Jehovah’s Witnesses Say it is Wrong to Worship Jesus, but Are Happy to Worship Men

Click here to view video

Hello, the title of this video is “Jehovah’s Witnesses Say it is wrong to Worship Jesus, but Are Happy to Worship Men”. I’m sure that I’m going to get comments from disgruntled Jehovah’s Witnesses accusing me of misrepresenting them. They will claim they do not worship men; they will claim that they are the only ones on earth who worship the true God, Jehovah. Next, they will criticize me for suggesting that worshiping Jesus is a scripturally correct part of true worship. They might even quote Matthew 4:10 which shows Jesus telling the devil, “Go away, Satan! For it is written, “It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.’” New World Translation

Fine, I have made the accusation and I have done so publicly. So now I need to back it up with Scripture.

Let’s start by clearing away some potential misunderstandings. If you are one of Jehovah’s Witnesses, what do you understand the word “worship” to mean? Think about that for a moment. You claim to worship Jehovah God, but how exactly do you do that? If someone were to come up to you on the street and ask, what do I have to do to worship God, how would you answer?

I have found that to be a very challenging question to ask, not only of a Jehovah’s Witness, but of any member of any other religious faith. Everybody thinks they know what it means to worship God, but when you ask them to explain it, to put it into words, there is often a long silence.

Of course, what you and I think worship to mean is irrelevant. What counts is what God means when he says that we must worship only him. The best way to find out what God thinks on the question of worship is to read His inspired word. Would it surprise you to learn that there are four Greek words that are translated “worship” in the Bible? Four words to translate the one English word. It seems like our English word, worship, is carrying a heavy load.

Now this is going to get a little technical, but I’m going to ask you to bear with me because the subject is not academic. If I am right in saying that Jehovah’s Witnesses are worshiping men, then we are talking about an action that could bring about the condemnation of God. In other words, we’re talking about a subject that is a matter of life and death. So, it deserves our fullest attention.

By the way, even though I’m focusing on Jehovah’s Witnesses, I think that by the end of this video you’ll come to see that they’re not the only religious people who are worshiping men. Let us begin:

The first Greek word used for “worship” that we are going to consider is Thréskeia.

Strong’s Concordance gives the short definition of this term as “ritual worship, religion”. The fuller definition it provides is: “(underlying sense: reverence or worship of the gods), worship as expressed in ritual acts, religion.” NAS Exhaustive Concordance simply defines it as “religion”. This Greek word Thréskeia occurs only four times in Scripture. The New American Standard Bible only renders it as “worship” once, and the other three times as “religion”. However, the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, the Bible of Jehovah’s Witnesses, renders it as “worship” or “form of worship” in each instance. Here are the texts where it appears in the NWT:

“who were previously acquainted with me, if they would be willing to testify, that according to the strictest sect of our form of worship [thréskeia], I lived as a Pharisee.” (Acts 26:5)

“Let no man deprive you of the prize who takes delight in a false humility and a form of worship [thréskeia] of the angels, “taking his stand on” the things he has seen.” (Col 2:18)

“If any man thinks he is a worshipper [thréskos] of God but does not keep a tight rein on his tongue, he is deceiving his own heart, and his worship [thréskeia] is futile. The form of worship [thréskeia] that is clean and undefiled from the standpoint of our God and Father is this: to look after orphans and widows in their tribulation, and to keep oneself without spot from the world.” (James 1:26, 27)

By rendering thréskeia as “form of worship”, the Witnesses’ Bible conveys the idea of formalized or ritualistic worship; i.e., worship prescribed by following a set of rules and/or traditions. This is the form of worship or religion practiced in houses of worship, like Kingdom halls, temples, mosques, synagogues and traditional churches. It is noteworthy that each time this word is used in the Bible, it carries a strongly negative connotation. Therefore…

If you are a Catholic, your worship is thréskeia.

If you are a Protestant, your worship is thréskeia.

If you are a Seventh Day Adventist, your worship is thréskeia.

If you are a Mormon, your worship is thréskeia.

If you are a Jew, your worship is thréskeia.

If you are a Moslem, your worship is thréskeia.

and yes, most definitely,

If you are a Jehovah’s Witness, your worship is thréskeia.

Why does the Bible cast thréskeia in a negative light? Could it be because this is paint-by-numbers worship? Worship that obeys the rules of men rather than the guiding principles of our Lord the Christ? To illustrate, if you are one of Jehovah’s Witnesses and you go to all the meetings regularly and go out in field service weekly, putting in at least 10 hours a month in the preaching work, and if you donate your money to support the worldwide work, then you are “worshipping Jehovah God” in an acceptable manner, according to the rules of the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society—thréskeia.

This is nonsense, of course. When James says that the thréskeia which is “clean and undefiled from God’s viewpoint is to take care of orphans and widows,” he’s being ironic. There is no ritualism involved in that. Just love. Essentially, he is saying mockingly, “Oh, you think your religion is acceptable to God, do you? If there were a religion that God accepts, it would be one that cares for the needy and doesn’t follow the way of the world.”

Thréskeia (adjective): Religion, ritualized and formal

So, we can say that thréskeia is the word of Formalized or Ritualized Worship, or to put it another way, Organized Religion. To me, organized religion is a tautology, like saying “evening sunset”, “frozen ice” or “tuna fish.” All religion is organized. The problem with religion is that it is always men who do the organizing, so you end up doing things the way men tell you to do then or else you’ll suffer some punishment.

The next Greek word we’ll look at is:

Sebó (verb): reverence and devotion

It appears ten times in the Christian Scriptures—once in Matthew, once in Mark, and the remaining eight times in the book of Acts. It is the second of four distinct Greek words which modern Bible translations render “worship”. According to Strong’s Concordance, sebó can be used for reverence, adoration, or worship. Here are some examples of its usage:

“It is in vain that they keep worshipping [sebó] me, for they teach commands of men as doctrines.’”” (Matthew 15:9 NWT)

“One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper [sebó] of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul.” (Acts 16:14 ESV)

“This man is persuading people to worship [sebó] God contrary to the law.” (Acts 18:13 ESV)

For your convenience, I’m providing all these references in the description field of the video you’re watching should you wish to paste them into a Bible search engine, like biblegateway.com so as to see how other translations render sebó. [References to sebó in Greek: Mt 15:9; Mark 7:7; Acts 13:43,50; 16:14; 17:4,17; 18:7,13; 29:27]

While sebó is a verb, it doesn’t really depict any action. In fact, in none of the ten occurrences of the use of sebó is it possible to deduce exactly how the individuals mentioned are engaging in sebó, in reverential worship or adoration of God. Remember, this term is not describing a ritualistic or formalistic process of worship. The definition from Strong’s does not indicate action either. To reverence God and to adore God both speak about a feeling or an attitude about God or towards God. I can sit in my living room and adore God without actually doing anything. Of course, it can be argued that true adoration of God, or of anyone for that matter, must eventually manifest itself in some form of action, but what form that action should take is not specified in any of these verses.

A number of Bible translations render sebó as “devout”. Again, that speaks of a mental disposition more than any specific action and this is an important distinction to keep it mind.

A person who is devout, who reveres God, whose love of God reaches the level of adoration, is a person who is recognizable as godly. His worship characterizes his life. He talks the talk and walks the walk. His fervent desire is to be like his God. So, everything he does in life is guided by the self-examining thought, “Would this please my God?”

In short, his worship isn’t about performing a ritual of any kind as prescribed by men in methodical worship. His worship is his very way of life.

Nevertheless, the capacity for self-delusion that is part of the fallen flesh requires us to be careful. In past centuries, when devout (sebó) Christians burned a fellow worshipper at the stake, they thought they were rendering sacred service or reverential service to God. Today, Jehovah’s Witnesses think they are worshipping God (sebó) when they shun a fellow believer because he or she speaks out against some transgression committed by the Governing Body, like their hypocritical 10-year affiliation with the United Nations Organization or their mishandling of thousands of child sexual abuse cases.

Likewise, it is possible to render sebó (reverent, adoring devotion or worship) to the wrong God. Jesus condemned the sebó of the scribes, Pharisees and priests, because they taught commands of men as coming from God. Jesus said, “They worship [sebó] me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.” Matthew (15:9 BSB) Thus, they misrepresented God and failed to imitate him. The God they were imitating was Satan and Jesus told them so:

”You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44, BSB)

Now we come to the third Greek word rendered “worship” in the Bible.

Thréskeia (adjective): Religion, ritualized and formal

Sebó (verb): reverence and devotion

Latreuó (verb): sacred service

Strong's Concordance gives us:

Latreuó

Definition: to serve

Usage: I serve, especially God, perhaps simply: I worship.

Some translations will render it “worship”. For instance:

“But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,’ God said, ‘and afterward they will come out of that country and worship [latreuó] me in this place.’” (Acts 7:7 NIV)

“But God turned away from them and gave them over to the worship [latreuó] of the sun, moon and stars. (Acts 7:42 NIV)

However, the New World translation prefers to render latreuó as “sacred service” which brings us back to Jesus’ encounter with the Devil that we discussed at the beginning of this video:

“Go away, Satan! For it is written, ‘It is Jehovah your God you must worship, and it is to him alone you must render sacred service [latreuó].’” (Mt 4:10 NWT)

Jesus links worship of God with service to God.

But what about the first part of that rebuke when Jesus said, “It is Jehovah your God you must worship” (Matthew 4:10 NWT)?

That word isn’t Thréskeia, nor sebó, nor latreuó. This is the fourth Greek word translated as worship in English Bibles and it is the one upon which the title of this video is based. This is the worship that we should render to Jesus, and it is the worship that Jehovah’s Witnesses refuse to render. This is the worship that Witnesses render to men. Ironically, most other religions in Christendom while claiming to render this worship to Jesus also fail to do so and instead worship men. This word in Greek is proskuneó.

According to Strong’s Concordance:

Proskuneó means:

Definition: to do reverence to

Usage: I go down on my knees to do obeisance to, worship.

Proskuneó is a compound word.

HELPS Word-studies states that it comes from “prós, “towards” and kyneo, “to kiss“. It refers to the action of kissing the ground when prostrating before a superior; to worship, ready “to fall down/prostrate oneself to adore on one’s knees” (DNTT); to “do obeisance” (BAGD)”

Sometimes the New World Translation renders it as “worship” and sometimes as “obeisance”. This is really a distinction without a difference. For example, when Peter entered the home of Cornelius, the first Gentile Christian, we read: “As Peter entered, Cornelius met him, fell down at his feet and did obeisance [proskuneó] to him. But Peter lifted him up, saying: “Rise; I myself am also a man.” (Acts 10:25, 26)

Most Bibles render this as “worshipped him”. For instance, the New American Standard Bible gives us: “As Peter was coming in, Cornelius met him and fell down at his feet and worshiped him.”

It is worthy of note for the serious Bible student that a very similar circumstance and wording occurs in Revelation where the apostle John says:

“At that I fell down before his feet to worship [proskuneó] him. But he tells me: “Be careful! Do not do that! All I am is a fellow slave of you and of your brothers who have the work of witnessing to Jesus. Worship [proskuneó] God; for the bearing witness to Jesus is what inspires prophesying.”” (Revelation 19:10, NWT)

Here, the New World Translation uses “worship” instead of “do obeisance” for the same word, proskuneó. Why is Cornelius shown as doing obeisance, while John is shown as worshipping when the same Greek word is used in both places and the circumstances are virtually identical.

At Hebrews 1:6 we read in the New World Translation:

“But when he again brings his Firstborn into the inhabited earth, he says: “And let all of God’s angels do obeisance to him.”” (Hebrews 1:6)

Yet in virtually every other Bible translation we read that the angels worship him.

Why does the New World translation use “obeisance” instead of “worship” in these instances? As a former elder in the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses, I can state without any doubt that this is to create an artificial distinction based on religious bias. To Jehovah’s Witnesses, you can worship God, but you can’t worship Jesus. Perhaps they did this originally to counter the influence of trinitarianism. They have even gone so far as to demote Jesus to the status of an angel, albeit the archangel Michael. Now to be clear, I don’t believe in the Trinity. Nevertheless, worshipping Jesus, as we shall see, does not require us to accept that God is a Trinity.

Religious bias is a very powerful impediment to accurate Bible understanding, so before proceeding further, let us get a good grasp of what the word proskuneó really means.

You will remember the account of the windstorm when Jesus came to his disciples in their fishing boat walking on water, and Peter asked to do the same, but then began to doubt and sink. The account reads:

“Immediately Jesus reached out His hand and took hold of Peter. “You of little faith,” He said, “why did you doubt?” And when they had climbed back into the boat, the wind died down. Then those who were in the boat worshiped Him (proskuneó,) saying, “Truly You are the Son of God!”” (Matthew 14:31-33 BSB)

Why does the New World Translation choose to render, proskuneó, in this account as “do obeisance” when in other places it renders it as worship? Why do almost all translations follow the Berean Study Bible in saying that the disciples worshipped Jesus in this instance? To answer that, we need to realize what the word proskuneó meant to Greek speakers in the ancient world.

Proskuneó literally means to “bow down and kiss the earth.” Given that, what image comes to your mind as you read this passage. Did the disciples just give the Lord a hearty thumbs up? “That was pretty nifty Lord, what you did back there, walking on water and calming the storm. Cool. Koodos to you!”

No! They were so overawed by this awesome display of power, seeing that the elements themselves were subject to Jesus—the storm abating, the water supporting him—that they fell to their knees and bowed before him. They kissed the ground, so to speak. This was an act of total submission. Proskuneó is a word that implies total submission. Total submission implies total obedience. Yet, when Cornelius did the same thing before Peter, the apostle told him not to do that. He was just a man like Cornelius. And when John bowed down to kiss the earth before the angel, the angel told him not to do that. Even though he was a righteous angel, he was just a fellow servant. He didn’t deserve John’s obedience. Yet, when the disciples bowed down and kissed the earth before Jesus, Jesus didn’t rebuke them and didn’t tell them not to do that. Hebrews 1:6 tells us that the angels will also bow down and kiss the earth before Jesus, and again, they do that correctly at the decree of God.

Now if I were to tell you to do something, would you obey me unquestioningly without reservation? You better not. Why not? Because I’m just a human like you. But what if an angel were to appear and tell you to do something? Would you obey the angel unconditionally and without question? Again, you had better not. Paul told the Galatians that even if “an angel out of heaven were to declare to you as good news something beyond the good news we declared to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8 NWT)

Now ask yourself, when Jesus returns, will you willingly obey everything he tells you to do without question nor reservation? Do you see the difference?

When Jesus was resurrected, he told his disciples that “all authority has been given me in heaven and on the earth.” (Matthew 28:18 NWT)

Who gave him all authority? Our Heavenly Father, obviously. So, if Jesus tells us to do something, it is as if our Heavenly Father himself were telling us. There is no difference, right? But if a man tells you to do something claiming that God told him to tell you, that is different, then you would still have to check with God, wouldn’t you?

“If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality. He that speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory; but he that seeks the glory of him that sent him, this one is true, and there is no unrighteousness in him.” (John 7:17, 18 NWT)

Jesus also tells us:

“Most truly I say to YOU, The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner.” (John 5:19 NWT)

So, would you worship Jesus? Would you proskuneó Jesus? That is to say, would you give your full submission to him? Remember, proskuneó is the Greek word for worship that implies full submission. If Jesus appeared before you in this instant, what would you do? Slap him on the back and say, “Welcome back, Lord. Good to see you. What took you so long?” No! The first thing we must do is to fall to our knees, bow to the earth to show that we are willing to totally submit to him. That is what it means to truly worship Jesus. By worshiping Jesus, we worship Jehovah, the Father, because we are submitting to his arrangement. He has put the Son in charge and he told us, three times no less, “This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved; listen to him.” (Matthew 17:5 NWT)

Remember when you were a child and were acting disobediently? Your parent would say, “You’re not listening to me. Listen to me!” And then they’d tell you to do something and you knew you had better do it.

Our Heavenly Father, the only true God has told us: “This is my Son…listen to him!”

We had better listen. We had better submit. We had better proskuneó, worship our Lord, Jesus.

This is where people get mixed up. They can’t resolve how it can be possible to worship both Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. The Bible says you cannot serve two masters, so wouldn’t worshipping Jesus and Jehovah be like trying to serve two masters? Jesus told the Devil to only worship [proskuneó] God, so how could he accept worship himself. A Trinitarian will get around this by saying that it works because Jesus is God. Really? Then why doesn’t the Bible tell us to worship the holy spirit as well? No, there is a much simpler explanation. When God tells us not to worship any other gods except him, who decides what it means to worship God? The worshipper? No, God decides how he is to be worshipped. What the Father expects from us is total submission. Now, if I agree to totally submit to my Heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and he then tells me to totally submit to his Son, Jesus Christ, am I going to say, “Sorry, God. Can’t do that. I’m only going to submit to you?” Can we see how ridiculous such a stance would be? Jehovah is saying, “I want you to submit to me through my Son. To obey him is to obey me.”

And we are saying, “Sorry, Jehovah, I can only obey commands you give me directly. I accept no mediator between you and me.”

Remember that Jesus does nothing of his own initiative, so to obey Jesus is to obey the Father. That is why Jesus is called “the Word of God”. You may recall Hebrews 1:6 that we read twice so far. Where it says the Father will bring his first born and all the angels will worship him. So who is bringing who? The Father is bringing the son. Who is telling the angels to worship the Son? The Father. And there you have it.

People will still ask, “But then to whom do I pray?” First of all, prayer isn’t proskuneó. Prayer is where you get to talk to God. Now Jesus came to make it possible for you to call Jehovah your Father. Before him, that was not possible. Before him, we were orphans. Given that you are now an adopted child of God, why wouldn’t you want to talk to your father? “Abba, Father.” You want to talk to Jesus too. Okay, no one is stopping you. Why make it into an either/or thing?

Now that we’ve established what it means to worship God and Christ, let’s deal with the other part of the video title; the part where I said that Jehovah’s Witnesses are actually worshipping men. They think they are worshipping Jehovah God, but in fact, they are not. They are worshipping men. But let’s not restrict that to just Jehovah’s Witnesses. Most members of organized religion will claim to be worshipping Jesus, but are also, in fact, worshipping men.

Remember the man of God who was deceived by an old prophet in 1 Kings 13:18, 19? The old prophet lied to the man of God who came from Judah and who was told by God not to eat or drink with anyone and go home by another route. The false prophet said:

“At this he said to him: “I too am a prophet like you, and an angel told me by the word of Jehovah, ‘Have him come back with you to your house so that he may eat bread and drink water.’” (He deceived him.) So he went back with him to eat bread and drink water in his house.” (1 Kings 13:18, 19 NWT)

Jehovah God punished him for his disobedience. He obeyed or submitted to a man rather than to God. In that instance, he worshipped [proskuneó] a man because that is what the word means. He suffered the consequences.

Jehovah God doesn’t speak to us as he did to the prophet in 1 Kings. Instead, Jehovah speaks to us through the Bible. He speaks to us through his Son, Jesus, whose words and teachings are recorded in Scripture. We are like that “man of God” in 1 Kings. God tells us which path to follow. He does this through his word the Bible which we all have and can all read for ourselves.

So, if a man claims to be a prophet—be he a member of the Governing Body, or a TV evangelist, or the Pope in Rome—if that man tells us that God speaks to him and he then tells us to take a different path home, a path different than the one laid out by God in Scripture, then we must disobey that man. If we don’t , if we obey that man, we are worshipping him. We are bowing down and kissing the earth before him because we are submitting to him rather than submitting to Jehovah God. This is very dangerous.

Men lie. Men speak of their own originality, seeking their own glory, not the glory of God.

Sadly, my former associates in the Organization of Jehovah’s Witnesses are not obedient to this commandment. If you disagree, try a little experiment. Ask them if there was something in the Bible telling them to do one thing, but the Governing Body told them to do something else, which would they obey? You’ll be surprised at the answer.

An elder from another country who had served for over 20 years told me about an elders’ school he had attended where one of the instructors had come down from Brooklyn. This prominent man held up a Bible with a black cover and told the class, “If the Governing Body were to tell me that the cover of this Bible is blue, then it is blue.” I have had similar experiences myself.

I understand that it can be hard to comprehend some Bible passages and so the average Jehovah’s Witness will trust the men in charge, but there are some things that are not hard to understand. Something happened in 2012 that should have shocked all Jehovah’s Witnesses, because they claim to be in the truth and they claim to worship [proskuneó, submit to] Jehovah God.

It was in that year that the Governing Body presumptuously took upon itself the designation of the “faithful and discreet slave,” and demanded all Jehovah’s Witnesses to submit to their interpretation of Scripture. They have referred to themselves publicly as the “Guardians of Doctrine.” (Google it if you doubt me.) Who appointed them Guardians of Doctrine. Jesus said that he that “speaks of his own originality is seeking his own glory…” (John 7:18, NWT)

Throughout the history of the Organization, the “anointed” were considered to be the faithful and discreet slave, but when, in 2012, the Governing Body took that mantle upon themselves, there was hardly a whisper of protest from the flock. Amazing!

Those men now claim to be God’s channel of communication. They audaciously claim to be substitutes for Christ as we see in their 2017 version of the NWT at 2 Cor 2: 20.

"Therefore, we are ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us. As substitutes for Christ, we beg: “Become reconciled to God.”"

The word “substituting” does not occur in the original text. It has been inserted by the New World Translation committee.

As acting substitutes for Jesus Christ, they expect Jehovah’s Witnesses to obey them unconditionally. For example, listen to this excerpt from The Watchtower:

"When “the Assyrian” attacks…the life-saving direction that we receive from Jehovah’s organization may not appear practical from a human standpoint. All of us must be ready to obey any instructions we may receive, whether these appear sound from a strategic or human standpoint or not."
(w13 11/15 p. 20 par. 17 Seven Shepherds, Eight Dukes—What They Mean for Us Today)

They view themselves as a collective Moses. When anyone disagrees with them, they consider that person to be a modern-day Korah, who opposed Moses. But these men are not the modern equivalent to Moses. Jesus is the greater Moses and anyone who expects men to follow them instead of following Jesus is sitting in the seat of Moses.

Jehovah’s Witnesses now believe that these men of the Governing Body are the key to their salvation.

These men claim to be kings and priests whom Jesus has chosen and remind Jehovah’s Witnesses that they “should never forget that their salvation depends on their active support of Christ’s anointed “brothers” still on earth. (w12 3/15 p. 20 par. 2)

But Jehovah God tells us:

"Put not your trust in princes, in mortal men, who cannot save.” (Psalm 146:3 BSB)

No man, no group of men, no Pope, no Cardinal, no Arch Bishop, no TV Evangelist, nor Governing Body serves as the cornerstone of our salvation. Only Jesus Christ fills that role.

“This is ‘the stone that was treated by you builders as of no account that has become the chief cornerstone.’  Furthermore, there is no salvation in anyone else, for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must get saved.”” (Acts 4:11, 12)

Frankly, I’m shocked that my former Jehovah’s Witness friends have so easily slipped into the worship of men. I’m talking men and women whom I have known for decades. Mature and intelligent individuals. Yet, they are no different from the Corinthians that Paul rebuked when he wrote:

"For YOU gladly put up with the unreasonable persons, seeing YOU are reasonable. In fact, YOU put up with whoever enslaves YOU, whoever devours [what YOU have], whoever grabs [what YOU have], whoever exalts himself over [YOU], whoever strikes YOU in the face." (2 Corinthians 11:19, 20, NWT)

Where did the sound reasoning of my former friends go?

Let me paraphrase Paul’s words to the Corinthians, speaking to my dear friends:

Why do you gladly put up with unreasonable people? Why do you put up with a Governing Body that enslaves you by demanding strict obedience to every dictate of theirs, telling you what holidays you can and cannot celebrate, what medical treatments you can and cannot accept, what entertainment you can and cannot listen to? Why do you put up with a Governing Body that devours what you have by selling your hard won kingdom hall property right out from under your feet? Why do you put up with a Governing Body that grabs what you have, by taking all the excess funds from your congregation account? Why do you adore men who exalt themselves over you? Why do you put up with men who strike you in the face, by demanding you turn your back on your own children who decide they no longer want to be one of Jehovah’s Witnesses? Men who use the threat of disfellowshipping as a weapon to get you to bow down to them and submit.

The Governing Body claims to be the faithful and discreet slave, but what makes that slave faithful and discreet? The slave cannot be faithful if he teaches falsehoods. He cannot be discreet if he arrogantly proclaims himself to be faithful and discreet instead of waiting for his master to do so upon his return. From what you know of the historical and current actions of the Governing Body, do you think that Matthew 24:45-47 is an accurate description of them, the faithful and discreet slave, or would the next verses fit better?

“But if ever that evil slave says in his heart, ‘My master is delaying,’ and he starts to beat his fellow slaves and to eat and drink with the confirmed drunkards, the master of that slave will come on a day that he does not expect and in an hour that he does not know, and he will punish him with the greatest severity and will assign him his place with the hypocrites. There is where his weeping and the gnashing of his teeth will be.” (Matthew 24:48-51 NWT)

The Governing Body is quick to label anyone who disagrees with them as a poisonous apostate. Like a magician who distracts you with a hand movement here, while his other hand is doing the trick, they say, “Watch out for opposers and apostates. Don’t even listen to them for fear they will seduce you with smooth words.”

But just who is doing the actual seducing? The Bible says:

“Let no one seduce YOU in any manner, because it will not come unless the apostasy comes first and the man of lawlessness gets revealed, the son of destruction. He is set in opposition and lifts himself up over everyone who is called “god” or an object of reverence, so that he sits down in the temple of The God, publicly showing himself to be a god. Do YOU not remember that, while I was yet with YOU, I used to tell YOU these things?” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-5) NWT

Now if you think I’m targeting only Jehovah’s Witnesses, you are wrong. If you’re a Catholic, or Mormon, or an evangelist, or any other Christian faith, and you are content in the belief that you are worshiping Jesus, I ask you to take a hard look at your form of worship. Do you pray to Jesus? Do you praise Jesus? Do you preach Jesus? That is all well and good, but that’s not worship. Remember what the word means. To bow down and kiss the earth; in other words, to fully submit to Jesus. If your church tells you it’s okay to bow down before a statute and pray to that statute, that idol, do you obey your church? Because the Bible tells us to flee from idolatry in all its forms. That’s Jesus talking. Does your church tell you to get fully involved in politics? Because Jesus tells us to be no part of the world. Does your church tell you it’s okay to take up arms and kill fellow Christians who happen to be on the other side of the border? Because Jesus tells us to love our brothers and sisters and those living by the sword will die by the sword.

Worshiping Jesus, unconditional obedience to him, is hard, because it puts us at odds with the world, even the world that calls itself Christian.

The Bible tells us that there will soon come a time in which the crimes of the church will be judged by God. Just like he destroyed his former nation, Israel in the time of Christ, because of their apostasy, he will likewise destroy religion. I don’t say false religion because that would be a tautology. Religion is a formalized or ritualized form of worship imposed by men and therefore is by its nature false. And it’s different from worship. Jesus said to the Samaritan woman that neither in Jerusalem at the temple, nor on the mountain where the Samaritans worshipped would God accept worship. Instead, he was looking for individuals, not an organization, a place, a church, or any other ecclesiastical arrangement. He was looking for people who would worship him in spirit and truth.

That is why Jesus tells us through John in Revelation to get out of her my people if you do not want to share with her in her sins. (Revelation 18:4,5). Again, like ancient Jerusalem, religion will be destroyed by God for her sins. It’s best for us not to be inside of Babylon the Great when the time comes.

In conclusion, you will recall that proskuneó, worship, in Greek means to kiss the earth before the feet of someone. Will we kiss the earth before Jesus by fully and unconditionally submitting to him no matter the personal cost?

I will leave you with this final thought from Psalm 2:12.

“Kiss the son, that He may not become incensed And YOU may not perish [from] the way, For his anger flares up easily. Happy are all those taking refuge in him.” (Psalm 2:12)

Thank you for your time and your attention.

Archived Comments

We have moved to the Disqus commenting system. To post a new comment, go to the bottom of this page.

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 10:37:53
WOW! Fantastic job on this video, my brother. This is one of the best videos I've seen in some time, I mean that. I can tell that you put a lot of work into this, and believe me when I say it payed off! Amazing job brother Eric!

P.S. I love your sense of humor(and how it manifests in the form of witty sarcasm)! :)
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-15 20:27:25
  Thanks, Rajeshsony.

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 11:16:45
is interesting that according to the biblical context the apostle Paul gives (latreuo) to Jesus ....... Acts 27: 23-24: Tonight an angel of God appears to me to whom I belong and to whom I render sacred service
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 12:29:11
  Yes, indeed. Here's what HELP word studies says about the term "ággelos";
  "32 ággelos – properly, a messenger or delegate – either human or heavenly (a celestial angel); someone sent (by God) to proclaim His message."
  
  Basically, an angel is anyone sent by God. It's merely a job description. It's not a type of spiritual being, with a specific appearance and/or powers. If you are sent directly by God, you are an angel. So, technically, Jesus is an angel. What I mean by that is, Jesus can take on the job of being a messenger of God. Whether or not someone is referred to as an angel has no bearing on their status, appearance, authority, and/or power. The term "angel", however, has come to mean in our vernacular just "any spiritual being in general." This is a mistake(not a terrible one, but a mistake nonetheless). Cherubim/seraphim are spiritual beings, but they are not angels.
  
  There is actually a proper term for "spiritual beings", that is, beings who are, by nature, belonging to the spiritual realm. It's "elohim" in Hebrew(all beings with a job such as throne guardian[cherubim] or messenger[angel] are spiritual beings, but not all spiritual beings have such specific jobs. They are proper subsets of the set of all spiritual beings, i.e. elohim). This is the word generally translated as God in the Hebrew Bible. But really, it refers to any spiritual being(whether Jehovah or angels or the Sons of God). It's a category title, used to denote a set(the set of all spiritual beings). "Angel" and "elohim" have come to be synonymous in our minds(even though we don't know it). Once again, this is a mistake. "Angel" is a job description, "elohim" is a description of your fundamental nature(one being spiritual i.e. belonging to the spirit realm). So, what we should say is, Jesus is an "elohim" who can be employed(and was employed at this instance) as a messenger of God(i.e. angel). But that does not mean he has the same status, appearance, authority, and/or power as all other "elohim" who are also employed by God to be His messenger. So, you are right. The angel here is definitely Jesus.
  - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 14:16:27
    Thanks for your comment.Even at Genesis 48:16 ... Patriarch Jacob calls Jehovah (angel) ... maybe it's figurative too..are we going a little off topic ... Can we give Jesus latreuo besides proskuneo?
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:03:52
      Patriarch Jacob calls Jehovah (angel)
      Yes, that is the Angel of the Lord, which I believe to be Jesus before he was transformed into a human. The Angel of the Lord had been called Jehovah and God on multiple occasions in the Hebrew Bible, and even acted like God, unlike any other angel(of which very few were named, and when they were it was never Jehovah). Jesus has been God's primary messenger since the time of Abraham. And in the minds of many who spoke to the angel, this angel WAS Jehovah(that's why they called him that). The messenger of Yahweh was Yahweh to them(I actually think it would be awesome if we could replace every "angel" in the Hebrew Bible with "messenger." Because the term angel comes with a lot of baggage, i.e. white men with feathery wings, as depicted by the organization). Even the "God" walking in the garden of Eden was Jesus. It's as though the minds of Jesus and God are inextricably linked. While they are not equal in every aspect(so far, the only discrepancies I can find are the fact that God has infinite power AND no source, while Jesus is able to be diminished in power, even to the point of death, and he has a source; God. But other than those two discrepancies, Jesus and God are synonymous). So, whether or not Jesus is God depends on how you define beinghood/existence. I can think of two main denotations.
      
      (1) Are YOU your mind + all the other attributes not pertaining to your consciousness? In which case, Jesus is not God because God has attributes Jesus doesn't(i.e. infinite power and no source).
      
      (2) Or are YOU your mind, i.e. your character and personality, the choices and decisions you make, the information you hold, your conscious will, etc.? In which case, Jesus IS God(at least, he was at the beginning of time, and will be in the New Heaven and New Earth[and maybe is now, I'm not sure]. During his time on Earth, he most certainly was not God in the sense of either denotation, as there was things he did not know. Although, when it comes to character/personality, Jesus was definitely the perfect representation of said divine quality[see Colossians 2:9]. And when it comes to God's will, he always acted it out too, making God's will his will[see John 12:49, John 6:38, John 5:19, and John 4:34]. So when Jesus is being a perfect representative of the mind/consciousness of God, he is, for all intents and purposes, God).
      
      So, a duality is and isn't right. Once again, it depends on how you define the existence of a being. If you go with the first denotation, Jesus is not God; if you go with the second, he is. Both definitions are valid, so it doesn't really matter to me either way. I usually go with the first defintion, so I don't say Jesus is God. It would be perfectly reasonable to go with the second defintion, however, and then say Jesus is God. That's absolutely fine. But, you cannot go with the first defintion and say Jesus is God, because they are not equal in every possible aspect.
      
      Can we give Jesus latreuo besides proskuneo
      Well, that's what Paul said, wasn't it? Worshipping Jesus IS worshipping God, because God has given Jesus the status of being His perfect represantive, holding ALL authority in all of existence, whether heaven or earth. Unquestionably obeying Jesus is unquestionably obeying God. To imitate Jesus as the perfect model is to imitate God as the perfect model(to walk with Jesus is to walk with God) . To be in the image of Jesus is to be in the image of God(i.e. Genesis 1:26 "...Let US make man in our image...").
      
      We can even pray to Jesus. That's what righteous Stephen did. Acts 7:59-60. "While they were stoning him, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” Then he fell on his knees and cried out, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” When he had said this, he fell asleep." Who did he pray to? Jesus! :) Take care, my brother! Have a wonderful day! ;)
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 15:37:26
        Of all the things you have said, I have only liked the Scriptures in Revelation 22: 1-5 and it is a valid point ...... I absolutely disagree with the other facts: 1-James addresses Jesus (the angel) and not to Jehovah ..... The angel in Eden and in the Hebrew Scriptures is always Jesus when the Bible does not specify ..... 2-We must pray to Jesus ..... 3-We can not give (Sebo) to Jesus. ... but only to Jehovah as Jesus gave to his Father in the way of his life ..... Your explanations seem too much to me and your thoughts or speculations .... Please express your point of view by supporting with Scriptures because with a tedious and worthless analysis to analyze your speculations .......
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:46:37
        "James addresses Jesus (the angel) and not to Jehovah"
        James? What about James?
        
        The angel in Eden and in the Hebrew Scriptures is always Jesus when the Bible does not specify
        I 100% agree. That's what I said. I'm just saying that they called the angel God as well. You provided a scripture that said that... Genesis 48:16. You literally said Jacob called God/Jehovah an angel, which he definitely did, I agree. This angel is Jesus, I totally agree. But, being a perfect representative of God, he is also God in a way...
        
        We must pray to Jesus
        I said that too! I agree with that. Didn't you read what I wrote about Stephen, who did pray to Jesus? Anyway, yeah. I agree. We can absolutely pray to Jesus. I do at times. :D
        
        -We can not give (Sebo) to Jesus.
        And where exactly in the Bible does it say that? Sebo means "reverence and devotion." Are we not devoted to Christ as Christians? Do we not adore and obey him?? "Sebo" is like a step down from "latreuó", which means "sacred service." Devotion and reverence is not as grand as "sacred service." If the Bible says we can render sacred service (latreuó) to Jesus, then surely we can have reverence for him, which is not anywhere near as grand as sacredly worshiping Jesus... And, once again, where does it say we cannot "sebo" Jesus?
        
        but only to Jehovah as Jesus gave to his Father in the way of his life
        Huh? Where does it say that? As you said to me, "Please express your point of view by supporting with Scriptures..."
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 16:04:39
        Brother .... this is a deep topic that has nothing to do with the topic that brother Eric did .... I hope to once again give the relevant Scriptures on these topics ..... Brother ...... ...... Jesus gave Sebo with his way of life Father, Latreuo, Proskuneo ..... you prayed to the Father ...... while you say that we pray to Jesus ... we give Sebo with our way of life, latreuo, proskuneo ... but we also give to Jehovah then Jesus is also our Father ...... But the Bible says that Jehovah asks us to give proskuneo to Jesus, latreuo and not to give Sebo with our way of life and we pray to Jesus because otherwise they fall to be the same person .... According to you we are polytheists with 2 Gods we pray to ... we give Sebo, proskuneo, latreuo ... while Jesus was praying His father ...
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 16:35:41
        So, then, Stephen was sinning when he prayed to Jesus? I really don't think so.
        
        My brother, you have to understand; the relationship we are supposed to have with God is not the same we are to have with Jesus. For example, say you call your mom on FaceTime. Would you say that, because you called your mom on FaceTime, if you were to call your sister on FaceTime as well, they(your mom and sister) would be the same? No, of course not. Similarly, prayer is just a form of communication. We pray to God as our Father; we communicate with Him and have a relationship with Him in a father-child dynamic. We pray(of course, we don't have to. No one said it was a requirement. I'm just saying it isn't sinful to do so) to Jesus as our Master/King, and our Lord and Savior, who also went through pain and suffering like us.
        
        It's about acknowledging God and Jesus in different manners, to be different people.
        
        We recognize God to be our;
        (1) Eternal Father and Loving Creator
        (2) Infinity Powerful Sovereign over all existence
        
        We recognize Jesus to be;
        (1) our Eternal King and Lord that has ALL authority in heaven and Earth
        (2) our Cosmic High Priest and Ultimate Savior i.e. the ultimate means of atonement for our sins, of which we will never need another.
        
        So long as we can apprehend and embrace those differences, and realize that praying to Jesus ≠ praying to God, it's absolutely fine to pray to whomever we wish(that is, whether to God or Jesus). Prayer(like FaceTime) is just a way to communicate, and we can use it to talk to either our Father or King(just like I can use FaceTime to talk to either my mom or sister). Once again, I'm not saying you have to pray to Jesus. All I'm saying is that you can. Big difference, right?
        
        According to you we are polytheists with 2 Gods we pray to
        Not two Gods. One God and one Lord/Savior, either of which we can talk(pray) to.
        
        while Jesus was praying His father
        At that point in time, Jesus had not ascended over the "highest heavens" to the right hand of the Father, possessing all possible authority over everything in existence.
        
        P.S. What makes Jehovah our Father is not the fact that we give "sebo" to Him. It's the fact that He is the creator of everything in existence, and has chosen to adopt us as children through the Spirit. Whether or not we give "sebo" to Jesus has no bearing on whether or not we can call God our Father. Giving "sebo" to Jesus does not necessitate the notion that he is our Father. Take care my brother! ;)
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:50:45
        I absolutely disagree with the other facts
        If you're going to say you totally disagree with me and go ahead and give my comment a dislike, I hope you have some valid reasons for doing so. Might I inquire as to what they are?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:51:32
        I have only liked the Scriptures in Revelation 22: 1-5 and it is a valid point
        Thank you very much my brother! :)
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 16:02:09
        Did you know the name "Israel" literally means "he who wrestles with God," or "fighter of God." That's why Jacob's name was changed to Israel, because he "fought with God." (Genesis 32:24) Of course, he fought with an angel. But, his name doesn't mean "he who wrestles with an angel." As you can see, the Angel of the Lord(Jesus) is synonymous with God(Jehovah). By wrestling the angel(Jesus), Jacob essentially wrestled with God, hence how he could justifiably change his name to Israel.
      - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:28:23
        I agree with you that Jesus is the Angel of the Lord, He is not an angelic being but the Malachi, especially if we take into account Jn 1:18. He has all the attributes of Yaveh.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 00:18:45
        He has all the attributes of Yaveh.
        Correction; he has all the conscious attributes of Yahweh.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 11:01:51
        What do you mean by that?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 11:28:36
        God has infinite power; Jesus does not. Well, if you accept the axiom that God has infinite power(i.e. cannot be subjected to anything that would in any way diminish His power), and know power is inversely proportional to diminishibility(the ability to be diminished in power), then a corollary is that God must have a nil level of diminishibility. And if that's the case, He cannot be the exact same as Jesus, who was diminished greatly, even to the point of death. Thus, Jesus is lesser to God(who has an infinite amount of power) in terms of power, and likewise greater than Him in diminishability. Jesus is not equal to God in all aspects, and is incapable of doing so(if Jesus were to gain infinite power, he would immediately become God with no way back, as no matter how much you subtract or add from infinity, you always get infinity back) and thus NOT God Almighty. If you want to get around this, all you have to do is say that God does not have infinite power, but a limited amount of power.
        
        If you take the limit of the function d = 1/P(diminishability is inversely proportional to power. Basically, as power rises, diminishability lessens) to infinity, you find that P becomes infinite. Check out the graph below(I just provided it for illustration). The x-axis(horizontal) is P(power), and the y-axis(vertical) is d(diminishability). The closer and closer you get to a value of 0 on the y-axis, the closer and closer you get to an infinite amount of power. Of course, it's literally impossible to actually reach infinity(or to see infinity reached on the graph. You would have to scroll for an infinite amount of time to for P to reach infinity), just like it's literally impossible for someone who IS infinite to become finite. If you are infinite by virtue, then you will stay infinite for eternity. If you are finite by virtue, then you will stay finite for eternity. You can't subtract from infinity without it staying infinity. And no matter how many numbers you count to, you can always add 1. You could be at 10^500, and still add 1. You could be at 1000^1000^1000 and still add 1. Basically, yeah. Jesus doesn't and can never have infinite power, and God can never have finite power.
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:22:56
      Revelation 22:1-5
      "Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb 2 down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. 3 No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve[latreuó] him. 4 They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. 5 There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever."
      Notice it doesn't say, "the thrones of God and of the Lamb." Nor does it say, "the throne of God and the throne of the Lamb." It says, "the throne of God AND of the Lamb." One throne; two people... or so it seems there are two people? It also says they will "serve him." Who is the him? There are two "hims", Jesus and God. Which one will we serve? The scripture doesn't clarify. It also says we'll see the face of God. But how can that be. No humans can see the face of God and live. And the beings in question are humans.
      
      In my opinion, Jesus is the bridge between God and humankind. God is a spirit being. He transcends ALL of time and space and matter and energy. We are physical beings, limited by time and space and matter and energy. And yet, God cares about us so much that He was provided a means for us to be with Him in person, just like how He was "walking" in the cool breeze in the garden of Eden to look for the first humans. JESUS is that means. Being with Jesus means being with God. Seeing Jesus' face means seeing God's face. God could easily leave us humans beings alone for eternity, and never interact with us; we certainly can't interact with Him, being lowly humans compared to a transcendent God. But THIS is how God loves us. That we will spends eternity with Him in paradise, by spending eternity in paradise with Jesus. Just like Jesus promised the thief on the cross. Luke 23:43;
      "Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today YOU will be with ME in paradise."" We will be with Jesus in paradise, my brother. How one can truly ponder such a notion and not shed a tear is beyond me; I certainly cannot do so.
    - Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 08:34:49
      Since he is our lord now, our commander-in-chief, it would be hard to obey him without rendering his service. ?

Comment by Mike West on 2021-12-14 12:15:53
Eric- spot on. I pray that our sincere brothers and sisters within the JW org are helped to see how the unquestionable allegiance demanded by a small group of men (GB) is in essence worship, and therefore an apostatizing from our true leader Jesus and our Father Jehovah.
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-15 20:23:50
  Thank, Mike.

Comment by Fani on 2021-12-14 17:03:51
Bonjour à tous
Dans cette histoire du Prophète de 1 rois 13 nous remarquons qu'en premier lieu le prophète avait bien respecté la loi de Dieu lorsqu'il s'est trouvé devant le roi Jéroboam. Ce fut facile car ce roi avait été manifestement rejeté par Jéhovah et le prophète le savait. Il refusa donc son invitation de rester et manger avec lui, comme le lui avait demandé Dieu.

Le problème fut différent lorsqu'il s'est trouvé devant un prophète qui disait que Dieu parlait aussi par lui. C'était un vieux prophète ce qui laissait entendre qu'il avait plus d'expérience que lui, plus d'autorité naturelle.
C'est donc devant une autorité religieuse, ayant une bonne apparence spirituelle que le prophète a manqué son but en s'attachant à la parole de cet homme au détriment de la parole de Dieu.
L'autorité naturelle de ce vieux prophète lui a fait croire qu'en certaines circonstances la parole des hommes peut se substituer à la parole de Dieu.

Il nous est plutôt facile de ne pas suivre les "infidèles", semblables à Jéroboam ou des incroyants. Mais qu'en est-il de ceux qui sont ministres de Dieu comme le vieux prophète ? Nous influencent ils au point d'oublier que notre seul guide est Christ ? Après tout rien ne nous dit que ce vieux prophète était un faux prophète. C'est d'ailleurs par son intermédiaire que Jéhovah annonce à l'homme du vrai Dieu qu'il n'a pas écouté son commandement et qu'il mourra.
Donc même si un chrétien n'est pas rejeté par Dieu, ça ne lui donne malgré tout aucune autorité pour placer sa parole au-dessus de la parole de Dieu. Il ne doit avoir aucune autorité sur nous.

Merci beaucoup pour ce développement. Je comprends aujourd'hui que je peux adorer Christ car cela signifie adorer YHWH.
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 17:19:53
  Wow! Un bon point, pourrais-je dire. Très perspicace. En effet, il est très facile de s'illusionner en pensant que nos paroles peuvent remplacer celles de Dieu. Il y a ceux qui trompent intentionnellement les autres, et il y a ceux qui trompent involontairement les autres parce que la racine du problème est leur propre illusion. Comme vous l'avez souligné, nous devons nous méfier des deux types de personnes. Peut-être plus important encore, nous devrions nous méfier de ne pas devenir l'un d'entre eux ! Merci pour cette remarque, sœur Fani. Passe une bonne journée!
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 17:23:09
  My comment in English:
  
  Wow! Quite a fine point, might I say. Very perceptive. Indeed, it is very easy to delude ourselves into thinking our words can be a substitute for God's. There are those who intentionally deceive others, and there are those who unintentionally deceive others because the root problem is their own self-deception. As you pointed out, we must be wary of either kind of person. Perhaps more crucial, we should be wary that we don't become one of them! Thank you for this point, sister Fani. Have a beautiful day!

Comment by yobec on 2021-12-14 17:59:00
Very interesting article Eric. I really appreciate you doing the research on the word worship and all the possible meanings in Greek. It should not surprise us as there is also four different Greek words for love. Something however on a separate note that I have pondered from time to time is that if our original parents had not sinned, how would we worship today? There appears that there were no directives in regards to how to worship God In the Garden of Eden other than what Jehovah mentioned to them in regards to having the animals in subjecting to them ,procreating and filling the Earth and of course not eating of the tree of knowledge of good and bad. Other than that, there are no other directives, including in regards to prayers or how to practice pure worship. We may not even know what worship is had they not sinned because whatever we would be doing in connection with God , would simply be a continuation of what they were doing.
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 18:30:04
  3 words; "dress and keep."
  
  Check out this article to see what I mean: https://theexplanation.com/dress-keep-garden-of-eden-man-destined-to-be-a-gardener/
  - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 19:22:42
    Someone disliked my comment. Might I ask why?
    - Reply by yobec on 2021-12-14 22:12:35
      First of all please know that it wasn't me. However having said that I'm wondering if it might not have something to do with what appears you overly commenting. So far out of the 21 comments here,14 are yours. None of us has everything figured out completely. We are still searching on certain things to complete the picture. The more you allow others to put in their input the more we will grow .I hope I haven't offended you. That is not my intention. I can see you are a spiritual person and I love that in you. Your brother Yobec
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 23:08:28
        The more you allow others to put in their input the more we will grow
        This is what I want more than anything else! Am I stopping anyone from doing so? If so, please forgive me.
        
        I hope I haven’t offended you. That is not my intention.
        Absolutely not!
        
        Take care, my brother! ^_^ Have a wonderful day! :)))
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 19:10:43
  Ok, let's think of it this way. There are two main types of worship of God.
  
  (1) the kind that comes from adoration and reverence for someone. This is encapsulated by the word "Sebó" in Greek.
  
  (2) the kind that comes from total submission, that is, full obedience. This is encapsulated by the word "Latreuó" in Greek.
  
  Emulation(an effort to imitate another person's qualities) is a form of worship that fulfills both kinds of worship. Think about it...
  
  (A) What makes you have adoration and total respect for someone in your mind? This is just anyone in general, even humans. Well, their character and consistency of character, of course. You can have this sort of adoration for humans e.g. a little daughter revering her dad for his loving and playful character, and how he is consistent with that character, reading her bedtime stories every night. And the sort of adoration one has for God is above all others, as He has the greatest character and IS perfectly consistent with it. It only follows that if one has such adoration for someone due to their character, that one would try to emulate said character. I think God is worthy of worship because of His character; that is a mental disposition of mine. And, as a result, I try to imitate said character to prove myself, others, and God how I DO revere Him absolutely for His character(like how I son might try to follow in his dad's footsteps. The motivation behind this is, of course, his love and respect for his father, which he has because of his father's character).
  
  (B) So, imitation is a form of worship in the first sense. But it is also a form of worship in the second. Why? Well, because God wants us to imitate Him, and thus commands us to. So, to emulate His character would be to fulfill both kinds of worship; we emulate Him because of our devotion and respect to Him and His character, but we also do so because God tells us to keep His commandments. And to keep His commandments would be to imitate Him, because His commandments stem straight from His character. God is never a hypocrite. He is not a "do as I say, not as I do" sort of person. And we can see that through Jesus. Jesus didn't just tell people what to do; he SHOWED them by the manner in which he lived his life.
  
  We imitate God's character BY obeying His commands(that is, we fully submit to Him[Latreuó]), BECAUSE we have total devotion and reverence for Him and think He deserves infinite honor[we have complete adoration for Him and His perfectly consistent character[Sebó]).
  
  God intended us to worship Him in both manners, and He has given us the ability and responsibility to do so. That is what He called the first humans to do; to worship Him in such manners. It is the reason we are made in His image. Being made in the image of God is both a quality and a status given by God. The quality is the we possess is the potential/capacity to emulate God perfectly, that is, the ability to imitate the character of God in the manner and to the degree we were intended to by God Himself; that is perfection. But it is also a status. The status that we possess is due to the responsibility God has given each and every one of us has to fulfill said divine potential and BE His perfect image-bearers. That is what God has called humankind to do; be His perfect image-bearers. That was the calling of the first humans, that is the calling for us now, and that will be the calling of ALL humanity in the future, for all eternity!
  
  P.S. As for Proskuneó; "Proskuneó" is sort of a compound between both "Sebó" and "Latreuó." We fall on our knees to worship Jesus, that is, be fully submissive to him, not because he forces us to, but because we are overcome by awe and adoration and reverence for him. That is "Proskuneó." When the motivation behind "Latreuó" worship IS "Sebó" worship. Pretty nifty, huh?
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 09:28:52
  That is a profound insight, Yobec. Thanks.

Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2021-12-15 05:04:21
Thanks Eric. Really helpful to see the different words that are used for worship (and sacred service if you like). Not something I had thought about, but it will definitely help me in working out what is really involved in worship.
Many thanks for raising the subject. I wonder what made you even think about it ? But I am more than happy you did so. Real spiritual food.

Comment by Zacheus on 2021-12-15 07:32:55
Wow what a massive work. It is one I will need to read over slowly.Now,I was doing my nightly reading of the bible and came across this scripture, It fairly leapt off the page to me.
Deuteronomy 18:22“When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him.”
King James Version (KJV)

but.. "its just around the corner"

Comment by rusticshore on 2021-12-16 07:03:12
Wonderful commentary. And may I add... the Witnesses do not worship Jehovah, the Father. They worship the name, and are thus guilty of idolatry. May one be guilty of idolatry in such a case, that is, worshipping the actual "name" of God? Certainly, yes! For when one examines the historical component associated with the long legacy of unbiblical practices by the JW and their leadership... something God would never approve, we may conclude that they are worshipping the actual name of God, and not God Himself... as well as the men who force them to do so.

"Name" in biblical Grk (Koine) in most cases is "Onoma," and literally means "character," "fame," or "reputation." The JWs are not worshipping the character of God and the example his son Jesus set. But again, by following men who have an embarrassing history of getting lost in a quagmire of false doctrines, dates, false parallel's (types/antitypes), unbiblical level of shunning, and tremendous more - we may conclude that the entire JW community is guilty of idolizing the actual name of God... not the person of God.

Jehovah's Witnesses are not following true Christianity.... only standing on the edges of it - as many of us once did, until we awakened our sleepy state.

Thanks for a very fine presentation.

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 07:28:49
This comment is for all Christians who pray to Jesus in particular .... In 2 Corinthians 12: 8 Paul prayed to Jesus 3 times and it is the Greek verb (parakals) = .. to call or to call ... is a word widely used in everyday Greek life ..... Stephen prayed to Jesus is the Greek verb (epicalumenon) = to appeal or call to Acts 7:59 ... while in verse 60 we have the verb (ekraksen) = to shout or shout loudly ...... it is interesting that the verb (epicalumenon) also appears in 2 Corinthians 1:23 (epicalum) where Paul calls God a witness ... while in Matthew 26:35 it is said that Jesus pray to the Father and the verb (prosefhomenos) comes out = to worship, to pray, to pray ..... we see clearly that worship is a form of worship that belongs only to Jehovah God .... while with Jesus we can call but not please .... thank you all
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:36:29
  Parakals, epicalumenon, ekraksen; they're all forms of prayer.
  
  Prayer : an address (such as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought (Merriam-Webster)
  
  Did Stephen not address Jesus aloud? Did Paul not make a petition to Jesus(maybe both aloud and in his mind)? If it that wasn't prayer, then why don't you do the same thing with angels? Make a petition to them. Why not? After all, prayer is something that belongs only to God, as you said. And Jesus is not God. So, since Paul and Stephen did not pray to Jesus, according to you, then what's stopping them(or us) from also praying to angels? Angels, like Jesus, are also not God. Where do you draw the line? How do you get to say that you are allowed to talk to Jesus and make petitions to him, but not to angels? You say that "prayer" is solely for God, and that talking and asking Jesus for things is not prayer. Since it's not prayer, then why don't we talk to angels? The only restriction is on prayer(we are only allowed to "pray" to God, according to you). Everything else, such as talking and petitioning(which according to you is not prayer), is totally free game. Why stop with Jesus? Let's talk to some angels! :)
  - Reply by Maria on 2021-12-18 04:32:53
    @rajeshsony
    
    1 Corinthians 15:45, ESV: "Thus it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam became a life-giving spirit."
    
    Jesus the life-giving spirit who through his death and resurrection gives us life, through our faith in his offer.
    
    When our prayers are answered do we say: thank you?!
    
    Love Maria ?
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:49:42
  Unless, of course, the defintion IS right. Prayer IS an address or petition, any address or petition, to God. As I've said before, Jesus is God's perfect representative. Everything we do to Jesus, we do to God Obeying Jesus means obeying God. God has put Jesus in charge of everything. Literally, everything. He will be doing all the judging, all the forgiving, all the resurrecting. He will carry out the Holy War of Armageddon. He has all authority over everything in existence, has ascended above the highest heavens, and is at the right hand of the Father, that is, an equal to God at the moment.
  
  Since no angel is or has any of this, no angel can be said to be, in essence, God Himself(Jesus can though. That's what Jesus was at the beginning of time, when he created everything in existence). Making a petition to Jesus, or talking to Jesus, like righteous Stephen did, or like Paul did, is essentially doing so to God. Also, I have a question. If talking/making a petition is NOT prayer, as you said, then what is? Do we not talk and make petitions to God? Are those then, by your defintion, not prayers? When we call on to God for help, like Stephen did to Jesus, are we not praying to Him?
  - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:53:21
    How do you explain 2 Corinthians 1:23 (epicalumeno) .... as a prayer?! .... The Greeks say in everyday life .... What time is it please ............ .. (parakalo) ......... is an expression and they use it in everyday life because I have known Greek closely
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:01:40
      I wasn't talking about 2 Corinthians 1:23. I was talking about 2 Corinthians 12:8.
      
      And, it's not about what different ways a verb CAN be used. It's about HOW the verb is used in the instance. I can say, "I climbed on top of my bed." I can also use the same verb "climb" and say, "I climbed Mount Everest." It's the same word. But the two situations are drastically different. In 2 Corinthians 12:8, Paul was literally talking to Jesus, and making a petition to him. That is what we do to God, is it not! Are you saying that petitioning/communicating is not a form of prayer? That's what Paul did to Jesus... Why not do it with angels? Seriously, tell me. Prayer is something sacred, belonging ONLY to God, according to you. And communicating to Jesus is not a form of prayer. It's just regular, "everyday life" stuff. Nothing to it. So, why don't we "epicalumeno" to angels? There's nothing grand about it, as you said. Surely, if I can climb atop my bed, I can climb atop mount Everest. I'm using the same verb, "climb", so both situations must be the same in grandeur.
      
      As you said, "epicalumeno" is never a prayer. It's always "everyday life" stuff. So, let's "epicalumeno" to angels. There really IS nothing from stopping us.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:06:14
        Dear brother ... I have never known an angel in my life and he has not appeared to me but if you would appear to me with pleasure I would talk to him..it would be something special
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:09:29
        I certainly would too. But if an angel appeared and we talked to him, that would not be prayer. That would just be communicating with the angel. I know I said that prayer is just a form of communication, but what I really mean is that it is a form of communication to reach someone you cannot see or hear, someone who is in heaven(prayer can only ever be to someone in heaven, because GOD is only ever in heaven. That's why no one prayed to Jesus when he was on Earth; they could just talk to him directly, in person. But after he ascended, no one could communicate with him in person. The only way they could communicate with him was by praying to him in heaven). I should have clarified that. Jesus did not appear before John. He sent his angel to appear to John. Jesus talked to the angel, which was NOT Jesus. But he also talked to Jesus, and Jesus was not before John at that moment.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:52:48
        The end of the lecture..Jesus is a god created by Jehovah ..... The worship we do to him we do because the Father requires us .... Jesus did all things in his life for the glory of the God Jehovah and took the name after every name ... Jehovah is the source of everything .... and in everything we do in our lives we do it for the glory of Jehovah .... therefore prayer (prosefho) = prayer of worship ... is a a right that belongs only to him .... Nowhere in the Greek Scriptures do we find anyone giving (prosefho) Jesus even when he ascended to heaven .... Jesus taught us to pray to the Father and all he did was to imitate the Father and Jehovah be glorified through the Son .... and at the end of 1000 years the Son himself will submit to the Father and Jehovah God will be everything ... thank you too
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 14:12:21
        Setting aside the use of the word "Prayer", I would like to pose a question: Are we allowed to talk to Jesus? Are we allowed to ask Jesus for something?
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:31:27
        Read these writings about Christ and answer me if we should speak or ask Christ for anything ..... (Revelation 3:20 ...... John 6:37 ....... John 10: 27- 29 ....... 1 Peter 3:18 ........ Romans 5: 1 ...... John 1:12 ...... John 14: 6 ..... ..Colossians 1: 13-14 ..... Acts 10:43 ..... Ephesians 1: 7-8 ....... 1 John 4: 9-10 .... John 5:24 ...... 1 John 5: 11-13 .... John 15: 7-11) ............ But prayer is to Jehovah alone .... Philippians 4: 6 -7 ..... And all that we ought to do, we ought to do for the glory of Jehovah .... 1 Corinthians 10:31 .... And Christ did all things for the glory of Jehovah God..thank you
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:37:06
        My brother, none of these scriptures say that we can ONLY pray to God... and none of them say that praying to Jesus is wrong either.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:40:11
        Read these writings about Christ and answer me if we should speak or ask Christ for anything
        See, this is the first and foremost problem. You think I am arguing for the proposition that we should pray to Jesus. Not so, at all. I am arguing for the proposition that we can pray to Jesus. Big difference. Stephen could have prayed to his Father when he was dying, but he chose to pray to Jesus, no? I am not saying you ought to pray to Jesus, but that you can if you want to. Please, my brother, understand the difference. 80-85% of my prayers are to my Father. I know people who pray to Jesus much more often than I do. Does that make them less righteous than me? I hope not.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:47:20
        The Greeks use this as the key word for the prayer of worship ... but I do not know if there are other words
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:48:06
        Ok, what proof do you have that this is so?
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 14:43:03
        Aleks, you haven't answered my question. I can speak to you and ask you for things. I can speak to God and ask God for things. Why can't I speak to Jesus and ask Jesus for things? I'm not talking about prayer, but speech.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:44:19
        Well, you are talking about prayer. Prayer is a form of speech. What you mean is you are not talking about "prosefho." That is what is synonymous with "prayer" in brother Krisiani's mind.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:45:19
        believe so ... we can talk and have a personal relationship with Jesus but not to pray to him
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:46:59
        Oh my goodness. If you talk to Jesus and make petitions to him, that is prayer.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:43:13
        We can talk and ask Jesus for something but not pray to him ..... Prayer is a form of worship that belongs only to Jehovah in the sense that I have so far ... however I change my mind if I am given scripture ... ..Even as far as the contradiction is concerned, I believe that the answer will be when the new scrolls are opened ... thank you
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:46:31
        We can talk and ask Jesus for something but not pray to him
        Why does no one understand this... talking and asking someone who is in heaven IS prayer...
        Prayer - an address (such as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought
        That is the defintion of prayer.
        
        Prayer is a form of worship that belongs only to Jehovah in the sense that I have so far
        Ok then, point me to the scripture that says this...
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:34:48
        The worship we do to him we do because the Father requires us
        100%. I agree totally.
        
        Jesus did all things in his life for the glory of the God Jehovah and took the name after every name
        Exactly. And obeying Jesus and praying to him glorifies God. Well, at least I know obeying him(Jesus) does. God has commanded us to do something, that is, to obey His Son. To NOT do so would be the opposite of glorifying Him, it would be sheer disobedience.
        
        Jehovah is the source of everything …. and in everything we do in our lives we do it for the glory of Jehovah
        Indeed, God IS the source of everything, including Jesus. I wouldn't say that God created hi, because creation implies a process, and a process implies a beginning point and an end point of said process, and that implies time, of which there is none where God and Jesus were. The Bible never refers to Jesus as created, just that God "gave rise" i.e. begat Jesus, and that God is his source. That's all we can really say. In that way, Jesus and God are not equal, as God is has NO source.
        
        therefore prayer (prosefho) = prayer of worship … is a a right that belongs only to him
        How did you reach this conclusion? Nothing you said justifies this conclusion. In fact, if prayer DOES belong solely to God, by virtue of being a form worship, then that helps my case, because Jesus was worshipped multiple times...
        
        Nowhere in the Greek Scriptures do we find anyone giving (prosefho) Jesus even when he ascended to heaven
        What I don't understand is... Why is it this word that can ONLY ever refer to prayer? What valid reasons do you have for such a notion? You are saying that prosefho is the ONLY word that can refer to prayer, and since that word is never used in relation to Jesus, we cannot pray to Jesus. Well, not only have you started with a faulty premise, but the conclusion is not justified FROM the premises either way. You would need 3 premises to reach that conclusion.
        
        (P1) Prosefho is the only word that can refer to prayer.
        (P2) The Bible says that you can only prosefho to God and no one else.
        (P3) Prosefho is never used in relation to Jesus.
        (C) Therefore, we can never pray to Jesus.
        
        This IS sound reasoning, but the argument is invalid because premise 2 is clearly false, and you haven't even proved premise 1.
        
        and at the end of 1000 years the Son himself will submit to the Father and Jehovah God will be everything
        Indeed, that is what 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 says. And yet, Luke 1:32-33 says, "He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him[Jesus] the throne of his father David, and he[Jesus] will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever[time indefinite]; his kingdom will never end."
        So, Jesus will eventually hand his kingdom back to God, and yet he will also rule it forever? Seems like a major contradiction to me...
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:19:25
        Is it possible for humankind to speak, pray, ask anything of a being that isn't omnipresent?

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 07:33:41
So prayer is a form of worship that belongs only to Jehovah God just as his only-begotten Son did ....... Jesus Christ during his lifetime by his example ... thank you
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:51:59
  If talking to/making a petition is not prayer, then what exactly IS prayer? How do you pray to God, if not talking to Him and making petitions to Him? That's what Paul and Stephen did with Jesus. Are you saying that when we talk to God we are not praying to Him? You say it is, "worship," but how exactly do you worship God when you pray to Him? And what is the difference between doing so and talking/making a petition to Jesus?
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:06:27
  The last words in the entire Bible, the inspired word of God, are a prayer to Jesus, not to God.
  
  Revelation 22:20-21;
  "He who testifies to these things says, “Surely I am coming quickly.” Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus! The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."
  
  Notice it doesn't say;
  "He who testifies to these things says, "Surely my Son is coming quickly." Amen. Even so, let your Son, Jesus Christ, come. The grace of our God and Father be with you all. In the name of your Son, Jesus Christ, Amen."
  - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:28:08
    Thanks for the comment brother .... I like it ... you have made some valuable points to consider ... what we understand when we pray ... The book of Revelation closes with a promise from Jesus Christ that he will come soon also with the term (amen) which means (so be it) ... With the term amen we express the belief and certainty that what has been said will happen ... but this is not a prayer ... We can use the term amen even in everyday life when we do not pray ... Thank you for your attention
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:33:02
      We can use the term amen even in everyday life when we do not pray
      Yeah, I know that. I use the term in everyday life as well. But just because that is possible, that doesn't mean that must be what is happening here. It's clear John is talking TO Jesus.
      
      "Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus!"
      Who is talking? John. Who is he referring to? Jesus. What does he say to finish his thought? Amen... This is a prayer. This is not "everyday life" talk. This is a prayer.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:37:45
        the case of the letters sent to the Hebrews the word worship is (proskuneo) = to bow down, obey with submission = worship .... We also render sacred service to Jesus as the apostle Paul (latreuo) but prayer is a form of worship = (prosefho) which belongs only to Jehovah ... You can find a scripture in the Greek Scriptures where they pray (prosefho) Jesus..If you will confirm me from the Scriptures I agree brother ... but I agree that we have a personal relationship with Jesus and communicate with him but the glory must go to our Father ... may he be healthy
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:53:37
        but I agree that we have a personal relationship with Jesus and communicate with him but the glory must go to our Father
        I couldn't agree more. The Father has a glory that the Son does not; He has infinite power. I know that. I know Jesus is not equal to God in that aspect. But how does praying to Jesus necessitate that one must beleive that Jesus is equal to God in glory? It doesn't. But I'm glad to hear you communicate with Jesus.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:37:33
        Interesting, but how do we explain...John 17:5 (NKJV)
        
        John 17:5 (NET)
        And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had with you before the world was created.
        
        Is there a scripture reference that states that Jesus glory is different to the Fathers or is that just an assumption?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 23:48:31
        Not so fast. "With" doesn't have to imply that you are sharing something with another person.
        
        With : used as a function word to indicate combination, accompaniment, presence, or addition (Merriam-Webster)
        
        "I had a smoothie with my girlfriend." Does such a statement necessitate that me and my girlfriend shared one smoothie? Absoultely not; in fact, if I wanted to imply that, I could have just said, "I shared a smoothie with my girlfriend." But, considering what I said, the meaning of my statement is more akin to, "I had a smoothie alongside my girlfriend."
        
        Another statement; "I was with my wife when she was giving birth." No one in their right mind would take that to mean that the husband shared with his wife in the birth-giving process. So, John 17:5 most likely means; "And now, Father, glorify me at your side with the glory I had alongside you before the world was created." Especially considering how Jesus said, "at your side." It's clear he was talking about his relationship to his Father, how he and his Father had glory(different glories) together, at each other's side.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 00:07:36
        Also, the context of John 17 makes it impossible that the glory Jesus had was the glory of God.
        
        John 17:20-23 "I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just 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 have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me."
        
        The glory that Jesus is asking for from the Father(John 17:5) IS the glory that he will share with his people(John 17:22). But God shares HIS glory with no one(Isaiah 42:8 "I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not give my glory to anyone else, nor share my praise with carved idols."); He certainly does not share it with lowly, ephemeral, dust creatures like us.
        
        This is an "already, but not yet" sort of thing that Jesus is talking about. At first, he's asking for his glory back, and then he is saying that he already has the glory and that his people do too. He's not contradicting himself. In a way, he already has the glory he had from the beginning of the world, just like how you and me have eternal life IN us(1 John 5:13 "I have written these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.") So, unless you want to say that the glory you and I will receive IS the glory of God Himself, I suggest you don't take John 17:5 to mean that Jesus had the same glory as God.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:41:26
        The conversation between Jesus and John is an extraordinary situation, with visions where Jesus spoke directly to him ... this is communication between them in an unusual situation ... we do not have this privilege because Jesus does not appear as in the 1st century
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:52:03
        The conversation between Jesus and John is an extraordinary situation, with visions where Jesus spoke directly to him … this is communication between them in an unusual situation … we do not have this privilege because Jesus does not appear as in the 1st century
        I agree. But he was still praying to Jesus. John was not talking to Jesus directly. Jesus did not appear to John.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:06:39
        Revelation 1:1 "This is the revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon come to pass. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw. This is the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. " (BSB)
        Whose revelation is this from? Jesus Christ's, who received it from God. How did Jesus make it known? By sending HIS angel to HIS servant, John.
        
        Revelation 22:6 "Then the angel said to me, “These words are faithful and true. The Lord, the God of the spirits of the prophets, has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place."" (BSB)
        Notice it says, "the Lord, the God... has sent his angel to show his servants what must soon take place." Who is our Lord? Jesus. Who sent the angel? It says at the beginning of the book, Jesus did. What does it say our Lord Jesus is? "...the God of the spirits of the prophets..."
        
        It doesn't say, "Then the angel said to me, “These words are faithful and true. The Lord and the God of the spirits of the prophets, have sent their angel to show their servants what must soon take place."" It says, "HIS", singular. The scripture is indicating that Jesus is God.
        
        Revelation 22:20-21 "He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! 21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints. Amen."
        Who is narrating? John. What did he(John) say that Jesus said? He(John) said that Jesus said HE himself is coming soon. What does John say about this? "Amen, come Lord Jesus(to whom does he talk to? Jesus)." He also says to let his(the Christ's) grace be with all the saints. Obviously John is not commanding it to be so. He is petitioning TO Jesus for his(Jesus') grace TO BE with all his servants. He is not petitioning to God. He is petitioning Jesus directly. What does he(John) finish this entire thought with? "Amen." I think it's pretty clear this was a prayer to Jesus.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:13:06
        The Bible teaches me according to Psalm 65: 2 that I pray only to the Lord God ... and according to John 14: 13-14 that I ask Jesus something, or call on him ..... but not to him ... even this is to glorify the Father ... for the angels we have no instructions in the Bible to pray or ask for anything ... thank you
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:26:06
        Once again, Jesus only prayed to God while he was on Earth because he was a human. And no one prayed to Jesus also because he was a human. Jesus did not have the power, authority, knowledge, status, etc. that he has at the current moment. He received it ALL when he ascended "above the highest heavens." That is when people started to pray to him, that is, to call to him and petition to him and communicate with him while he was IN heaven. Stephen did it, Paul did it, John did it(once again. Jesus did not appear before John. Only Jesus' angel did. So, when John talked to Jesus, he was praying to him. He did not talk to him in person; he talked to Jesus while Jesus was in heaven. That is, by defintion, prayer).
        
        for the angels we have no instructions in the Bible to pray or ask for anything
        Agreed. But, much more importantly, is that there is never anyone who was righteous found doing so. It's about setting a precedent. Stephen, Paul, and John all prayed to Jesus. ALL were righteous men. If they did it, why can't we? There are no explicit instructions saying we should pray to Jesus, but there are none that say we shouldn't. When one is confused about which way to go, take a look at the precedents set by others before you(ones' who were inspired by God and righteous people). If you don't know that something is ok, the phrase, "better safe(better NOT do it) than sorry(than suffer the consequences of doing it)" takes the primary slot. But if you DO know that something is ok(like if other men, deemed righteous by God, did it), then "better safe than sorry" is not necessitated. What is necessitated is, "it is ok to do this, but I don't have to." That is the attitude I take with prayer. It is not sinful to pray to Jesus, but I am not required, nor is anyone else, to do so. That's all, my brother! Take care! Thanks so much for this conversation. Have a beautiful day!
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:39:24
        All I'm saying is that, Jesus, when God is using him to be a direct representative of him, and Jesus being the perfect delegate of God, is, in essence, and for all intents and purposes, God Himself. It's about our mindset. When Jesus, who can fulfill God's will perfectly and represents him perfectly(see John 12:49, John 6:38, John 5:19, and John 4:34), is acting a delegate of God, it is absolutely reasonable to CALL him God. That is it. When John 1 said that the Word WAS God, it wasn't saying the Word was equal to God in all aspects, it was saying that the mind and will of God and the Word are perfectly synonymous(unlike any other being), thus one can rightly call the Word God.
        
        Let's think of an example(yes, it's pretty weird, but just go along with it). If you didn't know what I looked like and never saw or met me directly, and I sent someone to represent me, and that someone talked like me, acted like me, and did everything I wanted him to do, and did all that as perfectly AS possible, you could rightly say my representative IS me. After all, you've never seen or talked to me directly, or even been with me directly. The only way you have any idea what I am is through my representative, and since that representative represents me absolutely perfectly in every way I want him to, it would not be wrong to say that the representative is me. Now let's add something else. Say that representative HAS been with me, and not only that, but has been with me for eternity. Well, it would be even more reasonable to call my representative one and the same with me. That is what Jesus said. Both the Father and Son are in each other, and both are ONE. This does not mean both are equal in every way, as I said at the beginning. I'd say there are more ways to BE someone than to be equal to them in every possible aspect. I think that is what John 1 is trying to get across. Jesus WAS God, but not by being equal to Him in every aspect. That's all! Agape, my brother! :)
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 13:50:22
        Well put, Rajeshsony
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:28:48
  You have to realize, my brother. When Jesus was on Earth, he was not God. He was a human being, capable of being hungry, getting drunk(he never did. But he did drink wine. I suspect that he drank wine because it tasted good and gave a good feeling, the same reason every other human who drinks wine, drinks it. Having perfect self-control, he never got drunk, but having a human body, was certainly capable of doing so), being tempted, being anxious and fearful, suffering and feeling weakness, and dying.
  
  God cannot do or be or feel any of these things, by any means. Jesus did not have the authority he has now(he said he was given all authority on heaven and Earth. You can't be given something you already have). Jesus was a human being. Of course he prayed to solely God. He couldn't pray to himself, a human being. That's why no one prayed to him while he was on Earth. But people did pray to Jesus after he ascended. Stephen did(in Acts), Paul did(in Corinthians), and John(in Revelation) did; they all prayed directly to Jesus.
  
  And if prayer really IS only worship, well, then, I don't see how that's a problem, considering how people(and even spirit beings) worshipped/will worship Jesus on multiple occasions. We cannot even bow down to them/worship them, and, as a result, we cannot pray to angels. But we CAN worship Jesus, like how we worship God, which is why we CAN pray to Him.
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 15:00:05
  Here is what HELP word-studies says about "proseúxomai." This was the main word for prayer in Greek.
  "4336 proseúxomai (from 4314 /prós, "towards, exchange" and 2172/euxomai, "to wish, pray") – properly, to exchange wishes; pray – literally, to interact with the Lord by switching human wishes (ideas) for His wishes as He imparts faith ("divine persuasion"). Accordingly, praying (4336/proseuxomai) is closely inter-connected with 4102 /pístis ("faith") in the NT."
  
  It's a compound word. 4314 literally means, "in the direction, towards, in relation to." And 2172 means literally "to wish for." So, the word means, to wish for something towards someone else, in relation to them. It's also closely intertwined with 4102, which is the Greek word for "faith." Do you have faith only in God? Or do we have faith in Jesus as well? So, "proseúxomai", in essence, means, "to ask someone for something in faith." And, since we are only told to put faith in Jesus and God, we can only proseúxomai to them. As you can see, not only does the Greek defintion for the main word for prayer(proseúxomai) NOT exclude praying to Jesus, but it actually strongly encourages it.
  
  Fin.

Comment by James Mansoor on 2021-12-16 18:24:28
Good morning all,

This is a very interesting topic the subject about prayer.

I personally struggled with praying to Jesus the reason why is I could not differentiate between the father and the son, if everything I needed was in my prayer to Jesus then why do I need the father?

For example if the organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to interpret the Bible then why do I need the Holy Spirit?

I speak to Jesus every day some might think I am praying to him but the actual fact is I am not praying to him. For example Jehovah spoke to Abraham and Moses does that mean he was praying to them or was it just a form of conversation.

Some are equating conversation as a form of prayer. Personally speaking when we need something from our heavenly Father Jehovah, there is a completely different set of words we use as when we are talking to him as a father to a son and a son to a father.

When Jesus prayed in the garden of Gethsemane pleading with his heavenly father, the words he used are completely different as when he would be talking to him normally…. That’s what I think and if you are a parent you will know when your son is talking to you casually and when your son or your daughter is pleading with you for something that they really need, different set of words.

My personal experience happened to be when I was praying to Jesus I completely forgot who the father was because if everything I am asking for he can give why do I need the father?

Try it for yourself and see if my words are true or not, start praying to Jesus and ask him for everything that you need and at the end of your prayer how are you going to conclude your prayer? Better still pause for a second and ask yourself where was your heavenly father when you were talking exclusively Jesus Christ and asking everything in his name?

Now I pray in the presence of Jesus Christ but I address my prayer to my heavenly Father Jehovah after all how is my heavenly King going to intercede on my behalf if he is not listening to what I’m saying? Think of a lawyer who is pleading to the judge on your behalf he must be listening to what you have to say but he doesn’t have the power to grant you what you want, he will plead your case to the judge , that is how I think Jesus intercedes on my behalf.

I suppose the big question is what is prayer and what is worship?

Jesus said you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart mind and soul…. If you love someone wholeheartedly there isn’t much room in your heart for anyone else….. we seem to know that Jesus is God but he is not the Almighty God but where do we draw the line in addressing our prayer to Jesus and not to the Almighty God?

Again try to pray to Jesus and after awhile ask you yourself, how is your relationship with your heavenly Father Jehovah progressing?
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 19:25:54
  For example Jehovah spoke to Abraham and Moses does that mean he was praying to them or was it just a form of conversation.
  Yes, and when Abraham talked to God, did not God respond in a voice that he could hear? When we pray to God, does He respond to us in a voice that we can hear?
  
  Some are equating conversation as a form of prayer.
  Well, conversation in and of itself is not prayer. Conversation with God/a god in heaven is, by defintion, prayer. That's all prayer really is. Let me put it like this; all prayer is a form of communication, but not all forms of communication are prayer.
  
  My personal experience happened to be when I was praying to Jesus I completely forgot who the father was because if everything I am asking for he can give why do I need the father?
  May I ask you a question, my brother? Is prayer only asking for things? Can it be nothing else but making a petition?
  
  Try it for yourself and see if my words are true or not, start praying to Jesus and ask him for everything that you need and at the end of your prayer how are you going to conclude your prayer? Better still pause for a second and ask yourself where was your heavenly father when you were talking exclusively Jesus Christ and asking everything in his name?
  I'm not trying to make a case that we should exclusively pray to Jesus. I personally think it's up to the conscience, but I would never recommend that one should pray solely to Jesus. I'm not even recommending that you should(well, that depends on the person, of course). I'm just saying that you can pray to Jesus, as in, it's not morally wrong to do so in God's eyes. That's all.
  
  Now I pray in the presence of Jesus Christ but I address my prayer to my heavenly Father Jehovah after all how is my heavenly King going to intercede on my behalf if he is not listening to what I’m saying? Think of a lawyer who is pleading to the judge on your behalf he must be listening to what you have to say but he doesn’t have the power to grant you what you want, he will plead your case to the judge , that is how I think Jesus intercedes on my behalf.
  Well, Jesus does have the power to grand us what we want. He is the one who is doing the forgiving, the judgement, the resurrection, and will lead the Holy War of Armageddon. Honestly, that's neither here nor there. I completely understand the point you are trying to make, and it is certainly reasonable, my brother. :)
  
  I suppose the big question is what is prayer and what is worship?
  Well, there are different words that can be translated as "pray" in Greek, and the same is true for "worship." I'm currently working on this...
  
  Jesus said you must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart mind and soul…. If you love someone wholeheartedly there isn’t much room in your heart for anyone else…..
  Well, first of all, I don't think that if you love someone wholeheartedly that there isn't any room left for loving anyone else. But, either way, it's not the point. Loving Jesus IS loving God, because God GAVE us Jesus. We are clearly commanded to put faith in BOTH Jesus and God. Is it the case that, in doing so, we cannot have absolute faith for both simultaneously; that having total faith in one means it's impossible to have total faith in the other? Of course not, because putting faith in Jesus means putting faith in God, because God gave us Jesus as a means of salvation through faith. If we genuinely trust that God gave us His Son to be saved, then we trust in His Son to save us. It's the same with love.
  
  we seem to know that Jesus is God but he is not the Almighty God but where do we draw the line in addressing our prayer to Jesus and not to the Almighty God?
  Wow! I like that line! Jesus is God but he is not God almighty... that's pretty smart!! Because "almighty" inevitably prompts the subject of power, namely, infinite power. The moment we bring "almighty" into the conversation we are talking in terms of infinite power, as that is the defintion of almighty(i.e. having complete power; omnipotent). And God HAS unlimited power, but Jesus does not.
  But just saying "God," well, that could go many ways(as I had demonstrated in previous comments), as it is naturally more ambiguous, than just straight up "God Almighty." There really is only one way to take that phrase(God Almighty); that God has absolute and infinite power over all. Thanks so much for this, my brother. This is my new line, to encapsulate what I believe... "Jesus is God, but not God Almighty."
  - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-18 08:55:36
    Wondering what your thoughts are on who is the Almighty in Rev 1:8. I think there is a strong case for this to be Jesus.
    - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-19 10:58:00
      The scripture in Revelation 1: 8 I think is in context with Revelation 4: 8 and belongs to Jehovah ... I salute you
      - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:15:44
        The beginning and the end (eternal one) is the Father here, the Father is coming quickly?
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-20 07:54:39
        According to the biblical context Revelation 1: 8 relates to Revelation 1: 4 (who was, is, and is coming) ...... Revelation 4: 8 ..... Isaiah 6: 3 ..... (i holy, holy, holy) we also have the term (Pantocrator) .... Revelation 11:17 ....... Revelation 15: 3 ..... Revelation 16: 3 ........ Revelation 16: 7 ....... Revelation 19: 6 ...... Revelation 19:15 .......... I wish you health
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 13:22:30
        As this is "off-topic" I'll refrain from answering.
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 02:12:02
      Ok, sure, let me hear it. The case, I mean. :) I haven't really thought much about that scripture. But, it's not like every time in Revelation someone is denoted as the "Alpha and the Omega" or as "God" it is or even can be Jesus. Revelation 21:5-7 "And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.” 6 And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. 7 The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son." Surely this is a reference to God the Father, and not Jesus, right?
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 11:06:57
        Dislike? But all I did was ask to hear your own case... sorry for asking.
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 20:20:09
  Again try to pray to Jesus and after awhile ask you yourself, how is your relationship with your heavenly Father Jehovah progressing?
  I don't think it needs to be so black and white, don't you? I talk to both my mom and my sister. Talking with my sister more often doesn't mean I'm starting to love my mom any more less than I did before.
  
  In my opinion, prayer is more than just asking for things; much, MUCH more. The only thing I've prayed to Jesus for apropos a petition is that he be with me as I go through a troubling time in my life. I don't really ask for anything more than that. I like to be, mostly, appreciative of everything I have, and give thanks for what I do have, because I know I could be in a much worse situation than I currently am in; certainly lot's a people are, and it's not like I did something to deserve my better position; likewise, it's not like they did anything to deserve theirs'. And so, when I want to say thank you for whatever it is that I have, I pray to my Father for that. When I see something horrifying in the news, usually I immediately pray to God to let his kingdom come, because humanity undeniably needs it to. And I also pray to Jesus, thanking him for opening the path(for ALL who choose to walk it) to adopted by God as His children, and to be a part of God's kingdom, so as to bless the whole Earth and all of humankind.
  
  For me, prayer is a reminder more than anything else. A reminder of what? That God is paying attention to me; that God listens to me. That is the thing I keep in mind in EVERY prayer first and foreomost, whether a prayer of petition, or thanksgiving, or a combination of both! That God is paying attention to me.
  And in specific prayers where I give a petition, the no.1 thing(next to the first thing I mentioned) I keep in mind is that God WILL always answer me, in one way or another, and that sometimes that answer is no(maybe He thinks I can handle something on my own, and that His grace is sufficient for me. Or maybe He is testing my faith. Or maybe a combination of both. No matter what, I am always ready to take no for an answer, trusting completely that God knows best). However, I never keep in mind that God will always give me what I ask for, 100% of the time, because I know that's not true.
  And finally, the third thing I keep in mind(and this is another thing prayer reminds you of!) in ALL types of prayers is that, in the end, God WILL reward His faithful servants for their faith, no matter what; and that Jesus WILL resurrect us on the last day to live with him for eternity. I always keep in mind that, even though things may be tough, because of my faith, God will undoubtedly reward me, not with superficial, fleeting rewards(even if that may be what I want the most, at the moment), but with eternal, spiritual rewards(the greatest of ALL rewards).
  
  And so, that is what prayer is for me. Believe it or not, but when I pray to Jesus, I feel my relationship with my Father getting stronger! And when I pray to my Father, I feel my relationship with Jesus getting stronger! How is that possible? I don't know. Maybe that's just me, or I'm just crazy, haha. But I don't know how else to put it. For me, loving Jesus means loving my Father, and vice versa. Obviously, if you only EVER pray to Jesus, you will not progress in your relationship with God. But it's not like anyone is requiring you to pray solely to one or the other; once again, I don't think it has to be black and white like that. Take care my brother! I love you wholeheartedly. :) :D
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 09:50:16
  May I ask you a question, my brother? Is prayer only asking for things? Can it be nothing else but making a petition? Remember, prayer is just a means of communicating with God. So, is the only subject you want to communicate with God that you want something? Just answer that question, my brother. Have a wonderful day! :)
  - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 10:32:07
    Let me ask you a question: Why do not you pray to Jesus: Our Father in the heavens, let your name be sanctified ....... According to Isaiah 9: 6 he is also our Father, do you think! .. Maybe Jesus of the Testament that the New is the Old Testament Jehovah? .... what do you think!
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 11:28:29
      Huh?
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 12:00:58
        have become brothers with 85% to Jehovah and 15% to Christ and my faith has been strengthened ........ It was very beautiful ... The Bible does not forbid us for such a thing ... We do not need Jehovah ... we must worship Christ, we pray to Christ, we sanctify the name of Jesus, we are witnesses of Jesus, All the glory goes to Christ, everything we do for the sake of Christ, Jesus is our God, He is our creator, even Jehovah comes out of the equation, it's so Simple ,,,, as you think brother! Have we not lost something of great value by searching the Scriptures! The Bible was not written just for Jesus brother! ......
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 12:06:39
        I'm tasting... sarcasm... Hmmm. You know, it's pretty salty; I'm staggered.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 12:15:55
        Maybe Christ did things to get all the glory for himself and we did not understand brother!
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 12:33:16
        No, while he was on Earth, everything he did was for the glory of the Father. It still is now. But by brining glory to the Father, he brought glory to HIMSELF, because God glorified the Son as a consequence of doing so.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 12:34:06
        Jehovah is still our Father. At the moment, Jesus is not. We do still need Jehovah; He is our Father.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 12:03:53
        !
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 12:31:55
      Isaiah 9:6;
      "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."
      Well, this certainly isn't a scripture that helps anyone; not even trinitarians. Trinitarians believe that both the Father and the Son are God, but that the Father and the Son are not each other(I know, logically impossible, but we'll give it to them). This scripture says that Jesus will be called "Eternal Father", though, so that doesn't even help trinitarians. It makes things worse for them, actually. I've read a few commentaries on that. A lot agree that this isn't referring to being called by a proper name, but a description of the qualities of the person. In Hebrew, "he will be called" often means, "he will be/he will have." Here's an except from Matthew Poole's Commentary;
      "His name shall be; for to be called in Scripture is off put for to be, as I have noted before on Isaiah 1:26, and oft elsewhere. But this is not to be taken for a description of his proper name, by which he should be commonly called, but of his glorious nature and qualities. See my notes on Isaiah 7:4"
      Certainy Jesus has the qualities of his Father... He is the exact representation of the Father's character.
      
      But character is not the same as personality. Character deals with virtues and moral attributes; both God and Jesus are entirely perfect and one in the same in both manners. But personality, well, that deals more with which emotional attributes are more apparent than others. Fatherly emotional attributes are more apparent in God, while brotherly emotional attributes are more apparent in Jesus. Remember, emotion is not the same as morality. In the New World, we will ALL be morally perfect, but we will not all have the same personality and emotions and feelings as each other. I think it's the same with God and Jesus. Their moral character is of the highest degree, unable to be tempted(Jesus at the current moment, I mean. As a human, he most certainly could be tempted). But their personality are not the same. That is why I think the explanations offered by most commentaries are unsatisfactory.
      
      There is another view, however. This scripture actually supports my current view. I think this scripture is talking about the New World, when Eden has been restored. God was Adam's Father, no doubt. He even appeared to him... or did he? Well, yeah, He did; through Jesus. That is, the being we denote at "Jesus." Jesus wasn't always called Jesus. When He was walking(walking implies legs) in the garden to find Adam and Eve, He was called God. Obviously, our Father is infinite powerful, unable to be bounded by time and space(let alone have LEGS for walking). And yet, that was their Father walking in the cool breeze of the garden. In the New World, Eden will be restored throughout the Earth; it will be paradise. There, when Jesus fully subjects himself to the Father once more, he BECOMES the Father(In terms of personality) to us. "Jesus", His Son, is the means by which our Father will interact with us in the New World. In the New World, Jesus will truly be called "Eternal Father." This also solves the contradiction between Luke 1:32-33 and 1 Cor 15-24-28. Jesus WILL rule the kingdom for ALL eternity; he will do so BY subjecting himself to the Father and being truly 1 with the God, as he was in the Garden of Eden. In the New Earth, we very well may call the Son, "Father." Does this mean he is the Father? Yes, and no! People can be two different things simultaneously. My mom is, well, my mom. But to my grandmother, she is a daughter. This is not a perfect analogy, but it works, somewhat. Jesus will always be the Son in relation to God; at the current moment, he is like a big(eternal) brother to us. In the New World, somehow, he will be our Father, and we shall call him so.
      
      I understand that my view is pretty wonky(maybe an understatement). In addition to wonky, unheard of. I've searched all over the internet and different books and many, many commentaries, and I've never found anyone who shares this view; that Jesus becomes the Father by subjecting himself to Him... That's completely bonkers, something must be wrong with me(don't worry, I agree). But, it fits with Isaiah 9:6, and harmonizes Luke 1:32-33 and 1 Cor 15-24-28. For now, Jesus is not our Father; they have different personalities. So, we cannot rightly call Jesus our Father. But I think Isaiah 9:6 was talking about the New World. I mean, the scripture doesn't say WHEN he will be called each of those things; just that he WILL.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 12:48:59
        In Genesis 17: 5 even Abraham is called the father of many nations .... should we not also pray to Abraham ,,, what do you think, brother? It is the same term as Isaiah 9: 6 .... The Bible does not tell us anything about prayer addressed to Abraham ... How do you think we pray to Jehovah 90% and father Abraham 10% ... I do not think there is a problem!
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 12:56:00
        Did you not read what I wrote? Jesus is not our Father, but in the New World(New Heavens and New Earth), he will be.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 13:04:10
        Also, Abraham is dead. He is in Sheol, the grave, waiting to be resurrected by Jesus as part of the First Resurrection. He is not in heaven. Also, prayer can only be directed to God/a god(s). Even pagans pray, technically. They pray to pagan gods(the gods themselves, namely, their attributes and appearances, are not real, but behind the imaginary entity is a real demon(s); demons are always associated with divination, spiritism, and idol worship. And demons are gods). But since prayer is a form of worship, as Christians, the only gods we are allowed to pray to are the ones we worship, i.e. Jehovah and Jesus. I think me and Eric proved that we worship Jesus; the Bible, on many occasions, talks about worship to Jesus. In the book of Revelation, every single being in existence, in heaven and earth, spiritual and physical realms, praise Jesus to the highest degree. The ONLY beings we are allowed to worship are Jesus and God. We can worship NO other; that includes Abraham, who isn't even alive and totally unconscious at the moment.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 13:09:39
        I have a question for you though. What is prayer, to you? How do you pray? What do you view prayer as, and what are the implications of prayer to you? You keep talking about prayer this, prayer that, prayer is a form of worship, etc. etc. But, you haven't even told me WHAT prayer is to you... or what it looks like to you. And don't give me another Greek word please. I understand the Greek perfectly fine. I want to know what you, my brother, understand prayer to be.
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 13:20:59
        see prayer as a form of worship and communication with my Creator and the whole universe ... and as a privilege to be given only to the Source of Life (Jehovah) because He deserves it ... I accept Jesus as my mediator, the teacher, the king ... even if I speak to Jesus or ask him something I ask only for the glory of the Father Jehovah. I obey Jesus (proskuneo) and serve him (latreuo) but I do not give him (sebo) my way of life and nor prayer (prosefho) .... I sing praise to both the Father and the Son ....
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 13:37:44
        see prayer as a form of worship and communication with my Creator and the whole universe
        Ok, so what exactly do you do in your communcation. So far, yoou've ruled out petitioning, calling, and talking. You say, we can talk to Jesus, and call on his name(like Stephen did), and petition to him(like Paul did), and talk to him(like all of them did and like John did), but none of those are prayers, right? That's what you told me. So, then, what's left to do? if you want to stay consistent with your logic, then if you call on God, that's not a prayer. If you petition to God, that's not a prayer, if you even talk so much as to God, that's not a prayer. So, what exactly IS there left to do in a prayer?
        
        even if I speak to Jesus or ask him something I ask only for the glory of the Father Jehovah.
        So, when you speak to Jesus and ask him something, that's NOT prayer??
        
        I obey Jesus (proskuneo) and serve him (latreuo) but I do not give him (sebo) my way of life and nor prayer (prosefho)
        What did I say about the Greek words... :(
        
        Ok, so let me get this straight. As a Christian, you don't give Christ your way of life? Have you ever read the word "Christian..." The name is in the word. Being a CHRISTian is a way of life, is it not? It's not a hobby, or a one time choice. It's a lifestyle. Being a CHRISTian means giving your way of life to CHRIST... Honestly, I don't even know what you are trying to do here brother... Nowhere in the Bible is "sebo" strictly forbidden against anyone but Jehovah, the same is true for "proseúxomai." And why are Greek words of such importance to you? Does God speak Greek or something? Or is the reality of God dictated by how you understand the words of the Greek language?
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 14:01:06
        Dear brother, I do not claim to be Jehovah's channel, or that everyone knows the truth, nor do you know Greek fluently ... but I do know a little Greek and the words that are used as a prayer are what the Greeks do on a daily basis. ... when I talk to them, talk to them, yell at them, call them, address them, my friend ... this does not mean that I am asking them ... I realized that you have no knowledge of the Greek language since your arguments were presented .... I apologize if you feel offended anyway
        Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-17 14:04:37
        All those words that the Greek people use in their lives as communication you classify as prayer
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 14:21:36
        All those words that the Greek people use in their lives as communication you classify as prayer
        Wrong, I don't. See, you still aren't understanding me. They're classified as prayer when, and ONLY when, they are directed at a deity. I explained this to you already. One verb can have many meanings depending on the context you use it in. I can "climb" on to my bed, and I can also "climb" mount Everest; same verb, two totally different situations. Can you understand this, my brother? This is simple logic.
        
        Neither situation is the same in magnitude/significance, nor is the verb thought of/presented in the same way. When I climb onto my bed, I do so simply by jumping on to it. If I were to climb mount Everest, I would NOT do so simply by jumping onto the peak of the mount; not in the slightest.
        
        "But, they're the same word!! When you use the verb 'climb' when you say you 'climb on to your bed', that is everyday life language, therefore, to say that you 'climb mount Everest' must also be an everyday thing." That, my brother, is what your logic amounts to. I'm sorry, but it's nonsensical.
        
        Climbing my bed is an everday situation, climbing mount Everest is not; calling my friend is an everyday situation, calling on the name of Jesus, asking him to receive your spirit while you're being stoned to death, is NOT. To say that because of the fact that the verb "cimb" can be used in an everyday stiation, therefore ALL other situations using the verb "climb" must be everyday situation would be engaging in major sophistry. Sorry my brother. Take care! :)
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 14:30:38
        I apologize if you feel offended anyway
        No I'm not offended; absolutely not my brother! :D
        
        You still haven't answered my question;
        if you want to stay consistent with your logic, then if you call on God, that’s not a prayer. If you petition to God, that’s not a prayer, if you even talk so much as to God, that’s not a prayer. So, what exactly IS there left to do in a prayer?
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 22:08:09
        You know, if anyone has any feedback and criticism at all regarding my view, I genuinely want to hear it. And here are some more scriptures you have to harmonize.
        
        Ephesians 1:21 "...far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come." (ESV)
        
        Daniel 7:13-14 "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 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[whose dominion lasts forever with no end? Jesus'], which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (KJV)
        
        And, of course, Luke 1:33 "...and he shall reign over the house of Jacob to the ages; and of his reign there shall be no end[Jesus' reign will have no end]." (YLT)
        
        And finally, 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all." (NIV)
        
        Oh, and also Isaiah 9:6 "For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace." (WEB)
        
        By the way, when I said that we would call "Jesus" Father in the New World, I didn't mean that. I meant to say, maybe we will call him that. Certainly, if this scripture is talking about actual titles, then we will call him that; that it's much more probable it is talking about attributes, "glorious nature and qualities"; not proper name's. Either way, I don't feel Jesus has a father-like personality at this moment, only God does, but that in the New World, "Jesus", i.e. the Son of God, we return back to how things originally were at the Garden of Eden, and will be our God and Father to us(like how he was to Adam and Eve, when he was walking and talking with them).
        
        Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and Jesus and God could have the exact same personality/character at the current moment, but that Jesus, out of eternal humility for his Father and one and only eternal source, chooses to let God take on the role of Father in relation to us. I mean, no matter what you do, the scripture clearly calls Jesus the "Everlasting Father." You can't erase that fact.
        
        I mean, it makes you wonder; what is going to happen to Jesus after he subjects himself to the Father, when the last enemy(death) is defeated? It's not like God and Jesus aren't subject to change(in relation to us. God is changeless, of course. He is merely undergoing Cambridge change, which isn't real change). Before Jesus came, as recorded in the TaNaK, it was Jehovah who was the LORD of the Israelites; He was not their Father, He was their LORD. But, since Jesus came, Jehovah stopped being our LORD and has become our Father; and now Jesus is our LORD, and it is him we belong to. So, it's not like God has always been the Father of human beings, and it's not like Jesus has always been our Lord and Savior. And so, that begs yet another question; what was Jesus before he became our Lord and Savior?
        
        Anyway, yes, I'd love to hear lots of feedback and criticisms, any kind anyone might have! I'd also love to hear other perspectives on how to harmonizes the first 3 scriptures I listed with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, as well as on the meaning of Isaiah 9:6. Love to everyone! :)
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-18 09:28:28
        Keeping John 1:18 in mind who do you think was walking in the garden?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-18 23:01:47
        Jesus. I had already mentioned that. Eric agrees it was Jesus as well.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:51:28
        Why so many dislikes? Can no one reply and tell me why?
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:17:03
        Not Yahovah?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 22:33:09
        No, Jesus. Jehovah has infinite power; to be put into a body that is restricted by the confines of space, time, matter, and energy, a body that can walk, is to be diminished greatly in power, which God cannot be.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 13:25:55
        The omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent ElShaddi cannot? And as usual, we go off into metaphysics.
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 22:16:46
        You know, if anyone has any feedback and criticism at all regarding my view, I genuinely want to hear it. And here are some more scriptures you have to harmonize.
        
        Ephesians 1:21 "...far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come." (ESV)
        
        Daniel 7:13-14 "I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 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[whose dominion lasts forever with no end? Jesus'], which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." (KJV)
        
        And, of course, Luke 1:33 "...and he shall reign over the house of Jacob to the ages; and of his reign there shall be no end[Jesus' reign will have no end]." (YLT)
        
        And finally, 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 "Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27 For he “has put everything under his feet.” Now when it says that “everything” has been put under him, it is clear that this does not include God himself, who put everything under Christ. 28 When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
        
        Oh, and also Isaiah 9:6 "For to us a child is born. To us a son is given; and the government will be on his shoulders. His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace."
        
        By the way, when I said that we would call "Jesus" Father in the New World, I didn't mean that. I meant to say, maybe we will call him that. Certainly, if this scripture is talking about actual titles, then we will call him that; that it's much more probable it is talking about attributes, "glorious nature and qualities"; not proper name's. Either way, I don't feel Jesus has a father-like personality at this moment, only God does, but that in the New World, "Jesus", i.e. the Son of God, we return back to how things originally were at the Garden of Eden, and will be our God and Father to us(like how he was to Adam and Eve, when he was walking and talking with them).
        
        Of course, I could be entirely wrong, and Jesus and God could have the exact same personality/character at the current moment, but that Jesus, out of eternal humility for his Father and one and only eternal source, chooses to let God take on the role of Father in relation to us. I mean, no matter what you do, the scripture clearly calls Jesus the "Everlasting Father." You can't erase that fact.
        
        I mean, it makes you wonder; what is going to happen to Jesus after he subjects himself to the Father, when the last enemy(death) is defeated? It's not like God and Jesus aren't subject to change(in relation to us. God is changeless, of course. He is merely undergoing Cambridge change, which isn't real change). Before Jesus came, as recorded in the TaNaK, it was Jehovah who was the LORD of the Israelites; He was not their Father, He was their LORD. But, since Jesus came, Jehovah stopped being our LORD and has become our Father; and now Jesus is our LORD, and it is him we belong to. So, it's not like God has always been the Father of human beings, and it's not like Jesus has always been our Lord and Savior. And so, that begs yet another question; what was Jesus before he became our Lord and Savior?
        
        Anyway, yes, I'd love to hear lots of feedback and criticisms, any kind anyone might have! I'd also love to hear other perspectives on how to harmonizes the first 3 scriptures I listed with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28, as well as on the meaning of Isaiah 9:6. Love to everyone! :)
      - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-18 09:22:48
        How did you come to the conclusion that Jesus being the "everlasting Father" doesn't help Tri-unitarians?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-18 23:03:20
        Have you not studies the Trinity? Here's a picture.
        
        The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all God, but none are each other. Which is logically impossible. So, if the Father and Son are the same beings, that would hurt the Trinity. The Trinity says God and the Son are the same, but the Father and Son are not. That's what the picture says, anyway.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:51:56
        Is this not a picture of the Trinity doctrine? I don't understand??
    - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-18 09:13:47
      I think you may have hit the nail squarely on the head, how can Jesus be the everlasting Father? I've heard two explanations, one from the unitarian Sabalian/modelist camp which explains God to change modes, one mode is the Father, another mode is the Son, and finally the mode of the Holy Spirit, there is not three persons but one person that put's differing masks on.
      
      However this doesn't work for me, this idea I think makes God into a deceptive being, when we read about Jesus baptism God the Father speaks to the Son and the Holy Spirit comes down, surely the authors intent is to show that there is more than one person involved here.
      
      However, if Yahveh is a tri-personal (a Triunity) being; this would mean that Jesus is Yahveh, and although not the Father per se, He would have been the Father of Israel.
      
      What do you think?
      - Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-18 21:34:36
        The key is found in 1 Corinthians
        
        “. . .So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living person.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (1 Corinthians 15:45)
        
        Adam is the father of the human race, but in Adam, we are all dying. Jesus will become the last Adam for all who put faith in him under his kingdom rule. That means they will move over from death to life by become children of the last Adam and so he will become their everlasting Father. However, for the Children of God now whom Jesus calls his brothers, there is the opportunity be come adoptive children of the Father, God almighty.
        
        Hope that clears it up.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-18 23:08:50
        "Adam is the father of the human race, but in Adam, we are all dying. Jesus will become the last Adam for all who put faith in him under his kingdom rule. That means they will move over from death to life by become children of the last Adam and so he will become their everlasting Father. However, for the Children of God now whom Jesus calls his brothers, there is the opportunity be come adoptive children of the Father, God almighty."
        Woah! How did you think of that, my brother? This is probably a much better explanation than mine for Isaiah 9:6. I have a question though; what do you think will happen to Jesus in the New World, and how do you reconcile the 3 scriptures I listed with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:52:38
        I didn't even make any assertions in this comment! All I did was compliment Eric's explanation and proceed to ask a question...
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-20 05:43:21
        [RS] "what do you think will happen to Jesus in the New World, and how do you reconcile the 3 scriptures I listed with 1 Corinthians 15:24-28?"
        
        I have pondered that as well. It is a huge question. Beware: much speculation here. If you grant me that, I would say that the entire story of humanity is quite remarkable. Here we are on one tiny planet orbiting a fairly ordinary star, rotating with about 100 billion other stars within a very common type of spiral galaxy, which is merely one of about 100 billion galaxies (and that's just what we can see) and the creator of it all sends his son to save us?! Are we the only material creation made in his image in all the universe? I don't know. I guess you have to start somewhere, but then it seems presumptuous to make that assumption.
        
        I can only conclude that size doesn't matter to God. What matters is love, for God is love and we are vessels of love, both in that we can receive it and in that we can dispense it. We are God's children and so we matter.
        
        Once we are back on the path, then there will be other things for Jesus to do. Indeed, there will be other things for us to do. Who knows what Jehovah (the existing one) intended for humans prior to our fall from grace.
        
        I can only say that I am pleased to be given a chance to find out.
        
        As for the other part, I don't know which three scriptures you refer to. I must have missed them. Sorry, but been overwhelmed of late and have resorted to skimming to try to get all things covered.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 11:40:24
        would say that the entire story of humanity is quite remarkable. Here we are on one tiny planet orbiting a fairly ordinary star, rotating with about 100 billion other stars within a very common type of spiral galaxy, which is merely one of about 100 billion galaxies (and that’s just what we can see) and the creator of it all sends his son to save us?!
        So true!!! Thank you.
        
        Are we the only material creation made in his image in all the universe? I don’t know. I guess you have to start somewhere, but then it seems presumptuous to make that assumption.
        With an observable universe that's 96 billion light-years wide(that means it takes light, the fastest thing in existence, 96 billion years to traverse it), and the whole universe probably(scientists estimate) 200 times larger than that, indeed it would be presumptious to assume that we must be the only material creation in His image in existence.
        
        I can only conclude that size doesn’t matter to God. What matters is love, for God is love and we are vessels of love, both in that we can receive it and in that we can dispense it. We are God’s children and so we matter.
        Undoubtedly. :)
        
        As for the other part, I don’t know which three scriptures you refer to. I must have missed them. Sorry, but been overwhelmed of late and have resorted to skimming to try to get all things covered.
        No problem. I hope you get better, my brother. Here they are;
        
        Ephesians 1:21 “…far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and above every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come.” (ESV)
        
        Daniel 7:13-14 “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. 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[whose dominion lasts forever with no end? Jesus’], which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” (KJV)
        
        And, of course, Luke 1:33 “…and he shall reign over the house of Jacob to the ages; and of his reign there shall be no end[Jesus’ reign will have no end].” (YLT)
        
        But 1 Cor 15:24-28 says he will give up his dominion(everything, actually) to the Father. You can't reign for eternity while also giving up all your authority.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:48:07
        I kind of agree with you, however, if Jesus is Yahveh then he would be the father of Israel. We are surely speaking of the Messiah’s character toward Israel and us that Isaiah has in mind. Concerning the language of “Everlasting Father,” couldn't it also be a descriptive analogy pointing to Christ’s character He is fatherly, father-like, in his treatment of us.”
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-18 23:06:33
        Why do you think the Spirit is a person? Let's get one thing clear. When we say "person", we mean "distinct conscious entity." God is not a person like you and I, but He is a distinct conscious entity. So, is the Holy Spirit a distinct conscious entity(with thoughts, emotions, a character/personality like the God and Jesus)? If so, what proof do you have that this is the case?
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:50:03
        The authors intent in Acts, in every way that language could describe a person using personal pronouns it's used in regards to the Holy Spirit, plus He has a name.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 22:35:07
        What's its name? Also, Greek doesn't work the same way English words. Using personal pronouns to describe something in Greek doesn't mean the author thinks it's a person.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 08:47:54
        Comforter.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 13:17:23
        Have you ever heard of personification?
        
        Personification - the attribution of a personal nature or human characteristics to something nonhuman, or the representation of an abstract quality in human form.
        
        Personification is very, very common in everyday life. "The wind is howling." Does that mean the wind is a living thing which can howl? Here are some more examples.
        
        "That's an angry sore you've got there on your foot." "The stars danced in the midnight sky." "That cake is calling to me; it's telling me to eat it." "The weather looks sad today." "Death is like a thief in the night." "My computer is so clumsy." "The trees whisper to each other in the nighttime." "That thunderstorm was full of wrath." "The sun is smiling at us today." "Today treated me well." "This fresh-from-the-oven loaf of bread really comforted my belly." "My ship, well, she's a beauty."
        
        Need anymore examples? I'll give you two more;
        
        Jeremiah 31:10 "Hear the word of Yahweh, you nations, and declare it in the islands afar off; and say, He who scattered Israel will gather him[is the nation of Israel a living person that goes by the pronouns of he/him?], and keep him, as shepherd does his flock." (WEB)
        
        John 14:26 "But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you." (WEB)
        
        All that, on top of the fact that the Greek language doesn't use personal pronouns the way the English language does, should be enough to convince you that Jesus is not denoting the Holy Spirit to be a distinct conscious entity, i.e. a person.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 13:27:34
        Yea I call my boat a girl but guess what it's a boat.
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-18 23:26:50
        However this doesn’t work for me, this idea I think makes God into a deceptive being, when we read about Jesus baptism God the Father speaks to the Son and the Holy Spirit comes down, surely the authors intent is to show that there is more than one person involved here.
        Exactly! I'm glad you agree, my brother.
        
        However, if Yahveh is a tri-personal (a Triunity) being; this would mean that Jesus is Yahveh, and although not the Father per se, He would have been the Father of Israel.
        Israel had not Father, though. God was their Adonai(Lord). God is never once referred to as Father in the TaNaK. God could only become their Father when His people could have an opportunity to be adopted by Him, and they couldn't do that until Jesus.
        
        Let's clear something up. If A = C, and B = C, then A = B. There's no way around this; this is an unbreakable rule of logic. I don't think God is unlimited in ability that He is not restricted by the rules of logic, but that's ok, because logic is not something that is created(God can only not be subjected to things He created); it's a fundamental fact about reality. The statement above would be true in this universe and in another. If I have 2 apples in one hand, and 2 apples in the other, then I have 4 apples in total. Forget the signs; think of the abstract entities that signs represents. 2 + 2 will always be 4, no matter what universe you are in. Also, if God could do the logically impossible, then an implication of that is that He can make beings have and not have free will simultaneously. So, what, you ask? Well, if He could do that, then He could coerced the minds of Adam and Eve to NOT eat of the fruit of the tree(of the knowledge of good and evil), while not violating any moral principles(abolishing the free will God Himself granted to us), and we wouldn't even be in the situation in the first place. So, the fact that God didn't do that when He can so easily accomplish the logically impossible can only mean that He WANTED all this pain and suffering for humanity, which I cannot accept. So, I'm going with the axiom that God cannot accomplish the logically impossible... Therefore, formatting the statement of fundamental logic above; Father = God, and Son = God, Father = Son. There's no way around this. Father is = to Son. That's the consequence of a duality(and the consequence of a Trinity is that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all the same as each other). Now, well, that's a major problem. If the Father and the Son are the exact same, then there is no Father and Son. The whole point of names is for the ability to distinguish one being from another.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 17:01:52
        You have deduced God's unipersonality from the axiom of unipersonality, then as a unitarian, you attempt to deductively demonstrate that the doctrine of the trinity incoherently posits that the three divine persons of the Godhead are distinct while simultaneously implying that they are really one and the same person.
        
        You seem unable to conceive of another kind of individual personal being (namely, individual tri-personal being) which says nothing about whether or not God himself can be or is tri-personal. What can be known of God must be revealed by him in a manner that is accessible to the minds of men. He does this by accommodating himself to human limitations, a point which is given emphasis throughout the Scriptures via their use of anthropomorphic and anthropopathic language. God’s seeming unipersonality, in other words, must be analyzed not according to the heuristic axioms (logic) of sinful men but the teaching of Scripture regarding the nature of God as ontologically distinct from all of His creation.
        
        We must remember that not all things are logical in the bible, an axe head that floats, a man rising from the dead are not "logical" in our experience.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 17:03:55
        By the way, logic is created by God, it is an immaterial, universal and invariant law that cannot exist without intelligence.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 23:13:05
        By the way, logic is created by God, it is an immaterial, universal and invariant law that cannot exist without intelligence.
        Logic is a law? It needs intelligence to exist? Hmmm, it seems as though you haven't studied logic before. I'll let that slide. Also, just to be clear, I'm not saying God cannot do the logically impossible, because He very well could. I'm just saying that if He COULD do the logically impossible, that would have serious implications(God could abolish free will altogether, without abolishing free will altogether. Satan would never have existed, nor the demons, nor would Adam and Eve had sinned. God could have very, very easily done the logically impossible and forced Satan, the demons, and Adam and Eve from not sinning while simultaneously letting them retain their free will, and humanity would not have had to go through these thousands of years of pain and suffering).
        
        You have deduced God’s unipersonality from the axiom of unipersonality, then as a unitarian, you attempt to deductively demonstrate that the doctrine of the trinity incoherently posits that the three divine persons of the Godhead are distinct while simultaneously implying that they are really one and the same person.
        No, I haven't deduced God's unipersonality from the axiom of unipersonality. I haven't proved that God isn't a Trinity, because I don't know for sure that He isn't; no one does. What I'm saying is that it is logically impossible for God to be a Trinity, and so to believe in a Trinity you HAVE to believe that God is capable of doing the logically impossible. I'm merely running your system to a reductio ad absurdum; I'm not making any comment on whether or not it's true(it very well could be), but just about the inevitable consequences of it being true(consequences which can be entirely and easily avoided if you just Occam's razor this whole thing and accept that God is ONE BEING).
        
        You seem unable to conceive of another kind of individual personal being (namely, individual tri-personal being) which says nothing about whether or not God himself can be or is tri-personal.
        You are absolutely right. I am unable to conceive of that, and so are you, because it is logically impossible. You are also right in saying that fact says nothing about whether or not God is or isn't a Trinity.
        
        What can be known of God must be revealed by him in a manner that is accessible to the minds of men. He does this by accommodating himself to human limitations, a point which is given emphasis throughout the Scriptures via their use of anthropomorphic and anthropopathic language.
        Agreed, but that's independent of whether or not God is a Trinity.
        
        God’s seeming unipersonality, in other words, must be analyzed not according to the heuristic axioms (logic) of sinful men but the teaching of Scripture regarding the nature of God as ontologically distinct from all of His creation.
        We must remember that not all things are logical in the bible, an axe head that floats, a man rising from the dead are not “logical” in our experience.
        Heuristic? Ha, that's a good laugh. Nothing about logic is heuristic; it's the very opposite. Also, you seem to be conflating two different denotations of "logical."
        Logical :
        (i) (of an action, development, decision, etc.) natural or sensible given the circumstances;
        (ii) of or according to the rules of logic or formal argument.
        I'm not operating under the first definition when I say "logical," but under the second. I agree, things hardly ever seem that kind of "logical" in the Bible. Certainly, a man being resurrected after having died is "illogical."
        
        Let's talk about logic.
        
        Logic : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration: the science of the formal principles of reasoning (Merriam-Webster)
        
        Heuristic :
        (i) involving or serving as an aid to learning, discovery, or problem-solving by experimental and especially trial-and-error methods;
        (ii) of or relating to exploratory problem-solving techniques that utilize self-educating techniques (such as the evaluation of feedback) to improve performance (Merriam-Webster)
        
        I don't have to experience having 2 apples in one hand and 2 apples in another two know that 2 + 2 is ALWAYS 4. In fact, NO ONE needs to experience that situation(or any like it) to arrive at such a conclusion, because the conclusion is entirely self-evident, whether or not there are any conscious minds to figure that out. Do you think that if God suddenly disappeared, 2 apples + 2 apples would cease to be 4 apples(in total)? Would 2 apples in one hand and 2 apples in another give you 5 apples? 6 apples? 1,000,000,000 apples?
        
        Let me, if you would, give you a crash course on the fundamental laws(not law) of logic(there are more laws, but these are the main ones you need to know).
        
        (1) The Law of Noncontradiction: For every element(whether a number or value or person or object or property) A, it is impossible for A to be both A and ∼A(any element that is mutually exclusive with A, that is, an element that, in having/being, necessitates that you cannot have/be A) simultaneously, i.e. A is not not A.
        In mathematical terms(where ∼ means "not" and × means "and"); ∼(A × ∼A)
        (1.1) My mom is a human being at this moment in time, therefore she is not a cat or a table or the sun at this moment in time.
        (1.2) It is impossible for my right foot to also be a power cord and a metal cabinet at 2:11 P.M of 12/20/2021.
        
        (2) The Law of Identity: For every element A, A is A, i.e. A is identical to itself. In mathematical terms(where ∀ means "for every"); ∀A(A = A)
        For example;
        (2.1) (2 + 3) = 5, (1 + 4) = 5, and (0 + 5) = 5, therefore (2 + 3) = (1 + 4) = (0+ 5), or 5 = 5 = 5.
        (2.2) If the color of object A is identical to the color of object B, and the color of object B is identical to the color of object C, then the color of object A is identical to the color of object C.
        (2.3) If John is the father of Mary, and John is the brother of Thomas, then the father of Mary is the brother of Thomas.
        
        The Trinity doctrine asserts that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are all God, but none are identical to each other. Father = God, Son = God, Holy Spirit = God, therefore, as per the Law of Identity(which states that elements that are identical to each other are each other), the Father = the Son = the Holy Spirit. The Trinity totally rejects this conclusion while asserting the very proposition that inevitably leads to this conclusion, therefore the Trinity is logically impossible. I'm not saying that God must be bound by the laws of logic, or that He can't break them(although it wouldn't be a problem if that was true, as the laws of logic are not created by a conscious mind, but fundamentally self-evident). I'm saying that it's impossible for Him to BE a Trinity without breaking them. And if He is capable of breaking the laws of logic, He is capable of literally anything. God could be my table while not being my table. God could be me while not being me! IF God is capable of doing the logically impossible(I'm not saying that He is, or that He isn't, because I don't know which of these propositions is true, and neither do you), then I have every right to say that I could be and not be God Himself simultaneously, as that is a very real possibility. I could also rightly call God evil and not evil; I could say that God didn't want to stop all the pain and suffering humanity would go through for thousands upon thousands of years, because He very easily could have, and all the while making sure we completely retain our free will, thereby not contradicting His purpose(which the Bible says He cannot do, but that He always fulfills His purposes) by totally abolishing the free will of the agents of whom He gave it to.
        
        So, final verdict:
        To believe in the Trinity doctrine, you HAVE to believe that God can do the logically impossible; there's no two ways about it. God being able to do the logically impossible has many implications. So, once again, which do you choose to believe in? In case you've misunderstood me once more, this is not in any way, shape, or form, a proof for why God MUST be one being and not a tri-unity, because He could or could not be one, and no one can know for sure right now; I am merely detailing the inevitable consequences of God being a tri-unity(able to accomplish the logically impossible, but choosing not to do so and instead unjustly allow thousands of years of pain and suffering, as well as the rebellion of over 1/3 of all the spirit beings in heaven, as well as the death and suffering of His innocent and perfect Son. The argument that God cannot get rid of all evil thoughts/actions in an instant because that would interfere with the free will He chose to give us completely falls apart, and God is unjust and cruel). If you want to continue to believe in the Trinity doctrine, then you have to accept these corollaries. If you are fine with that, then great; we can move on! :) If not, then you cannot persist in the preaching/believing of the Trinity doctrine. Take care, my brother! Have a wonderful day. :D
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 00:33:11
        continuing my comment from before... I got cut off;
        
        But if the Father and Son are the exact same beings, then there's IS no Father and Son. There is only Father, or only Son. You cannot say that they are equal and not equal simultaneously. That is breaking another fundamental law of logic; Proposition A = B is true or proposition A ≠ B is true at any given moment in time, but both propositions are never true simultaneously. Therefore, there is no Father and Son. If there is no Father and Son, well, then, the entire Bible is a lie... We have no savior and no Father, or we have only a savior but no Father, OR we have only a Father but no savior. That's what happens when you run a duality(or a Trinity) through a reductio ad absurdum. For the Trinity to be true or even slightly reasonable, God would need the ability to do the logically impossible, but that has all sorts of implications(more than the one I already went into) you don't want to get into. You have to pick one; either you agree that God can't do the logically impossible, and therefore the Trinity is false, or you say that He can. No two ways about it.
        
        You see, one doesn't even have to get into the details of the Trinity to disprove the Trinity(Eric has already done beautifully that with his post on the Logos). Just take it to it's logical conclusion...
        
        Now that we have proved that the Trinity is false, we can get into more interesting subjects. After all this, I expect that you'll agree with me that the Trinity is false(you might still believe that the Holy Spirit is a person. That's totally fine. I know Christians that don't believe in the Trinity but think the Holy Spirit is a person), but I could be wrong. But let's hope that I am right about that. If so, I'd like to ask a question. What do you think will happen to Jesus when he subjects himself to God the Father after the last enemy, death, is defeated(i.e. when the last being who will ever die, dies; which will be at final judgement when everyone is thrown into the Lake of Fire. Death is defeated when ALL God's enemies are defeated, because when ALL God's enemies are defeated, it is peaceful life that lasts for eternity. See how they're connected)?
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:58:57
        How about instead of disliking everything I comment and doing absolutely nothing else, you reply and rebut my arguments to show WHY my comment deserves a dislike? If someone had tried to disprove my beloved doctrine I certainly wouldn't like it. Now, whether or not I can give a valid counterargument is another subject, don't you think?
        
        What it comes down to is that, if God is able to manifest Himself in 3 persons simultaneously, none of which are the same as each other, He is doing the logically impossible; there's no way around this. So, to believe in such a notion, one would have to accept the axiom that God is capable of doing the logically impossible. This means He can destroy the universe and not destroy it simultaneously. This means He can destroy free will and not destroy free will simultaneously. This means He can lie and not lie simultaneously. He could be EVIL and NOT EVIL simultaneously. God could do and get away with literally anything. The Trinity requires one to accept that God can do the logically impossible.
        
        Now, you can disagree with me, give me 1000 dislikes, say that I'm senseless, whatever, all that is fine. But you cannot get around this. But if you can, please reply and show me how. I'll take any and all silence to mean that you accept defeat. Take care. :)
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-19 10:38:59
        Hello brother, how are you? I spoke sarcastically with my brother (Rajeshsony) and to see where his logical reasoning leads us .... whether we should pray to Jesus ........ He causes a lot of confusion by saying that Paul, and Stephen they prayed to Jesus .... when in fact at that time Jesus appeared and communicated with these apostles..they were supernatural manifestations and they spoke and cried out to Christ ... but they did not pray to him ... those words used in those Scriptures are used by the Greek people in daily life in communication with each other and none of them has the meaning of (prayer) ,,,, however I suggest to the brother to take a course (Greek-English) for the meaning of the Bible words. .... Jesus taught us to pray to the Father ,,, he himself prayed to the Father .... we have no case in the New Testament that they prayed to Jesus .... and neither does Jehovah command us to pray to Christ .. ..but to accept his role ..even serve and obey his Son .....
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:57:22
        those words used in those Scriptures are used by the Greek people in daily life in communication with each other and none of them has the meaning of (prayer) ,,,, however I suggest to the brother to take a course (Greek-English) for the meaning of the Bible words.
        OH MY goodness... How many times... how many times... how many times... how many times... do I have to go over this? I'm not going over it again. Please, read my previous comments.
      - Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-19 10:50:18
        As for the term (Abba) used for Abraham, Jesus, Jehovah .... I think Abraham is called (Abba) of all believers ..believing alone and being separated from his relatives and family for worshiped Jehovah ...... Jesus is called (Abba) because he is the last Adam .... and Jehovah is called (Abba) because he is the source of creation and Creator ........ Jrhovai does not command us to pray Jesus ... but to obey and obey him and to serve him ... since Jesus is our personal mediator to the Father we have entered into a personal relationship with him..because without Jesus we can not go to the Father Jehovah ..... Jesus he sanctified the name of his Father with his life and gave him glory .... He said that I do the things that the Father has told me and those that please Him ..... we give it 100% and not 15% as brother (Rajeshsony) said .... If we do not give 100% a form of worship to the Father or the Son in the worm condemning ourselves ..... How can there be something like ... you give my prayer to Jehovah 85% and Jesus 15% ... would not be approved ......
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 11:57:02
        Jrhovai does not command us to pray Jesus
        So, unless Jehovah commands us to do something, we cannot do it? Following your logic; Jehovah doesn't command us to sleep on a bed, therefore we cannot sleep on a bed. Let's take that one step further. Jehovah doesn't commands us NOT sexually abuse children, therefore we have to sexually abuse children. Nice logic, right?
        
        you give my prayer to Jehovah 85% and Jesus 15% … would not be approved ……
        Ok then. Show me the scripture that condemns praying to Jesus. Go on... If you do not reply but dislike my comment, I'll take that to mean that you have no answer and admit defeat.
  - Reply by James Mansoor on 2021-12-17 15:32:54
    Good morning,
    
    To answer your question the answer is no, you see my brother Jehovah and Jesus are not my waiter they are my family, just think of your family situation, if you have children do they love you for what they can get out of you? do they talk to you only when they need something?
    
    Moses walked with the true God as seeing the invisible one, can you imagine in your minds eye that you’re holding your heavenly father‘s hand and just going for a walk?
    
    I personally believe that you and I are coming to the subject of prayer and worship from two different roads, but leading to the same destination our means of transportation is different but nonetheless our destination is the same, if that makes sense to you.
    
    love your zeal ?
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-17 15:58:57
      To answer your question the answer is no, you see my brother Jehovah and Jesus are not my waiter they are my family, just think of your family situation, if you have children do they love you for what they can get out of you? do they talk to you only when they need something?
      Exactly! Thank you so much! :) You are awesome brother. :D
      
      Moses walked with the true God as seeing the invisible one, can you imagine in your minds eye that you’re holding your heavenly father‘s hand and just going for a walk?
      I can actually. It's one of the best feelings in the universe. Especially when I go for a run in the woods. Oh my goodness. To know that God is watching me and cares about me... A feeling unlike any other...
      
      I personally believe that you and I are coming to the subject of prayer and worship from two different roads, but leading to the same destination our means of transportation is different but nonetheless our destination is the same, if that makes sense to you.
      It makes perfect sense!
      
      love your zeal ?
      Thanks my brother. ;)
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-20 05:26:51
  "For example if the organisation of Jehovah’s Witnesses claim to interpret the Bible then why do I need the Holy Spirit?"
  
  What a good point!
  
  Thank you for sharing this reasoning with us, James. I concur.

Comment by ZbigniewJan on 2022-01-02 14:16:04
Thank you very much, Eric, for this lecture. This is a wonderful work for the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. You interpret 1 Kings 13: 18,19 wonderfully. JW's Governing Body cannot worship Jesus because it is taking his place and awaiting glory for itself. As Jesus says, they have already received their wages, and apart from rebuke, they are not owed a thread. Many brothers with their roots in JW have difficulty worshiping our Lord. John 5: 22,23 is the key to balance in this matter. Our God the Father is not jealous of his only-begotten son. Jesus himself says whoever does not honor the son, does not honor the Father. Eric with a sense of humor says how the brothers from JW greet the coming Jesus: good Lord, you are already here, but we have a few reservations. Probably some would say, if Lord Jesus you shave your beard, you will be able to say a few words from the podium in the hall of the kingdom. I had such an experience recently: I was talking to two elders in my home during an emergency visit. We talked about the divinity and position of Jesus in the JW congregation. I asked how they would greet Jesus if he entered the room now. I got up, opened the door and talked to them, I got down on my knees and in that moment I fell to my knees. You can imagine the terrified faces of the older brothers, a priceless sight.
I am constantly learning to worship and glorify our Lord. Sometimes I feel guilty that I dare to turn to my Lord and ask for something from him. Sometimes I feel as if I should apologize to Jehovah's Father for this. I am supported by the words of the apostle Paul: 1 Cor. 16: 22-24 Cursed be whoever does not love Christ.
Dear brothers, may the love of Christ be with you.
- Reply by Frankie on 2022-01-05 19:08:59
  Hi ZbigniewJan
  
  „Our God the Father is not jealous of his only-begotten son“ – That is the truth. Otherwise, Jehovah would not give all his power in heaven and on earth to his Son (Matt. 28:18).
  Nowadays, Jesus is in charge of all God's things in heaven and on Earth (1 Peter 3:22). He acts temporary (1 Cor 15:28) as God for all of us. His authority includes everything except Jehovah (1 Cor. 15:27).
  
  On my knees, how would I ask for my health, or for my faith, or for mercy for my enemies? (2 Cor 12:8; Luke 17:5; Acts 7:59-60).
  In addition, I can imagine a scene where the Lord chose Matthew instead of Judas (Acts 1:21, 24). Jesus is my beloved Lord, my King, my Savior and my brother. Who will stop me from talking to Him?
  
  Thank you Zbyszek for you comment.
  God bless you. Frankie
  - Reply by ZbigniewJan on 2022-01-09 17:37:06
    Witaj Frankie!!!
    Dziękuję za Twoją odpowiedź. Zawsze z uwagą czytam Twoje komentarze i czuję z Tobą jedność w Chrystusie. Mieszkamy na tej naszej planecie dosyć blisko siebie, mam nadzieję, że się spotkamy i uściskamy. Pragnę poznać Ciebie i Twoją chrześcijańską drogę do wolności Chrystusowej. Proszę napisz do mnie coś z Twojej historii. Napisz po słowacku, google pomoże mi przetłumaczyć. Mój mail:
    z.piatek-zegarmistrz@wp.pl
    Pozdrawiam serdecznie!!!!
    Zbigniew

Comment by Bamba64 on 2021-12-18 09:30:20
Excellent polemic against the WTBTS as always, however, the theology has me baffled. Doesn't your position make scripture contradict itself and affect the immutability Of God? Scripture has affirmed that we shall not worship the created only the uncreated which axiomatically is Yahovah, Yahovah has also said that there are no other gods (uncreated gods, or true Gods) beside Him, (Romans 1:25, Isaiah 45:5, Deut 6:13-14, Ex 23:13).

Of course, if you mean that Jesus is not of creaturely status i.e. eternal; and thus must be by default Yahovah then I’m with you on that (Rev 1:8, Rev 1:17-18). If not, maybe you can clear up exactly who you believe Jesus to be and is worthy of worship and sharing God's glory.
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-18 21:27:43
  I explain how it is possible for Jesus to be eternal, while not being God Almighty in this video: https://beroeans.net/2021/03/26/trinity-part-3/
  
  As for the statement that there are no other Gods beside Yehowah, that refers to there being no rival Gods. That context reveals he is not making a statement about existence, but about rivalry.
  
  To help you comprehend how he can say that there are no other Gods but himself when he himself states that there are other Gods, like Satan and the Word, we can look at these verses:
  “. . .There is no other God but me; A righteous God and a Savior, there is none besides me.” (Isaiah 45:21)
  “. . .But I am Jehovah your God from the land of Egypt; You knew no God except me, And besides me there is no savior.” (Hosea 13:4)
  
  Now would you say God is contradicting himself about being the only savior when he inspired Bible writers to pen these words?
  “. . .Then Jehovah raised a savior up for the sons of Israel that he might save them, Othʹni·el the son of Keʹnaz, the younger brother of Caʹleb. . .” (Judges 3:9)
  “. . .So Jehovah raised up for them a savior, Eʹhud the son of Geʹra, a Benʹja·mite, a left-handed man. . . .” (Judges 3:15)
  “. . .Consequently Jehovah gave Israel a savior, . . .” (2 Kings 13:5)
  “. . .in the time of their distress they would cry out to you, and you yourself would hear from the very heavens; and in accord with your abundant mercy you would give them saviors who would save them out of the hand of their adversaries.” (Nehemiah 9:27)
  
  Hopefully that and the video will help you to see that there are other ways of looking at these accounts without jumping to the conclusion that they can only refer to existence, or that he is stating that there can be not such things as created Gods. Or that for someone to be a true God, as is the case with the only-begotten god, Jesus, he must be one and the same with the almighty.
  - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:37:09
    We’ve had this discussion before Eric, I don’t know why you would fetch this up as an argument (unless your memory is failing like mine). Obviously, there is no saviour of souls other than Yaveh, however, there are many saviours of human life.
    
    Can you explain what you mean by begotten, and in the context of what scripture?
    I will look at your video again but this argument could be simply settled by one question. Is Jesus of creature status (created) yes or no?
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 01:50:26
      Is Jesus a creation by God? No... Well, that depends on what defintion of "create" you are operating under.
      
      (1)
      Create - to make something new, or invent something (Cambridge Dictionary)
      Create - to make or produce (something) (Merriam-Webster)
      
      (2)
      Create - to cause something to exist (Cambridge Dictionary)
      Create - to bring into existence (Merriam-Webster)
      NOTE: defintion of exist - to be, or to be real (Cambridge Dictionary)
      
      If you are operating under the first, Jesus is uncreated. The process of making something new implies a starting point(the start of the creation process) and an end point(when the creation process is finished, i.e. when the thing is fully made), which implies time(whatever is in between the period from the start of the creation process to the end). Certainly God created the angels like this; at one point in time they did not exist, and at another point in time they existed. But wherever Jesus was at the beginning of the universe, when he created it, he must have been outside of it(i.e. trasncending all time, space, matter, and energy). So, he could not have been created in such a manner.
      
      If you are operating under the second defintion; yes, Jesus is kind of a created being, as God, being the source of Jesus, caused Jesus to exist("to be real," and yet outside of time and space itself?! How is that even possible?). Such a notion is still incredibly ambiguous, because if you are caused to exist, it is still implies that thre was a moment before that cause, therefore a moment you didn't exist. Once again the concpet of time is implied, though much less so than in the first defintion of "create." But anyway; that's what it means to be "begotten."
      Begotten - brought into existence by or as if by a parent (Merriam-Webster)
      
      In the end, it doesn't really matter what defintion you are going by, because it's not like the meaning of the existence of Jesus(or of God) can even be encapsulated within a single word(or any amount of words), as though our mental faculties are even slightly capable of apprehending the notion of being "created" outside of space, time, matter, and energy itself. We can only talk about it; but to talk about something does not necessitate that you grasp(whether fully or even slightly) what you are talking about. If you try to envision something being caused to exist outside of time, space, matter, and energy, you cannot do it without envisioning space(of which to gather and put together material), matter(the material from which the thing is being made), and energy(you see the creator working to create, and thus expending energy); as for time, well, you don't have to envision it per se, because it's already there in your vision, as your thought processes require time(if you were frozen in time you could not think anything) to function(you envision the beginning of the creation process, and you envision the end. And you do not do that in a timeless instant. For something to happen in the period between the start and finish of the creation process, you inevitably need a concept of time to envision said period; it's called a time period). Basically, you cannot do it, at all.
      
      As the illustration Eric always uses; we're like a man born blind trying to understand color. Take care my brother. Have a beautiful day! :D ;)
      - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 05:43:05
        This is the problem that I see, you ask a simple question and when you can't answer it you go into micro analyse mode or obfuscation. How did the audience understand that Jesus is the first and last? Was there a "time" when Jesus didn't exist and therefore came into existence, it's not a difficult question, if he was created he is of creature status? It's not hard to understand what created or not created means.
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-20 06:07:27
        I've addressed that conundrum in this video:
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_5_OqnnF6M
        
        Bamba64, this video was not about the Trinity, so your questions are off topic and are obviously intended to provoke a polemic. I'm not interested in monitoring a site like that. If you wish, you can go to discussthetruth.com where they encourage such debates.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 08:44:52
        Apologies Eric.
        Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 08:56:58
        While I do recognize that I'm off topic it does relate to whether we should communicate (pray) to any supernatural being and, I'm hardly the only one that is off-topic in that respect on this thread.
        
        Nevertheless, I know it must take a fair amount of time for you to monitor this blog. I'll try to keep on topic.
        Many thanks for your time.
        
        Mark
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 11:05:10
        This is the problem that I see, you ask a simple question and when you can’t answer it you go into micro analyse mode or obfuscation.
        What?? I don't understand you, my brother. It like you want a clear and cut answer, that can only be taken and understood one way, as though the infinite complexities of metaphysics ought to be enveloped within a few words for Mr. Bamba. I gave you a great answer, the most correct answer you are ever going to get.
        
        Was there a “time” when Jesus didn’t exist and therefore came into existence,
        No... that's what I'm saying. But I'm also saying no one can envision such a concept.
        
        if he was created he is of creature status
        Once again, that depends. Reread my comment please.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 12:33:53
        How did the audience understand that Jesus is the first and last?
        
        Revelation 1:17-18 "When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, "Fear not, I am the first and the last, 18 and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades."
        This passage is undoubtedly about Jesus. The "first and the last" here is, I think, a reference to Jesus' resurrection. There is a lot of evidence supporting that, because of the context surrounding the phrase. I am the "living one." What is that a reference to? Possibly the resurrection. Then right after he says, "and I died, and behold I am alive forevermore." Clearly, this is unequivocally a reference to the Jesus' death and resurrection. He died, but was resurrected with a glorious, eternal, spiritual body. And then he emphasizes that HE has the keys of Death and Hades; HE has the power and authority to resurrect all whom he chooses. It seems as though the majority of this passage is about death and resurrection. Why wouldn't the epithet he gives himself, right before all that about his death and resurrection, also be interconnected with the notions of his death and resurrection? If everything else in this passage(delivered by Jesus) is clearly a reference to his resurrection, why wouldn't the very first thing he says in initiating his proclamation also be a reference to his resurrection?
        
        So, what would the "first" mean. Well, clearly that he(resurrected by God) is the first person to be resurrected with a glorious, eternal body. And what would the "last" mean? Well, tying into that last phrase in the passage, "I have the keys of Death and Hades," it probably means that he is the last person who will ever be resurrected by God. Jesus does all the resurrections from now on; HE is the one with the keys of Death and Hades, because God gave them to him upon his resurrection(He gave all authority in existence to Jesus upon his resurrection).
        
        You see, Jesus' resurrection had a twofold impact; the moment he was resurrected, he was simultaneously both the first person to be resurrected by God into a new, incorruptible, eternal body, AND the last person to be resurrected by God into a new, incorruptible, eternal body. He was simultaneously the "first and the last" at the instant of his resurrection, and he has been the "first and the last" ever since, and will be the first and the last for eternity. Jesus is the first person to be resurrected with a glorious new body by God, and will be the only person to ever be resurrected by God with a glorious new body, and therefore the last person to ever be resurrected by God with a glorious new body. If you are the first person to do something, and you will be the only person to do that something forever, you are simultaneously the first and last person to do that something.
        
        Hope this helps! Either way, it's not like I'm disagreeing with you on Jesus being eternal, because he is; he has NO beginning, thus he is technically uncreated. I just wanted to shed some light on what the expression "first and the last" is trying to convey, and how it is not a reference to the eternal nature of Jesus.
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-21 00:19:04
        Someone has something to say about what I wrote? I'd love to hear. :) Constructive criticism is always optimal. :D
        Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-24 18:25:00
        Is this explanation a little too anti-climactic for your tastes? It fits perfectly within the context, albeit a little dissatisfying compared to "first and last" being a testimony to the eternality of Jesus. But can anyone tell me why my explanation is wrong, per se? Or whether or not there is a better explanation out there(better, as in, fits within the context better. Not better in your mind or to your feelings)? Dissatisfaction, however distasteful, is not a valid reason in support of an argument being wrong.
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 00:53:38
  Actually, there are other gods. The Hebrew word "elohim" is the word translated as God or gods in English. What is means is any being belonging to the spiritual realm; it's a category title, the set of all spiritual beings(like how "mom" is a category title. One term for the set of all female human beings who have children. However, when I hear "mom", I don't think of every mom in the world. I think of one specific mom; MY mom... Such is the same with the term "god.").
  
  And a proper subset of "elohim" is the One True God Yahweh, who is the only member of said subset(this is who we automatically think of when we hear the word, "god" thinking that there are no other gods. There are NO other gods like Yahweh; none anywhere even close to Him. But there are other gods. See the difference?). Other subsets include angles(messengers), cherubim and seraphim(throne guardians), demons(lesser spirits who have been abased of their status and power in heaven, i.e. the Satan and principalities and powers), sons of God/divine council, etc. You should read Psalm 82 to see what I'm talking about. If you want to learn more about this subject you should check out the work of a scholar called Michael Heiser. He's done a lot of work in this field. Take care, my brother! Have a wonderful day! :D
  - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:12:22
    I think you may have misunderstood me, I tend to agree with you, and I believe that is exactly the distinction that Yahovah is making. They may be recognized as gods (elohim) by men, but they are not by nature God Gal 4:8.
    - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 22:31:27
      :)
      - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-24 20:41:38
        Heh heh. A smiley face got two dislikes. That's gotta tell you something. No words, no arguments, no assertions, not a single letter. Nothing but a simple, friendly smiley face, and 3 people disliked it(I remember it had 1 upvote, so for it to have 2 downvotes now, 3 people must have downvoted it). Somebodies really don't like. I wonder who they are? ;P ^_^
  - Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 13:19:40
    Got his book "The Unseen Realm"

Comment by Psalmbee on 2021-12-19 12:50:12
Here's the way I see it. Everything else is religion, just a snare and a racket.

1st. (Jos 24:15)

2nd. (Jhn 7:53)

3rd. (Jhn 8:1)

4th. (Jhn 8:2)

Psalmbee

Comment by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-20 11:40:15
To all, please understand that this comment section is for just that: comments. It is not a debating forum. If anyone wishes to debate, please use www.discussthetruth.com. There you can debate to your hearts content. Outside of sharpening your reasoning skills, it is, however, a waste of time.

Trinitarians have many methods to promote this falsehood, and long, hard experience shows they will not let a little thing like reason get in their way.

They use ambiguous proof texts like John 1:1 and John 20:28, but only allow for a single interpretation. They will coin words like the recent "monotheism" and claim this is God's way of worship, thus disallowing the Father from calling his son a god and appointing him in his place. They gag at the gnat claiming it is illogical to say that a created being could also be eternal while swallowing the camel that is the illogic of three distinct persons (beings) all being the same being. They will spend all their time on their proof texts while ignoring the mountain of scriptures which clearly disprove any trinitarian concept.

At some point, we have to let them be and move on with the business of promoting the Good News, or is 2 John 7-11 only written to guard against gnostics?
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 13:55:02
  To all, please understand that this comment section is for just that: comments. It is not a debating forum. If anyone wishes to debate, please use http://www.discussthetruth.com. There you can debate to your hearts content. Outside of sharpening your reasoning skills, it is, however, a waste of time.
  Yes, you are absolutely right, brother. Sorry. And I'll cease my debating. :)
  
  At some point, we have to let them be and move on with the business of promoting the Good News, or is 2 John 7-11 only written to guard against gnostics?
  Mhhmmm, indeed. It's meant to guard against anyone who tries to deceive(whether intentionally or unintentionally) others by putting themselves in the place of Jesus to garner followers for themselves(and away from Jesus) using their own teachings, teachings that are against the Christ's teachings. Of course, to what degree someone IS an antichrist varies, but the point stands.
  
  Thanks for this brother Eric! ;)
  - Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-21 08:11:17
    Good to have you with us, RajeshSony.
- Reply by Frankie on 2021-12-21 07:05:08
  I agree.

Comment by James Mansoor on 2021-12-20 18:29:46
Good morning from Australia,

It is so nice to see 157 comments even though that some are off the subject, but by the same token it’s really great to see so many commenting.

The other day I got called stupid from one of the people that I deal with since he believed in the Trinity.

And it’s true what Eric said that we’re not here discussing the Trinity, this whole subject was about prayer and worship.

And I’m very very happy that the subject about the alpha and the omega came up in this forum, let me explain….. My father is the alpha and the omega to his parents, I am the alpha and the omega to my parents, recently my father has given me the authority over all his business and I mean everything.

I asked this gentleman who believe strongly in the Trinity that I must be my father and my father must be me since we are both alpha and the omega and I have authority over everything that he has….. Simply put he called me stupid because he said who gave you this authority? I stated my father, he simply had a grin on his face and he said that’s why you Jehovah’s Witnesses are stupid…. Your father gave you that authority so how can you be your father? and just because you’re the alpha and the omega that doesn’t make you equal to your father.

As Eric said you can take a horse to the water but you cannot force it to drink.

Now I ask you who is the stupidest one?

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-22 21:43:31
Hello, fellow brothers and sisters. I just wanted to clear up the issue of praying to Jesus once and for all. This is over 12 hours of researching and writing, so I genuinely and sincerely hope someone, anyone, finds this helpful. :D

We'll start with the definition of prayer(as prayer is an ENGLISH word).
Prayer : an address (such as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought (Merriam-Webster)

That's the definition of "prayer." Now, there is one stipulation that is necessitated for every prayer to be a prayer; that you do not see and cannot hear the god(if it were to respond in a verbal manner) you are praying to, because in such an instance you are not praying but conversing(or looking for a conversation), and having/trying to initiate a conversation with a god is not the same thing as praying to a god(Conversation : oral exchange of sentiments, observations, opinions, or ideas[Merriam-Webster]). Obviously, this notion is implied in the given definition above, as in most cultures throughout human history gods were usually thought to live in other realms other than the one humans live in, thus humans could not see or hear their gods so as to strike up a conversation with them. So, once again, that's implied in the definition, but I just wanted to make that clear(that's why prayer is a method of showing your faith; you cannot see or hear your god, but you have faith that your god can see and hear you). If Jesus were to appear before me and talk to me and I talked back, though Jesus is God/a god(whichever you prefer), I would not be praying to him. So, a better definition than the one given above would be, "an address (such as a petition) to God or a god(that you cannot see or hear) in word or thought." Ok, moving on.

Now, what is communication?
Communication : the act or process of using words, sounds, signs, or behaviours to express or exchange information or to express your ideas, thoughts, feelings, etc., to someone else (Merriam-Webster)

The term "communication" is a set(a set is a collection of elements of any kind); the set of all possible ways for a being(s) to transmit information to another being(s). "Prayer" is a proper subset of "communication", i.e. ALL elements found in "prayer" are also found in "communication", while not all elements found in "communication" are found in "prayer." Why? Because prayer is a manner in which you transmit information; a human transmits information through word or thought to a deity, thus, prayer is a type of communication. An example of this is the relationship between squares and rectangles; all squares are rectangles, while not all rectangles are squares(the set of all squares is a proper subset of the set of all rectangles).

Ok, now we'll move on to some Greek, and investigate the main Greek word for prayer; προσεύχομαι.
The word προσεύχομαι(G4336) is actually a compound word, from the words πρός(G4314) and εὔχομαι(G2172).

Here is Strong's definition of πρός;
"Definition: a preposition of direction; forward to, i.e. toward (with the genitive case, the side of, i.e. pertaining to; with the dative case, by the side of, i.e. near to; usually with the accusative case, the place, time, occasion, or respect, which is the destination of the relation, i.e. whither or for which it is predicated)."
Basically, πρός can mean either
(i) at/nearby/by the side (denoting the action(s) of doing something in relation to something/someone else, WITH a regard to spatial position, whether literal or figurative), or...
(ii) to/towards/with/with regard to (denoting the action(s) of doing something in relation to something/someone else, WITHOUT any regard to spatial position).

εὔχομαι literally means, "to speak out, utter aloud(especially with reference to a deity. It is actually the Greek technical term for invoking a deity)," but it came to mean more generally "to wish or vow."
Here is Strong's concordance of εὔχομαι;
"Middle voice of a primary verb; to wish; by implication, to pray to God -- pray, will, wish."
So, εὔχομαι is another word for prayer in Greek(though not the main one).

The compound word, προσεύχομαι then literally means, "to earnestly wish for something(or speak something, anything, in general) with regards to a deity." Although, it can have a more figurative sense of, "to speak to while being nearby/next to a deity," for a sense of being in that deity's presence, face to face. And this word, rightly carries with it the notions of faith(πίστις) and worship(προσκυνέω). If you earnestly ask for something from a deity, you have faith in that deity, and if you have faith(complete trust) in that deity, you have adoration and reverence for that deity(you worship it).
Here is Strong's concordance for προσεύχομαι;
"From pros and euchomai; to pray to God, i.e. Supplicate, worship -- pray (X earnestly, for), make prayer."
So, in general, if you are supplicating/appealing to(more literally talking to/addressing) a deity in faith, you are προσεύχομαι. This is in accord with the definition of prayer given at the beginning of this comment.

So, whether or not you agree Jesus is God, I'm more than certain you agree he is at least A god. Are we not told to put complete trust(πίστις) in Jesus, and to worship(προσκυνέω) him? You cannot argue with that fact. Prayer is a facet of worship and putting faith; it's a means by which we can show our faith and adoration for Jesus. If God has specifically commanded us to do both those things, does it seem reasonable to think that God forbids us from praying to His Son? Remember, if you assert that prayer to Jesus is forbidden, then the burden of proof is on you. What sort of proof do you have to provide? Well, you'd have to show from the Bible where God says that, despite giving us a direct command to worship and put faith in His Son, prayer, itself being a method to fulfil this very command, is the one exception. "Yes, you must love, worship, and put faith in the Son; but don't pray to the Son, because that shows how much you love, worship, and put faith in the Son." Does this seem like a reasonable thing for God to do? Of course, whether or not it is isn't the point; the point is that the Bible never suggests such a notion.

The reasonable default position apropos prayer to Jesus would be that it is, at the very least, allowed; and that until you can find somewhere in the Bible where such notion is reprimanded, no one is obliged to believe that prayer to Jesus is disallowed. "Better safe than sorry"(that is, better not pray to Jesus, lest we suffer the consequences of doing so[that is, if there are any in the first place]) should not, by any means, be the default position to take when we have every reason to think that prayer to Jesus is allowed and no reason at all to think it isn't.

This definition also automatically forbids προσεύχομαι to anyone else BUT God or Jesus, as it pertains to faith and worship, and we are commanded to worship and put faith solely in God and Jesus, and not in anyone else(as they are the only ones who can bring salvation).

Psalm 146:3 "Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help." (KJV) And of course, Revelation 22:8-9 "I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw them, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed them to me, 9 but he said to me, “You must not do that! I am a fellow servant with you and your brothers the prophets, and with those who keep the words of this book. Worship God." (ESV) If we, imperfect lowly dust creatures, are not even allowed to worship a righteous, perfect spirit angel, then I think it's safe to say we cannot worship anyone but Jesus and God. And because of that fact(as well as the fact that we are commanded to worship/put faith in Jesus), the only reasonable conclusion to reach is that prayer to Jesus must be, at the very, very least, allowed(at the most, highly encouraged).

But I know what some of you out there are saying... Why doesn't the Bible ever give a command to us to pray to Jesus? Well, first of all, you shouldn't need a command to do something to know that it's not forbidden by God to do it. I honestly don't know what kind of logic that is. "God never commanded us to pray to His Son, therefore we cannot pray to His Son." Not a very airtight argument, if I may. But there are two reasons for that, anyway. I've basically already mentioned them, but I just want to reiterate in the most clear way possible.

(1) It's not a requirement to pray to Jesus, and a command to do so would indicate that it is. It all depends on the person's conscience. If someone feels comforted when they pray to Jesus, then they feel comforted when they pray to Jesus. But not everyone is the same. Someone may feel better praying to the Father, because they have a closer relationship with Him. No one says that's wrong, do they? And do you think either kind of person should tell the other only their way of praying is permitted?

(2) God's purpose is not that we are required to pray to His son, but it is His purpose that we are allowed and encouraged to do so. Why is this true? Well, we are commanded(by God) to worship Jesus and put faith in him, no doubt about that. And προσεύχομαι IS a means by which we do just that! If worship and faith in the Son are required, then a corollary is that prayer, which is a form of worship and faith, is, at the very least, allowed. But, why isn't it commanded, you ask? Well, simple; it's not the only way we can fulfil the command by God to put faith in and worship Jesus. If it was, then it follows that prayer to Jesus is a requirement. I mean, if God commands us to worship and put faith in the Son, and tells us prayer to him is the only way to obey that command, then prayer to Jesus is a command. Simple logic. But, of course, prayer's not the only way one can worship/put faith in Jesus, therefore prayer to Jesus is not a requirement. And, on top of that, it's never a requirement, because it's literally impossible to even start to pray to Jesus without already having faith in/worshipping him. To even think of praying to Jesus requires that you trust that he's watching, listening, and cares about you. It's impossible to pray to Jesus without already having faith in/worshipping Jesus in some way, shape, or form. Therefore, prayer to Jesus is never required, and if it's never required then it wouldn't make sense for there to be a command from God to do so. Does that mean prohibited from praying to Jesus? No, of course not. Once again, that sort of logic doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and such a conclusion is made obsolete because of everything else I mentioned before this.

And to drive the nail into the coffin, I'm going to give two examples of righteous men in the Bible praying to Jesus; Stephen and Paul.

Let us examine Acts 7:59;.
"And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”" The word used here for "call" in Greek is the word ἐπικαλέω(G1941). Here's what BibleHub.com says about its usage: "(a) I call (name) by a supplementary (additional, alternative) name, (b) mid: I call upon, appeal to, address." Hmmm, this word seems like an "everyday word." Ok, pause; before I move on, I want to address some objections I've heard before. And I'm going to show why both of these objections are entirely nonsensical.

Here they are;
(1) the words used here are not the word for prayer(προσεύχομαι) and do not mean the same thing as προσεύχομαι, but are "everyday words" so the situation must be an "everyday situation" and not prayer(isn't prayer itself an everyday thing though?).
(2) unless the word that's usually translated as prayer, προσεύχομαι, is used, the situation cannot be referring to a prayer.

So, to start off, I'll say that there is no such thing as an "everyday word." There are words that can be used in everyday situations, but there's no such thing as an everyday word(if by that you mean, a word that can only ever be used in an everyday situation). I've heard it said(for some reason) that if a word can be used/is generally used in an everyday situation, every other situation using that word must also be an everyday situation. This is sophistry on another level and I will illustrate why with two examples. The verb in the sentence, "I'm cooking an omelet," is "cooking." The verb in the sentence, "I'm cooking my husband," is also "cooking." Since the verb was used in an everyday situation in the first sentence, it must have been used in an everyday situation in the second, right? That's where the logic would have to take you. I can assure you though, that cooking a person is not the same situation as cooking an omelet, notwithstanding the fact that the same word(cooking) is used in both situations. Here's another example. Here are two sentences: "I climbed onto my bed," and "I climbed to the top of Mt. Everest." Same word? Different situations. The same verb doesn't even mean the same thing in both situations. In the first, when I said "climbed," I meant "hopped." I didn't climb so much as I hopped(and yet you'd say my statement was perfectly reasonable, right?). In the second sentence, I was mountaineering. I hope I have shown why objection no. 1 is complete nonsense.

Now for objection no. 2. Say someone broke into my house, and I say to the police officer who came after, "A man broke into my house." And then the police officer tells me, "So what's the problem?" And I tell him, "Um, sir, the man committed burglary." And he tells me, "No he didn't, because that's not what you said. You said that he broke into your house. The word 'burglary' was not used, therefore it's not a burglary. Take care, and have a good day sir." If a situation like that happened, my mouth would be dropped to the floor for the rest of the day. I'd be saying to myself, "What kind of insane logic is this police officer using?" Hey, you know what, I can go back to my first example and kill two birds with one stone. The wife who said she cooked her husband(who is a human being), killed her husband so she could cook him, right? So, one would say she commited murder. "But the word murder was not used, therefore it wasn't a murder!" No, course not, right?

When the description of an event corresponds with the denotation of a word, it wouldn't be inaccurate at all to describe the event using that word(even if at first you don't). The same is true for synonyms of words. The definition of muder is, "the crime of deliberately killing a person." The wife deliberately killed her husband and made him into a soup. Therefore, one can say she murdered her husband. The definition of "burglary" is "the entering of a building with the intent to commit a crime," and the man in the first example illegally broke into my house, therefore he committed burglary. Simple, right? Am I crazy for spending this much time on this? Yes. But this objection was raised before(multiple times), so I wanted to clarify as clearly as possible why this objection is completely ridiculous, and I hope I have done so. Since I have, I'm not going to bring up this subject once more for the rest of this treatise.

Let's now return to ἐπικαλέω(G1941). Here's Strong's Concordance on ἐπικαλέω;
"Appeal unto, call on, invoke. Middle voice from epi and kaleo; to entitle; by implication, to invoke (for aid, worship, testimony, decision, etc.) -- appeal (unto), call (on, upon), surname."
"Invoke"... Sound familiar? How about "worship." How about "appeal."

Here is what Thayer's Greek Lexicon says about this word;
"5. Hebraistically (like יְהוָה בְּשֵׁם קָרָא to call upon by pronouncing the name of Jehovah, Genesis 4:26; Genesis 12:8; 2 Kings 5:11, etc.; cf. Gesenius, Thesaurus, p. 1231{b} (or his Hebrew Lexicon, under the word קָרָא); an expression finding its explanation in the fact that prayers addressed to God ordinarily began with an invocation of the divine name: Psalm 3:2; Psalm 6:2; Psalm 7:2, etc.) ἐπικαλοῦμαι τό ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου, I call upon (on my behalf) the name of the Lord, i. e. to invoke, adore, worship, the Lord, i. e. Christ: Acts 2:21 (from Joel 2:32 ()); ; Romans 10:13; 1 Corinthians 1:2; τόν κύριον, Romans 10:12; 2 Timothy 2:22; (often in Greek writings ἐπικαλεῖσθαι τούς Θεούς, as Xenophon, Cyril 7, 1, 35; Plato, Tim., p. 27 c.; Polybius 15, 1, 13)."
The word means literally, "to call upon," and it's a word that can and IS used in everyday situations. Once again, this does not mean it can only be used in regular situations. It can also be used in relation to a God/a god(to invoke them), and thus carries notions of worship, adoration, supplication/petition. Starting to remind you of any word? This is starting to look a lot like προσεύχομαι... That's because it is. No, not that the word ἐπικαλέω is the same as προσεύχομαι. προσεύχομαι means literally "to pray," and ἐπικαλέω means literally "to call upon." They don't literally mean the same thing; but they can be used in similar situations where they do mean the same thing. When both are used in relation to a deity, they mean practically the same thing.

Well, duh! That's pretty obvious. The definition of prayer is, "an address (such as a petition) to God or a god in word or thought." And Stephen did just that; "And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." He addressed Jesus, who is God/a god. And it doesn't matter that the scripture didn't use the main word for prayer to describe the situation, because the situation is already that of prayer. When the description of an event corresponds with the denotation of a word, it wouldn't be inaccurate at all to describe the event using that word. The description of the event with Stephen, that he talked to/called out to Jesus, matches with the meaning of prayer(to talk to a deity, of which Jesus is). Ergo, in this situation Stephen was προσεύχομαι to Jesus(even though it doesn't say that, the description of the event matches the exact definition of the word). Not all calls are prayers, and not all prayers are calls; but some calls are prayers, and some prayers are calls. Both prayers and calls are sets, that are subsets of the set of communication, and an intersection happens between the sets when an element is part of BOTH sets. How does that happen? When the element fulfils the requirements for being a part of both sets. The element can then be rightly called either of the two. A call on a deity matches the definition of a prayer, so in such a situation you would be praying to the deity. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure any of this out.

Now, we could examine Acts 7:60 as well, but we'd reach the exact same conclusion as we did just now. So I'll move on to the example of Paul(where we shall easily reach the same conclusion as well).

This is 2 Corinthians 12:8;
"Concerning this thing I pleaded with the Lord three times that it might depart from me." The word here used for "pleaded" in Greek is, παρακαλέω(G3870).
Here's Strong's Concordance for παρακαλέω;
"beseech, call for, urge. From para and kaleo; to call near, i.e. Invite, invoke (by imploration, hortation or consolation) -- beseech, call for, (be of good) comfort, desire, (give) exhort(-ation), intreat, pray."
And here is what Thayer's Greek Lexicon says about it;
"II. to address, speak to (call to, call on), which may be done in the way of exhortation, entreaty, comfort, instruction, etc.; hence, result a variety of senses, on which see Knapp, Scripto varii arg. edition 2, p. 117ff; cf. Fritzsche, Ep. ad Romans, i., p. 32f."
So, it means to talk to/address, as well as to call upon and invoke. Yes, once again, the same situation with ἐπικαλέω and προσεύχομαι. Paul was praying to Jesus, just as Stephen was...

So, in conclusion:
Taking everything I have written/research into consideration, by far the most reasonable verdict is that prayer to Jesus NOT forbidden, never a requirement, but always (at the very least) allowed(as well as encouraged). I hope this helps someone! Have a beautiful day to whoever made it this far down to read this(you deserve a medal?).

Agape! ;)
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-24 18:17:09
  If you're going to leave a dislike, please reply and tell me why so I can improve upon what I've written. I spent a lot of time on this, and I genuinely appreciate receiving constructive criticism. If you have any, please, please comment them.
  
  Was it my weird as heck examples? Yes, they were weird, but they got the point across, right?
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-24 20:38:02
  Hmmmm. I see. So, basically, this comment disturbs you because you know I'm right and have nothing to say in return. Dislike this comment for, "Yes, you are right." Don't dislike this comment and actually reply to me(for once) for, "No, you are wrong."
  
  Only time will tell...
- Reply by Fani on 2021-12-25 04:13:51
  Pour ma part je n'ai mis ni un + ni un -.
  Je voulais juste dire que vous aviez déjà très largement commenté votre opinion.
  Il arrive un moment, après avoir donné ses arguments, où il faut cesser de vouloir absolument que les personnes adoptent nos conclusions.
  "Il y a un moment pour parler et un moment pour se taire."
  
  Vos arguments et références sont très intéressants et je pense que nous avons compris.
  
  J'ai trouvé ce dernier développement fatigant car pour moi c'est une redite.
  
  Fraternellement
  Nicole
  - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-25 13:03:17
    Il arrive un moment, après avoir donné ses arguments, où il faut cesser de vouloir absolument que les personnes adoptent nos conclusions.
    I'm not trying to get anyone to adopt my conclusions. I'm trying to get the people who dislike my conclusion to reply to me and tell me why exactly they dislike it. Trying to get a response from people is not the same as trying to force people to agree with me. Either way, I'm fine. If no one can reply and tell me why they dislike my arguments despite me inviting them to on several occasions, but just keep on disliking them, that can only mean one thing; that my arguments are solid and my reasoning, airtight.
    
    What else could it mean? "Oh... He's kindly inviting me to share my criticism? Well, I have very good criticism, and in just a few minutes time I can comment and share it with him, as well as everyone else... but I'll just dislike all his comments and do absolutely nothing else instead." And then 4 different people all did this exact thing? That's preposterous, to say the least.
    
    Ok, take care, sister Fani! :) I hope you have a beautiful day. :D

Comment by Ilja Hartsenko on 2021-12-25 07:17:41
Hi Eric,
Thank you for another good video.
In the text (and in the video) you made a mistake:). There must be a 2 Corinthians 5:20, you have 2:20.

Quote from the text:
“Those men now claim to be God’s channel of communication. They audaciously claim to be substitutes for Christ as we see in their 2017 version of the NWT at 2 Cor 2: 20.

“Therefore, we are ambassadors substituting for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us. As substitutes for Christ, we beg: “Become reconciled to God.””
- Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-25 18:00:00
  Ahh! Thank you so much for this. :)
  - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-25 22:57:25
    I
  - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-25 23:06:35
    can anyone

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-25 23:06:04
Hello, everyone. Please allow me to impart my sincerest apologies to everyone I've (most likely) offended due to the sarcastic, humorous, provoking, and irritable impression I give off. That is entirely on me, and so I'm deeply sorry for that.

I'm sorry vitisbp.

I'm sorry Bamba64

I'm sorry wish4truth2

I'm very sorry just wondering.

I'm very, very sorry Aleks Kristiani

I'd appreciate it more than anything else if everyone could find it in their hearts to forgive me. If not, that is ok. Have a fantastic day, my brothers! :)

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-26 07:40:27
Hello, everyone. Please allow me to impart my sincerest apologies to everyone I've (most likely) offended due to the sarcastic, humorous, provoking, and irritable impression I've been giving off. That is entirely on me; no excuses. So I'm deeply, deeply sorry for that.

I'm sorry vitisbp.
I'm sorry Fani
I'm sorry Frankie
I'm sorry Bamba64
I'm sorry wish4truth2
I'm very sorry just wondering.
And I'm very sorry Aleks Kristiani

I'd appreciate it more than anything else if everyone could find it in their hearts to forgive me. If not, that is ok, I understand. Have a fantastic day, my brothers! ?

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-26 07:56:24
Hello, everyone. Please allow me to impart my sincerest apologies to everyone I've (most likely) offended due to the sarcastic, humorous, provoking, and irritable impression I've been giving off. That is entirely on me; no excuses. So I'm deeply, deeply sorry for that.

I'm sorry vitisbp.
I'm sorry Fani
I'm sorry Frankie
I'm sorry Bamba64
I'm sorry wish4truth2
I'm very sorry just wondering.
And I'm very sorry Aleks Kristiani

I'd appreciate it more than anything else if everyone could find it in their hearts to forgive me. If not, that is ok, I understand. Have a fantastic day, my brothers! ?
- Reply by Fani on 2021-12-26 15:28:30
  Personnellement tu ne m'as pas offensée, donc je ne vois pas ce que je dois te pardonner.
  J'ai juste partagé mon sentiment, mon impression en lisant tes nombreux commentaires et en particulier le dernier.
  
  Nous allons tous essayer de garder notre franchise tout en faisant attention à la sensibilité, parfois à la susceptibilité de chacun.
  Comme disait Paul ,: "supportez vous les uns les autres". Colossiens 3 : 13
  
  Ne faisons pas le jeu de Satan qui veut nous diviser.
  Préservons ce site. Nous en avons tellement besoin. Nous avons dû nous taire pendant si longtemps ! La parole est un bien précieux, apprenons à la manier habilement (j'ai beaucoup de progrès à faire dans ce domaine).
  
  Fraternellement
  Nicole
  - Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-26 19:34:18
    Ne faisons pas le jeu de Satan qui veut nous diviser.
    Préservons ce site. Nous en avons tellement besoin. Nous avons dû nous taire pendant si longtemps ! La parole est un bien précieux, apprenons à la manier habilement (j’ai beaucoup de progrès à faire dans ce domaine).
    I couldn't agree more with you, my sister. :D

Comment by vitisbp on 2021-12-29 13:05:48
Rajeshsony, You are not my brother. You are a troll. Get away from me.

Comment by Slepajula on 2022-01-16 04:30:31
DZIĘKUJĘ, JAKOŚ UMKNĄŁ MI TEN 2012 ROK.. Tylko moja intuicja mi mówił, że coś jest nie tak.

Comment by Ralf on 2022-05-14 11:57:07
[Meleti Vivlon] This is where people get mixed up. They can’t resolve how it can be possible to worship both Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. The Bible says you cannot serve two masters, so wouldn’t worshipping Jesus and Jehovah be like trying to serve two masters? Jesus told the Devil to only worship [proskuneó] God, so how could he accept worship himself. A Trinitarian will get around this by saying that it works because Jesus is God. Really? Then why doesn’t the Bible tell us to worship the holy spirit as well? No, there is a much simpler explanation. When God tells us not to worship any other gods except him, who decides what it means to worship God? The worshipper? No, God decides how he is to be worshipped. What the Father expects from us is total submission. Now, if I agree to totally submit to my Heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and he then tells me to totally submit to his Son, Jesus Christ, am I going to say, “Sorry, God. Can’t do that. I’m only going to submit to you?” Can we see how ridiculous such a stance would be? Jehovah is saying, “I want you to submit to me through my Son. To obey him is to obey me.”

[Ralf] How can the Father reserve worship and glory for Himself alone, and then give it to another? Doesn't that sound like the Father is contradicting Himself?

The reason there is no instruction to worship the Spirit, is no different than the reason you give for why you worship Jesus. You are obeying God. The Father instructs the one the worship of Jesus, but not the worship of the Spirit. So you are placing yourself in the position of interpreting the Father's absence of instruction to worship the Spirit to mean the Spirit isn't divine. But that is an argument from silence. There are no bible verses that say the Spirit isn't divine. What is in the bible are verses that refer to the Spirit as God, and all of scripture depicts the Spirit in service to the Father and Jesus. That we can know.

We also know the verses that say that God does not share His glory with anyone. When Jesus told Satan, you are to worship only God, He wasn't denying His divinity. When He told the young man, "why do you call me good, only God is good" He wasn't denying His divinity. In fact, since He alone is good, He was essentially saying "I and the Father are one", and that He was God. The young man's failure was that He didn't recognize God in the flesh right there within arms reach.

People must use reason to remove from Jesus His divinity when they read these verses, adding a meaning that isn't in the texts. The verses themselves don't say Jesus isn't divine. But the bible has verses that say Jesus is God. They show that God isn't inconsistent when He says He shares His glory with no one else, while Jesus also shares the throne of God, receives glory and is worshiped.

[Meleti Vivlon] Now if you think I’m targeting only Jehovah’s Witnesses, you are wrong. If you’re a Catholic, or Mormon, or an evangelist, or any other Christian faith, and you are content in the belief that you are worshiping Jesus, I ask you to take a hard look at your form of worship. Do you pray to Jesus? Do you praise Jesus? Do you preach Jesus? That is all well and good, but that’s not worship. Remember what the word means. To bow down and kiss the earth; in other words, to fully submit to Jesus. If your church tells you it’s okay to bow down before a statute and pray to that statute, that idol, do you obey your church? Because the Bible tells us to flee from idolatry in all its forms. That’s Jesus talking. Does your church tell you to get fully involved in politics? Because Jesus tells us to be no part of the world. Does your church tell you it’s okay to take up arms and kill fellow Christians who happen to be on the other side of the border? Because Jesus tells us to love our brothers and sisters and those living by the sword will die by the sword.

Worshiping Jesus, unconditional obedience to him, is hard, because it puts us at odds with the world, even the world that calls itself Christian.

[Ralf] I am pleased to say I believe my church passes your test. No statue worship, no Pope or equivalent, the teaching is discussed and challenged in bible studies and one on one conversations with the pastors. The bible is the authority for settling any disagreements. We don't cast out those who disagree unless they disagree on essential doctrines. Even then, only after a process is followed which is intended to correct errors. And even after that, they remain welcome at church, though excluded from the sacraments. But discipline is for restoration, not punishment. We don't preach or teach politics. Individual members make such decisions for themselves.

No Christian is perfect, and no church is either. No one is going to succeed in unconditional obedience. But our inability doesn't release us from God's command for such obedience.

Ralf
- Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-14 14:38:48
  [Ralf] How can the Father reserve worship and glory for Himself alone, and then give it to another? Doesn’t that sound like the Father is contradicting Himself?
  
  [Eric] I explained the answer to that question in the preceding paragraph. If you can't grasp it, I don't know what else I can say to explain it to you so that you see there is no contradiction.
  
  As for the rest of what you wrote, thank you for sharing your opinions, but since there is no scriptural basis backing them up, I have nothing more to add, as I am loathe to engage in a discussion based on opinions of men.
  - Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-14 15:52:08
    I just didn't take the time to get them all. So I will do that and get back to you. But it's kinda like Thomas saying "my Lord and my God". But I'll show where my opinions have come from my reading of scripture.
    
    As for churches who are worshiping wrongly, none are going to be perfect. As for individuals worshiping perfectly, none are going to be perfect. That's why we need a savior. A savior whose sacrifice on our behalf was of such value that it could pay for the sins of all humanity. A man who somehow managed to live a perfect life would earn paradise for himself. Not someone else. If he sacrificed his perfect life for another, then one person would benefit in his place. When we worship Jesus, we aren't worshiping a man alone, though we are worshiping the man Jesus.
  - Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-17 14:03:31
    I do appreciate these conversations. Thank you for your patience with me.
    
    [Meleti Vivlon] This is where people get mixed up. They can’t resolve how it can be possible to worship both Jehovah God and Jesus Christ. The Bible says you cannot serve two masters, so wouldn’t worshipping Jesus and Jehovah be like trying to serve two masters? Jesus told the Devil to only worship [proskuneó] God, so how could he accept worship himself. A Trinitarian will get around this by saying that it works because Jesus is God. Really? Then why doesn’t the Bible tell us to worship the holy spirit as well?
    
    [Ralf] Why is it necessary for Jehovah to command worship of the Holy Spirit? The fact that He doesn't, tells us nothing about the Spirit, and there is no bible text saying the Spirit doesn't deserve worship. We do know the Spirit is the Spirit of the Father (Matt 10:20, Lk 11:13, John 14:26, Gal 4:6, Phil 1:19), and the Spirit is personified throughout the bible.
    
    [Meleti Vivlon] No, there is a much simpler explanation. When God tells us not to worship any other gods except him, who decides what it means to worship God? The worshipper? No, God decides how he is to be worshipped. What the Father expects from us is total submission. Now, if I agree to totally submit to my Heavenly Father, Jehovah God, and he then tells me to totally submit to his Son, Jesus Christ, am I going to say, “Sorry, God. Can’t do that. I’m only going to submit to you?” Can we see how ridiculous such a stance would be? Jehovah is saying, “I want you to submit to me through my Son. To obey him is to obey me.”
    
    [Ralf] I would never want to willfully disobey Jehovah, or Jesus. You argue that Jehovah God commands worship of a human being as a way to worship Him. But to do so is to disobey Jehovah's earlier commands. Jehovah says He gives His glory to no others. Isa. 42:8 "I am the Lord; that is my name; my glory I give to no other, nor my praise to carved idols." Isaiah 48:11 " . . . My glory I will not give to another." Jehovah tells us we are to have no other Gods or gods. I think that command would include not worshiping any other gods. We know from Deut 6:4 that there is only one God. In Matthew 4:10, it reads, "Then Jesus said to him, “Be gone, Satan! For it is written, “‘You shall worship the Lord your God and him only shall you serve.’” Jesus is just re-stating the commandment from Deut 5:7 and Exod 20:3. Worship and serve only God. So is this a command meant only for Satan, or for everyone? And after reiterating this command of God, Jesus then turns around later in his life and allows it to be broken by accepting worship? (i.e. Matt 14:33, 28:9, 28:17)
    
    That worshiping Jesus isn't breaking Jehovah's commands tells us something about Jesus, that He is worthy of worship. Does a Holy God ask His people to worship someone not worthy of worship? Especially if the worship He expects to be given that human being is worship worthy of Him(Jehovah God). The reason I can't grasp your explanation for how God could call for worship of Jesus as a way to worship Him, is because you believe Jesus was only a human being like you or I when he was receiving that worship. No mere human being is worthy of such.
    
    Jesus accepts the titles "Lord" and "God" from Thomas, (John 20:28-29) and even commends those of us who will likewise believe Him deserving of the titles in the future even though we don't have Thomas' great benefit of seeing Jesus in person after His resurrection. (John 10:38) He says the Father is in Him and He is in the Father. Colossians 2:9 states that in Jesus dwells all the fulness of divinity, bodily. In Revelation 15:3-4, a song is sung to the Lamb (Jesus) who is identified as Lord God the almighty and receives glory and worship. And Exodus 34:14 says that worship is reserved only for the one true God. In the Book of Revelation, Jesus is given the same titles as God, "Alpha and Omega" and "Beginning and the End".
    
    If you can't see that this is scriptural evidence of Jesus' shared nature with Jehovah, then you must accept that Jehovah gives commands that He later changes. If that's true, He sounds like the Jehovah of Watchtower and not the Jehovah of the bible.
    
    [Meleti Vivlon] Now if you think I’m targeting only Jehovah’s Witnesses, you are wrong. If you’re a Catholic, or Mormon, or an evangelist, or any other Christian faith, and you are content in the belief that you are worshiping Jesus, I ask you to take a hard look at your form of worship.
    
    [Ralf] I agree with you in that whenever we obey a teacher or pastor, we are worshiping the man if we consider the man's teaching to be authoritative. But if we obey the man's teaching/preaching because we can test it against God's word and see that it is truth, then we are grateful to have a faithful pastor but we worship God by striving to obey His instructions given through a man/pastor.
    
    Ralf
    - Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-17 15:35:32
      Ralf, If Jehovah tells you to unconditionally obey Jesus, would you unconditionally obey Jesus?
      - Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-18 10:38:49
        Matthew 5:48. To the best of my ability. I am trying to do so every day. I fail, but repent as best I can and resume striving to obey.
        
        How are you doing at it?
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-18 11:48:58
        I was using "you" in a generic sense. It is none of my business how you choose personally to obey Jesus. I was only trying to establish a common ground from which to reason.
        
        The point is that if Jehovah tells us to proskuneo Jesus--that is submit to Jesus--he is not violating his rule of sharing his glory with another god, because that rule was given within the context of rival gods which the Israelites were submitting to (worshipping). Would you agree with me on that understanding?
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-18 23:01:20
        I can agree that the context of the revelation when given was in reaction to the people's adultery of following other gods. It don't see that changes the command to have no other gods, and that if Jesus is just a man, he would be just as subject to that command and could not accept worship.
        
        I find Jesus to be divine in almost every chapter of every book of the bible, and I see him as fully human as well. Without that understanding, I find the bible to be contradictory.
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-19 07:46:50
        Putting aside for the moment the account where Jesus accepted proskuneo while still a man, you haven't acknowledged agreement, or disagreement, with my stated understanding that "if Jehovah tells us to proskuneo Jesus–that is submit to Jesus–he is not violating his rule of sharing his glory with another god".
        
        Jehovah didn't want the Israelites worshipping other gods. Worship (proskuneo) represents being submissive to God, that is to obey his commands. Are you saying that if Jehovah decides that the way to submit to him (worship him) is to submit to his son, that he is violating his rule as you understand it?
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-19 14:14:53
        We obviously see things very differently and draw different conclusion from the same Bible evidence. Since we have no common ground, further discussion will be fruitless.
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-22 22:07:14
        Jehovah isn't violating His requirement of worshiping Him only when He commands worship of Jesus, because the only reason He isn't violating it is that Jesus is God just as Jehovah is. Different persons, and the same nature.
        
        We do have different understandings of scripture. You've pointed out in multiple places that the only way to understand the bible correctly is by the guiding of the Holy Spirit. One of has that guidance, and one of us doesn't.
        
        And I can't put aside even for a moment, the fact that Jesus accepted worship during His earthly ministry because all of scripture is important (2 Tim 3:16).
        
        If you prefer to end our discussion, I will respect that. If you would prefer I cease to respond to any posts on Beroean Pickets, I will respect that as well. I appreciate the interaction we have had. But do let me know, or I will continue to read and respond when I feel it's useful.
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-23 10:04:13
        "because the only reason He isn’t violating it is that Jesus is God just as Jehovah is. Different persons, and the same nature."
        
        But Jesus isn't God, so your logic fails because it is based on a falsehood.
        
        You cannot separate a person from his nature. Your reasoning is based on a fallacy. To say that God's nature is God is like saying that Ralf's nature is Ralf.
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-05-26 14:53:24
        As you have said to me, I don't really give any consideration to an opinion, unless you have scripture to prove it correct.
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-05-26 19:27:48
        So you know and agree that an opinion not supported in Scripture is without value. Yet you state that Jesus is God though you provide no proof, which is understandable since there is no proof. Yet when I do the same you find fault. Seems a little hypocritical to me. So let's do this. You are free to comment, but only bible facts, no personal opinions and certainly no false Babylonish teachings. Can we agree on that?
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-06-16 10:05:10
        I agree that opinions without scriptural backing are not very helpful. We read the same bible, and you claim there is no proof of Jesus being God. I find scripture that indicates Jesus is God. I and centuries and centuries of people see Jesus is God based on scripture. How many people on the planet, excluding JWs who we know are unbiblical, agree with you concerning Jesus not being God? Of course, truth isn't arrived at by democratic means. Yet, volumes of scholarly study would agree with me.
        
        So here is my scriptural backing that I've already shared several times. If you find it's not biblical proof, I can only assume that you are kinda like the pope and the Governing Body of Anointed Elders, deciding the proper understanding of God's word.
        
        John 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God."
        Jesus plainly states that they are united in essence/nature. Not just united in will and purpose. John 10:30 "30 I and the Father are one."
        Jesus receives honor only deserved by God. John 20:28, Phil 2:9-11.
        Jesus is called God. Heb 1:8 "8 But regarding the Son He says, “Your throne, God, is forever and ever, And the scepter of righteousness is the scepter of His kingdom.", Titus 2:13 "13 looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus," Rom 9:5 " 5 whose are the fathers, and from whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen." John 20:28 "28 Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!”
        
        There are more. Most everyone who denies Jesus' divinity, don't get the dual natures of Jesus. Verses used to demonstrate Jesus isn't divine would only do so if there weren't also verses which reveal His divinity. He has to be both God and man in order for his mission as Messiah to save us from the wrath all our sins deserve. To deny the necessity of His divinity and relegate Him as only a man/creature leaves us still needing to earn eternity by achieving perfection. To anyone who believes that is necessary, I can only say "good luck", and my heart hurts for them.
        
        If my scripture references don't live up to your standards, I suppose that means I'm not free to post here anymore. Though it would be nice to know what other conclusions are at when reading these bible verses.
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-06-18 21:48:14
        I thought that I had responded to this post, but I suspect that operator (me) error must have messed up and failed to get my response posted.
        
        Yes I agree that opinion is of little value if it can't be backed up by scripture. I believe I have provided plenty of scriptural references to support my belief that Jesus is divine. So I'll repeat my bible verses:
        
        Matthew 1:23 & Isaiah 7:14. Immanuel, God with us.
        
        John 1:1. The Word was with God and the Word was God.
        
        Colossians 2:9. The fullness of deity dwells in Jesus.
        
        Hebrews 1:8 & John 20:28 & Titus 2:13 & Romans 9:5. Jesus is identified as God.
        
        Matthew 28:19. Jesus instructs baptism be done in the name (singular) of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
        
        There are many more portions of God's word that demonstrate Jesus is God. In fact, I find it throughout the bible.
        
        I find it amazing whenever someone understands portions of the bible very differently than I do. I'm sure those who disagree with me think the same thing, including you. But if I had only John 1:1, I'd have to accept that Jesus is God.
        
        Ralf
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-07-23 20:51:03
        Hi Ralf,
        
        Do you accept that Isaiah 9:6 proves that Jesus is God?
        
        eric
        Reply by Ralf on 2022-07-24 16:27:38
        Hey Eric,
        
        I believe Is 9:6 is describing and predicting the Messiah.
        
        Ralf
        Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2022-08-27 10:14:30
        Correct. How is it then that he, God the Son, is called "Everlasting Father"?

Jehovah’s Witnesses Say it is Wrong to Worship Jesus, but Are Happy to Worship Men

Archived Comments

Comment by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 10:37:53

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-15 20:27:25

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 11:16:45

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 12:29:11

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 14:16:27

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:03:52

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 15:37:26

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:46:37

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-14 16:04:39

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 16:35:41

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:50:45

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:51:32

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 16:02:09

Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:28:23

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 00:18:45

Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-20 11:01:51

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 11:28:36

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 15:22:56

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 08:34:49

Comment by Mike West on 2021-12-14 12:15:53

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-15 20:23:50

Comment by Fani on 2021-12-14 17:03:51

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 17:19:53

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 17:23:09

Comment by yobec on 2021-12-14 17:59:00

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 18:30:04

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 19:22:42

Reply by yobec on 2021-12-14 22:12:35

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 23:08:28

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-14 19:10:43

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 09:28:52

Comment by Leonardo Josephus on 2021-12-15 05:04:21

Comment by Zacheus on 2021-12-15 07:32:55

Comment by rusticshore on 2021-12-16 07:03:12

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 07:28:49

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:36:29

Reply by Maria on 2021-12-18 04:32:53

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:49:42

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:53:21

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:01:40

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:06:14

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:09:29

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:52:48

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 14:12:21

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:31:27

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:37:06

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:40:11

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:47:20

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:48:06

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 14:43:03

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:44:19

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:45:19

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:46:59

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 14:43:13

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:46:31

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 14:34:48

Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:19:25

Comment by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 07:33:41

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 11:51:59

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:06:27

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:28:08

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:33:02

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:37:45

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:53:37

Reply by Bamba64 on 2021-12-19 16:37:33

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-19 23:48:31

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-20 00:07:36

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 12:41:26

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:52:03

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:06:39

Reply by Aleks Kristiani on 2021-12-16 13:13:06

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:26:06

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 13:39:24

Reply by Meleti Vivlon on 2021-12-16 13:50:22

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 12:28:48

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 15:00:05

Comment by James Mansoor on 2021-12-16 18:24:28

Reply by rajeshsony on 2021-12-16 19:25:54