4057 Shares

A quick question for Jehova's Witness. Who is Jesus to you? Is he God the Son? As it says in John, Jesus is the Word and the Word is God.?

A quick question for Jehova's Witness. Who is Jesus to you? Is he God the Son? As it says in John, Jesus is the Word and the Word is God.? Topic: Thesis index
June 20, 2019 / By Lynda
Question: Do you believe that Jesus died for man kind and resurrected on the 3rd day. Do you believe that he is the only way to salvation and is a part of the Trinity, God the Son? If you do not then don't classify your self as a Christian, because Christian literally means the follower of Christ. @ Uncle Thesis https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index... Have a look at the best answer on this question, it is rather in depth but he proves a point. JW definition of Jesus is incorrect. @Steph Amen, Thanks for the explanation.
Best Answer

Best Answers: A quick question for Jehova's Witness. Who is Jesus to you? Is he God the Son? As it says in John, Jesus is the Word and the Word is God.?

Kaylie Kaylie | 9 days ago
Jesus to them is Michael the archangel. He really isn't much more than an afterthought. They kinda kick Him to the curb and are all about 'Jehovah' who they think is the Father. They think they can use their organization and their leaders in NY to go straight to the Father and just skip over Jesus. Their Bible, the New World Translation, has been extensively rewritten to try to remove the deity of Christ and make Him into a created being. John 1:1 in their bible says, "...and the Word was a god". You can still show them the deity of Christ in the NWT, especially comparing OT to NT like Heb. 1:10-12/Psalm 102:24-27...but they won't listen. They preach a false gospel that should be rejected. They don't even know the real gospel. They believe Jesus died to make up for Adam's sin, but they have to die a physical death to pay for their own personal sins and they are not acquitted of sin until they die. They do not believe Jesus was bodily resurrected. They believe Jesus, the man, is dead...forever dead...and He was resurrected as a spirit that then had to "manufacture" bodies so He could appear to people. They believe the Trinity and the cross are pagan teachings. They believe their organization is the only way to get salvation - that you have to be one of them to be saved. Their organization is called the "ark of salvation". They believe their NY leaders speak for God and they have to obey them...if they don't, they get kicked out and will lose salvation. Their salvation is based on works. A recent publication of theirs said, "Preaching is a requirement for our salvation". Hence the reason they go to so many meetings and knocking on doors. They have to earn their salvation...it's up to them. They believe only 144,000 go to heaven and everyone else will remain a flesh and blood human on earth that they will turn into a paradise like Eden. Jesus is not their Mediator. He is the Mediator for the 144,000 that are still alive. Everyone else has to go through the NY leaders and they are the Mediator for them to Jesus and then the Father. They say the Apostles were Jehovah's Witnesses and even that Jesus was a Jehovah's Witness. The Holy Spirit is an "active force"...a thing, like electricity. That's a little more than what they think of Jesus, but if you're a Christian, you can see how incredibly warped and contradictory their beliefs are.
👍 166 | 👎 9
Did you like the answer? A quick question for Jehova's Witness. Who is Jesus to you? Is he God the Son? As it says in John, Jesus is the Word and the Word is God.? Share with your friends

We found more questions related to the topic: Thesis index


Kaylie Originally Answered: Why did not John use the Greek word 'theios' if he wanted to communicate that Jesus was divine instead of God?
Very good question, Nina. It's quite simple for even NT Koine Greek students, let alone scholars. The word "theios" in the Koine Greek does indeed mean "divine" in the English, but it was apparently ONLY used to describe many of the popular deities of Greek mythology, as indicated by the Apostle Paul's usage of the word in his message to the Athenian philosophers at the Aeropagus in Acts 17:29. In addition, even the pagan Athenians in the Biblical account clearly didn't use this word to describe what was to them the "unknown God", the Creator of the universe Whom the Apostle Paul was about to introduce to them, as he did in Acts 17:24-30. Now, guess what word these Athenians actually did use to describe this unknown divine being? Yep, Luke recorded in Acts 17:23 that they used "theos" on an altar inscription, rather than the commonly used "theotais" meaning "deity" or "godhead", and that WITHOUT the Koine Greek article "ho" before it (meaning "the" in English), just as the Apostle John wrote in His description of Jesus in John 1:1b! And, of course, the Apostle John not only confirms in the context of chapter one of his gospel that Jesus, the Word, is this Creator God in the following verses (John 1:2-3), but just as the Apostle Paul inferred in Acts 17:30-31 to the Athenians, and statedly clearly in his many letters to the churches (Philippians 2:6; Colossians 2:9; Titus 1:3;2:13;3:4), John also clearly states that He is our Redeemer God too in that same chapter (John 1:14,16-18). No, the word "theos" without the article "the" in John 1:1b was chosen by the Apostle John because the Koine Greek word is in the predicate nominative position, for the sake of identifying Him as the Creator God, and NOT as being different in any way from our Creator. In order to clearly convey this meaning, just as in English grammar, the Apostle John utilizes this same grammatical rule which is also in the NT Koine Greek by dropping the article, for the purpose of describing the subject as being one and the same as its predicate, and of course vice versa as well. In other words, John was conveying to his readers in this verse that the Word that was with God in the beginning, is also God too. And, therefore, it is just as correct to translate, as some versions do, the Koine Greek into the English "...and God was the Word", rather than what is found in most credible English translations "...and the Word was God." Therefore, it is why the Apostle John did not choose to use the word "theios", else this would infer Him to be some kind of Greek mythological deity, among the many that were popular of that time period. Nor should we translate this word "theos" as "a god" in the English, as the Russellites do, as if He was some kind of demigod in the polytheistic sense, different from our Creator, for this very reason either. And, of course, the following verses (John 1:2-3) bear this out.

Huldah Huldah
Jesus is - The Son of God The Word of God The Savior The Ransomer The Redeemer The Firstborn of all creation The High Priest The Lamb The Archangel, Michael The Christ The Messiah The Mediator The Bridegroom The Prince of Peace The Mighty God The Wonderful Counselor The Everlasting Father The King of Kings The Lord of Lords The Only-begotten Son The Fine Shepherd The Son of Man The Bright Morning Star The Last Adam The Amen The Lion of the Tribe of Judah The Seed of Abraham The Faithful and True Witness The Beginning of the Creation by God The Way, The Truth, and The Life The Ruler of the kings of the earth The Judge of the living and the dead The First and the Last The Beloved The Chief Cornerstone The Root and the Offspring of David The Vine The Root of David The Image of God The Root of Jesse The Living Water The Wisdom of God The Head of the Congregation The Rock-mass The Perfecter of our faith The Apostle The Owner The Master ...and I'm sure I missed a few.
👍 60 | 👎 7

Edwena Edwena
A Christian is a follower of everyone except Jesus, I am a disciple, brethren, servant and follower of ONLY Jesus Christ. Jesus is the Son of man. The Christ is the Son of God. The Word is God the Father. The Christ is the Word in this world for the Christ brought the Word of God from heaven and gave it to the Prophets. Jesus was the Word made Flesh, the Christ became flesh and became the Living Word on Earth. Have you never read John 12:49-50 & John 17:8? .
👍 52 | 👎 5

Charlene Charlene
Jesus plainly stated that he was more than a good man. He said: “I am God’s Son.” (John 10:36) Of course, anyone could claim to be the Son of God. But if Jesus’ claim were false, what would that make him? Really, not a good man, but a great fraud! The most reliable testimony came from God himself. He twice said concerning Jesus: “This is my Son.” (Matthew 3:17; 17:5) Just think: The Scriptures report only a few occasions when God’s own voice was heard on earth yet on two of them he affirmed Jesus as his Son! This is by far the best proof that Jesus was who he said he was. Jesus never claimed to be God, but he repeatedly spoke of himself as “God’s Son.” Even his enemies acknowledged this. Jesus never even suggested that he was God or was equal to him. So to teach such a thing dishonors Jesus. When Jesus was a man on earth, did he know all that the future held? No, for he humbly acknowledged: “Concerning that day and hour nobody knows, neither the angels of the heavens nor the Son, but only the Father.” (Matt. 24:36) “When the writers of the New Testament speak of God they mean the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. When they speak of Jesus Christ, they do not speak of him, nor do they think of him as God. He is God’s Christ, God’s Son, God’s Wisdom, God’s Word.
👍 44 | 👎 3

Ariadne Ariadne
Hi We do teach that Jesus died for mankind and YES he was resurrected on the 3rd day.......The bible identifies Jesus as "Gods son" I have never found anywhere in the bible where it says, "God the son". In connection with John 1:1 I think you might need to understand a little Koine Greek when using John 1:1 as there is not indefinite article, that is the word "a" in ancient Greek, did you know that ? and so the use of the DEFINITE article (the Greek "ho") shows that John was explaining that Jesus was "a god" or as many translations say, "was godlike" or was "divine" ! Even the very trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the properinterpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: "a god was the Word". - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing. Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is "and a God[2] (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" - p. 54, (`New Covenant' section), Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing. Even Origen, the most knowledgeable of the early Christian Greek-speaking scholars, tells us that John 1:1c actually means "the Word [logos] was a god". - "Origen's Commentary on John," Book I, ch. 42 - Bk II, ch.3. W. E. Vine - "a god was the Word" - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of the New Testament. C. H. Dodd - "The Word was a god" - Technical Papers for the Bible Translator, Jan., 1977. Murray J. Harris - "the Word was a god" - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. Robert Young - "and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" - Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary. "and a god was the word." The Emphatic Diaglott, interlinear reading, by Benjamin Wilson. "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed. and a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" - Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary. "and the Word was divine." The Bible—An American Translation, by J. M. P. Smith and E. J. Goodspeed. In addition to their comments below, W. E. Vine, Prof. C. H. Dodd (Director of the New English Bible project), and Murray J. Harris admit that this ("the Word was a god") is the literal translation, but, being trinitarians, they insist that it be interpreted and translated as "and the Word was God." Why? BECAUSE OF A TRINITARIAN BIAS ONLY! I only mention this because so many people are being kept in the dark as to the Koine Greek and the fact that they never had an equivalent definite article (the word "a") Regards
👍 36 | 👎 1

Zalmon Zalmon
Jesus is the son of God .....not God the son. Colossians 1:15 indicates Jesus was created. FIRST BORN. Jesus is super important in God's dealings, but he is not God ALL-mighty. He never claimed to be God ALL-mighty. He said God was greater than him. John 14:28
👍 28 | 👎 -1

Sib Sib
. God himself plainly said who Jesus was. Matthew 3:13-17. We take God's word for who Jesus is. Do you? .
👍 20 | 👎 -3

Odran Odran
Well my mom is one of them or well was. They don't like to wear the cross necklace because she said it reminds people of the death he did. The word of Jesus can be interpreted in many different ways. It's just the perspective you get on people.
👍 12 | 👎 -5

Odran Originally Answered: Why do trinitarians use John 1:1 The word was God and John 1:14 to say the word became flesh but skip?
There is NO definite article in the old Greek ( the word "A" or "an") so the grammar would decide. So look at the context, the word (Jesus) was WITH GOD, how on earth does anyone make sense of such grammar as that, to be with someone and yet be them at the same time !!!! Trinitarian Moffatt's highly acclaimed New Translation of the Bible and (2) trinitarian Smith-Goodspeed's An American Translation both say that the Word "was divine. Even the very trinitarian Greek expert, W. E. Vine, (although, for obvious reasons, he chooses not to accept it as the proper interpretation) admits that the literal translation of John 1:1c is: "a god was the Word". - p. 490, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1983 printing. Trinitarian Dr. Robert Young admits that a more literal translation of John 1:1c is "and a God[2] (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" - p. 54, (`New Covenant' section), Young's Concise Critical Bible Commentary, Baker Book House, 1977 printing. Certainly a trinitarian scholar such as Dr. Young would interpret John 1:1c to mean "the Word was the true God" if he could honestly do so! Obviously he felt there was something wrong with that interpretation. Highly trinitarian NT scholar Murray J. Harris also admits that grammatically John 1:1c may be properly translated, `the Word was a god,' but his trinitarian bias makes him claim that "context" will not allow such an interpretation! - p. 60, Jesus as God, Baker Book House, 1992. Professor Jason David BeDuhn tells us, “Grammatically, John 1:1 is not a difficult verse to translate. It follows familiar, ordinary structures of Greek expression. A lexical (‘interlinear’) translation of the controversial clause would read: ‘And the Word was a god.’ A minimal literal (‘formal equivalence’) translation would rearrange the word order to match proper English expression: ‘And the Word was a god.’ The preponderance of evidence, from Greek grammar, from literary context, and from cultural environment, supports this translation….” - p. 132, Truth in Translation, University Press of America, 2003. Many trinitarian scholars, in fact, are forced to reject the interpretation that John 1:1c says that Jesus was the same "God" that he was with. Famed trinitarian scholars A. T. Robertson and B. F. Westcott, for example, were both forced to that conclusion - p. 96, Selected Notes On The Syntax Of New Testament Greek, Wallace, 3rd ed., 1981. Prof. Philip B. Harner also came to that conclusion, p. 85, JBL, vol. 92, 1973. Revised Version-Improved and Corrected, "the word was a god." Moffatt's The Bible, 1972, "the Logos was divine" Reijnier Rooleeuw, M.D. -The New Testament of Our Lord Jesus Christ, translated from the Greek, 1694, "and the Word was a god" Abner Kneeland-The New Testament in Greek and English, 1822, "The Word was a God" Robert Young, LL.D. (Concise Commentary on the Holy Bible [Grand Rapids: Baker, n.d.], 54). 1885, "[A]nd a God (i.e. a Divine Being) was the Word" Belsham N.T. 1809 “the Word was a god” J.N. Jannaris, Zeitschrift fur die Newtestameutlich Wissencraft, (German periodical) 1901, [A]nd was a god" Joseph Priestley, LL.D., F.R.S. (in A Familiar Illustration of Certain Passages of Scripture Relating to The Power of Man to do the Will of God, Original Sin, Election and Reprobation, The Divinity of Christ; And, Atonement for Sin by the Death of Christ [Philadelphia: Thomas Dobson, 1794], 37). "a God" Andrews Norton, D.D. (in A Statement of Reasons For Not Believing the Doctrines of Trinitarians [Cambridge: Brown, Shattuck, and Company, 1833], 74). "a god" Paul Wernle, Professor of Modern Church History at the University of Basil (in The Beginnings of Christianity, vol. 1, The Rise of Religion [1903], 16). "a God" Ernest Findlay Scott, The Literature of the New Testament, New York, Columbia University Press, 1932, "[A]nd the Word was of divine nature" Philip Harner, JBL, Vol. 92, 1974, "The Word had the same nature as God" Maximilian Zerwich S.J./Mary Grosvenor, 1974, "The Word was divine" If they (trinitarian translators) had honestly believed that John was saying that Jesus is God, they certainly would not have hesitated to say "the Word was God." Why, then, did some Trinitarian translators of Christendom, some of the best Bible scholars and translators in the world, choose the word "divine" or the word was a god? Can you explain that ? Most Greek scholars laugh at the way Trinitarians try to use John 1:1 to support the trinity !

If you have your own answer to the question thesis index, then you can write your own version, using the form below for an extended answer.