those honored to be called "God" in that he was with God when the world was made and the world was made through him. Not quite like it was with Moses or the Israelite Judges ... Jesus is in an entirely different category as the Incarnate Word.
Take care & God bless
Anne/WF
Dear Anne,
With regard to your suggestion that, instead of posting any further "novelettes," that I "post a link" to some of my own sources, may I recomend the following:
http://www.geocities.com/goodcompanionbooks/Some_Interesting_Observations.html
http://www.geocities.com/goodcompanionbooks/Some_Powerful_Reasonings.html
If you will permit, your point that, in recognition of the Bible's other uses for the title "gods," this '...leaves out important points, [that] Jesus is unique among those honored to be called 'God' in that he was with God when the world was made and the world was made through him [and that this is] Not quite like it was with Moses or the Israelite Judges ... [that] Jesus is in an entirely different category as the Incarnate Word,' to this, I would certainly agree. For I often include the comment that:
With our appreciation of Jesus as being God’s “apostle” (Hebrews 3:1), our “Savior” (Luke 2:11), as the one who would now be serving as our appointed “Lord” (Acts 2:34), future “Judge” (John 5:22; Acts 17:31), heavenly Ruler and “King” (1 Corinthians 15:25), we should surely see in Jesus someone as having more right to this title than any other earthly or heavenly “representative” of God. (John 7:29)
What you choose to permit to go thru to your blog is, of course, as you see fit, and I do respect that - but, as you can imagine, I am still sorry that you felt the need to remove what I had earlier submitted.
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
You're not the first person to have a novelette deleted. That thing was 5 pages when cut & pasted into a word processor with default margins. That's the kind of thing I don't let stand in my comment box.
I notice, when you brought back why Jesus is especially entitled to be called God, you still left out that as the Word of God he pre-existed the world and was the force behind the creation of the universe. You still seem to be holding to a view of Christ as "special man but nevertheless mere man with great roles and titles"; that doesn't do justice to the Word of God made flesh. Any view of Christ which overlooks his eternity, his pre-existing his incarnation, his role in creation ... these are views which do not do justice to Scripture and, more importantly, do not do justice to Christ.
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
Dear Anne,
Again, sorry for the earlier tome,...I didn’t realize it was so long. And yet, it's too bad it got deleted for, even though you might be "familiar with the material" I presented, there might be some here who aren't -- oh well.
With respect to your statement:
"I notice, when you brought back why Jesus is especially entitled to be called God, you still left out that as the Word of God he pre-existed the world and was the force behind the creation of the universe. You still seem to be holding to a view of Christ as "special man but nevertheless mere man with great roles and titles"; that doesn't do justice to the Word of God made flesh. Any view of Christ which overlooks his eternity, his pre-existing his incarnation, his role in creation ... these are views which do not do justice to Scripture and, more importantly, do not do justice to Christ."
Forgive me for not being as thorough in the presentation of my (and JW's) views concerning Jesus – as we all might agree, there is, indeed, so much that could be said about Him.
Yes, although Jehovah's Witnesses do believe that Jesus enjoyed a pre-existent life in the heavens with his God and Father, Jehovah, and that He certainly did have a role in the creation, they, however, do not believe the Scriptures teach that He had an eternal existence, that is, before the beginning of the creation. The following weblink might be helpful:
"Is God Always Superior to Jesus?"
http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/article_06.htm
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanonbooks.com
See, when you start out with arguments that Moses and the judges were "gods", and then admit Jesus alone had a role in creation, you've got off on a bad foot by making the first argument about Jesus being "god" like Moses and the judges ... well, not to be too blunt, but it comes across as specious.
The website linked has a very poor understanding of Trinitarian theology and counts in its readers to have the same lack of knowledge which leads to some of those questions.
The bottom-line point of the article that you linked is that Jesus is not God. Yet the JW's continue to have a problem in that Jesus claimed oneness with God, and that the Bible calls him God in several places ... which is why you brought up Moses et al, even though Moses et al did not pre-exist the world.
If Jesus is not God, then we do not owe our salvation to God, who (on your take) did not die for us. On that JW view, we owe our salvation to someone other than God, because someone other than God paid the price, and someone other than God had the greatest love.
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
Dear Anne,
Taking each of your points separately, you said:
"See, when you start out with arguments that Moses and the judges were "gods", and then admit Jesus alone had a role in creation, you've got off on a bad foot by making the first argument about Jesus being "god" like Moses and the judges ... well, not to be too blunt, but it comes across as specious."
Well, in their acknowledgment that others in the Bible (including Moses) had been called "gods." I don't think the point of most all scholars is ever meant to suggest that everyone of those who are called such had shared in the same position of power, authority, responsibilities, etc. (e.g., angels vs. Moses).
What I do find, however, it that they typically inform us that each one of these (of course, excluding the non-effective "gods" of the nations), do have one thing in common: They are all appointed by God to serve as His representatives, that is, in the carrying out of His will and purpose, not their own.
Apart from that, each are quite different; i.e., in power, position, authority, responsibility, etc., etc., including Jesus - in each of his special, unique roles assigned to him by his own God and Father.
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
Dear Anne,
You said:
"The website linked has a very poor understanding of Trinitarian theology and counts in its readers to have the same lack of knowledge which leads to some of those questions."
With respect to who it really is that has a "poor understanding of Trinitarian theology," might I suggest consideration of the contents within the following link:
"Some Interesting Observations About the Trinity, Perhaps Not So Commonly Known"
http://www.geocities.com/goodcompanionbooks/Some_Interesting_Observations.html
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
Dear Anne,
You said:
"The bottom-line point of the article that you linked is that Jesus is not God. Yet the JW's continue to have a problem in that Jesus claimed oneness with God, and that the Bible calls him God in several places ... which is why you brought up Moses et al, even though Moses et al did not pre-exist the world."
Although the Jews had a problem with Jesus’ claim of oneness with God (John 10:30), Jehovah’s Witnesses do not. After all, even Jesus expressed his interest in the importance of his own disciples achieving oneness with them. In prayer to his God and Father, among other things, Jesus asks:
"I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word;
that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me. The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one;...” - (John 17:20-22 - NASV).
[Quite interestingly, I have found most all Bible’s translations providing a cross-reference link from John 10:30 to this prayer by Jesus (John 17:21f), that is, when speaking of his concerns to his own God and Father (Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:34; John 20:17; Revelation 3:2, 12).]
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
Dear Anne,
You stated:
"If Jesus is not God, then we do not owe our salvation to God, who (on your take) did not die for us. On that JW view, we owe our salvation to someone other than God, because someone other than God paid the price, and someone other than God had the greatest love."
Actually, it is because Jesus is not God that we should, indeed, thank them both for the sacrificial roles that each had played in the salvation which comes to mankind.
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.” - (John 3:16 - NASV).
“For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all,...” - (1 Timothy 2:5, 6a - NASV).
Jesus was sent by his God to do His will and, by means of his willing sacrifice, he met that challenge to God’s approval. As the apostle Paul point’s out, within Romans 5, Jesus’ life of obedience, even to his own willing death, offsets what Adam had done. As a result of this, God is quite pleased to now exalt His own dear Son, Jesus, to an ever greater position than he had before, one with quite unique roll’s and responsibilities - and yet, still, all in accordance to the will of his own God and Father.
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
Hey John-1-1
Four replies? Mmm, that's an inventive way to not have any one comment so long, but still it works out to a conversation that's not really blog-format. It's been my experience that when a discussion starts covering more than yea-many points, it's not focused enough to be sustainable in this format. If the conversation is to continue, there needs to be some focus. And I think the focus is here: you seem to be skirting around the big issue. Let me invite you to take it on directly: Jesus asks, "Who do you say that I am?" Who do you say that he is? No half-answers, if you please. And remember, a long answer may still be a half-answer; it's directness that counts. Do the JW's say Jesus is an angel?
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
Dear Anne,
This conversation is over.
Agape, Alan.
john1one@earthlink.net
http://www.goodcompanionbooks.com
As you like. From your standpoint, you're probably safe enough trusting my friendly neighborhood JW's with the conversation.
FWIW, those passages that you bring up are familiar to me both from old debates with various "alternate Christology" folks and from research I'm doing for an upcoming paper on the Trinity. I can sympathize with those who wonder about the Trinity; it's just that I have not yet seen a better framework for understanding what we know about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The alternatives have been worse, not better, as far as I can tell.
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
"I'll also see if they have any understanding at all of what the Word of God becoming flesh really means..."
(Not that I'm a JW or a supporter of them, but) I'd be curious to see if you actually have any clue what the word of YHWH becoming flesh really means... I'd bet quite a lot you have no idea...no idea whatsoever...
Let's see if you do.
What Jewish author previous to the first century AD created the concept of the word becoming flesh and tabernacling in Israel and what did this mean?
Hi SlaveOfOne
ROFL, two points there. Books could be written on the subject, and I'm sure I have plenty to learn. The only respect in which I'm solidly a step ahead of my friendly neighborhood JW's is that I don't deny the concept and therefore have found it worth studying.
But if you're interested, the basic outline of the "Incarnate Word" section of my upcoming paper is reviewing the creative / living / presence of God / mind of God aspects, highlights of creation and Sinai, tabernacle and Temple (I have a space limit of 2000 words, and Incarnate Word is not my only topic).
If you have an especially pertinent writing on the topic that you'd like to recommend, I'd be glad to hear of it.
Take care & God bless
Anne / WF
Post a Comment