Even C.T. Russell said Michael is not Christ.

imJRR

Active member
Sorry for not being clear - From what I have read of your posts, you do not hold to JW beliefs. In believing that Jesus is Michael, Kade does, at least partially; although I don't think he fully identifies with JWs. My post to you was an attempt to explain that - in order for there to be clarity on the forum and this thread - comparing Christian beliefs with JW beliefs; and focusing in particular on the fact that the founder of the JWs declared that Michael is not Christ - that was the reason for request to move.
 

e v e

Super Member
Sorry for not being clear - From what I have read of your posts, you do not hold to JW beliefs. In believing that Jesus is Michael, Kade does, at least partially; although I don't think he fully identifies with JWs. My post to you was an attempt to explain that - in order for there to be clarity on the forum and this thread - comparing Christian beliefs with JW beliefs; and focusing in particular on the fact that the founder of the JWs declared that Michael is not Christ - that was the reason for request to move.
okay.
 

Nathan P

Member
That may be your point, but THE point is that Jesus - God the Son - the Word (Who is eternal) - is God come in the flesh.
That is how it applies to JWs.
In terms of 'Son of God', that title is given to Jesus many times. John 3:16 is probably the most familiar reference.
Anyway, the JWs - as with they are with MANY other things - have this wrong.
Unfortunately and horribly tragically, getting this wrong separates them from God, makes them guilty of having a false Jesus Christ, a false message of salvation, and spiritual liars, deceivers and abusers of millions.
Are you trying to say that Jesus is referred to as the Son before the Word became flesh at John 3:16? You do know humans are talking there and since he was only known to the humans as the Son and not the Word, they have to refer to him as the Son there and not the Word? And at vs 17 it says he sent his Son into the world and not to the world After the Word became flesh and was Jesus and thus was God's Son he was sent into the world to save it and not condemn it. Into and to have different meanings.
 

imJRR

Active member
Are you trying to say that Jesus is referred to as the Son before the Word became flesh at John 3:16? You do know humans are talking there and since he was only known to the humans as the Son and not the Word, they have to refer to him as the Son there and not the Word? And at vs 17 it says he sent his Son into the world and not to the world After the Word became flesh and was Jesus and thus was God's Son he was sent into the world to save it and not condemn it. Into and to have different meanings.

I'm not "trying" to say anything. Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, the Savior.
 

Nathan P

Member
I'm not "trying" to say anything. Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh, the Savior.
No he was sent into the world and not to the world. If I sent you to the store, that means I sent you from a place like home to the store, but if I sent you into the store that means we are already there and I sent you into the store. Since it says Jesus was sent into the world and not to the world that means he was already there or was the Son on earth who was sent into the world.
 

imJRR

Active member
(shrug) Whether Jesus was "sent" or "came" has nothing to do with what I posted. What I posted has to do with Who Jesus Christ IS - God come in the flesh, the Savior.
 

Nathan P

Member
(shrug) Whether Jesus was "sent" or "came" has nothing to do with what I posted. What I posted has to do with Who Jesus Christ IS - God come in the flesh, the Savior.
And what I posted proves he was sent into the world as Jesus after the Word became flesh and was not sent to the world from heaven as Jesus. You have to prove your point like I did.
 

imJRR

Active member
And what I posted proves he was sent into the world as Jesus after the Word became flesh and was not sent to the world from heaven as Jesus. You have to prove your point like I did.

LOL! Your post hasn't actually "proven" anything; it is only a mere statement of what you believe. It is also, very much, a completely meaningless and irrelevant side-tracking from the subject of the thread. It doesn't matter what words are used for Him - Jesus, the Word, Immanuel, Lamb of God, Lord, King of Kings, Light of the world, Lord of all, Mediator, Supreme Creator of all, the Door, the Way, the Truth, the Resurrection and the Life, the Almighty One, the Alpha and Omega, the Good Shepherd, Faithful and True, Bread of Life, Chief Cornerstone, Author and Perfecter of Faith, Jesus Christ - That Person whom the New Testament talks about was and is God come in the flesh, the Savior.
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Your post hasn't actually "proven" anything; it is only a mere statement of what you believe. It is also, very much, a completely meaningless and irrelevant side-tracking from the subject of the thread. It doesn't matter what words are used for Him - Jesus, the Word, Immanuel, Lamb of God, Lord, King of Kings, Light of the world, Lord of all, Mediator, Supreme Creator of all, the Door, the Way, the Truth, the Resurrection and the Life, the Almighty One, the Alpha and Omega, the Good Shepherd, Faithful and True, Bread of Life, Chief Cornerstone, Author and Perfecter of Faith, Jesus Christ - That Person whom the New Testament talks about was and is God come in the flesh, the Savior.
And you do not attempt to prove your point Also in the OT Jesus not mentioned. If he was God and is so prominent why would God leave him out and only mention him in the NT?
 

imJRR

Active member
And you do not attempt to prove your point Also in the OT Jesus not mentioned. If he was God and is so prominent why would God leave him out and only mention him in the NT?

LOL! Oh, I've proven my point VERY well - I've given the irrefutable meaning of Jesus' statement in John 14:9. Any denial of that is nothing but an open, blatant falsehood. As for your question, that is totally, totally laughable, and a HUGE exposing of ignorance.

For Any and All - You are invited to consider the following:

Jesus Himself confirmed the fact that He is in the Old Testament. In John 5:46 He explained to some religious leaders who had challenged Him that the Old Testament was talking about Him: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.” According to Jesus, God’s work with man since time began all pointed to Him. Another time when Jesus showed that He is in the Old Testament was on the day of His resurrection. Jesus was walking with two of His disciples, and “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Earlier, before His crucifixion, Jesus had pointed to Isaiah 53:12 and said, “It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment” (Luke 22:37).

By some counts, more than 300 Old Testament prophecies point to Jesus Christ and were fulfilled by Him in His life on earth. These include prophecies about His unique birth (Isaiah 7:14), His earthly ministry (Isaiah 61:1), and even the way He would die (Psalm 22). Jesus shocked the religious establishment when He stood up in the synagogue of Nazareth and read from Isaiah 61, concluding with this commentary: “This scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing today” (Luke 4:18–21).
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Oh, I've proven my point VERY well - I've given the irrefutable meaning of Jesus' statement in John 14:9. Any denial of that is nothing but an open, blatant falsehood. As for your question, that is totally, totally laughable, and a HUGE exposing of ignorance.

For Any and All - You are invited to consider the following:

Jesus Himself confirmed the fact that He is in the Old Testament. In John 5:46 He explained to some religious leaders who had challenged Him that the Old Testament was talking about Him: “If you believed Moses, you would believe me, for he wrote about me.” According to Jesus, God’s work with man since time began all pointed to Him. Another time when Jesus showed that He is in the Old Testament was on the day of His resurrection. Jesus was walking with two of His disciples, and “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Earlier, before His crucifixion, Jesus had pointed to Isaiah 53:12 and said, “It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’ and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment” (Luke 22:37).

By some counts, more than 300 Old Testament prophecies point to Jesus Christ and were fulfilled by Him in His life on earth. These include prophecies about His unique birth (Isaiah 7:14), His earthly ministry (Isaiah 61:1), and even the way He would die (Psalm 22). Jesus shocked the religious establishment when He stood up in the synagogue of Nazareth and read from Isaiah 61, concluding with this commentary: “This scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing today” (Luke 4:18–21).
John 5:46 has nothing to do with the OT and Jesus. You always say things but you do not explain it because that is not talking about the OT. And who are you saying wrote about Jesus at John 5:46?
 

imJRR

Active member
John 5:46 has nothing to do with the OT and Jesus. You always say things but you do not explain it because that is not talking about the OT. And who are you saying wrote about Jesus at John 5:46?

LOL! Oh, sure it does. Jesus refers to Moses. As for the "always not explaining things" - That idea/statement is nothing less than just blatant falsehood. I'm very content to let readers decide between us on that.
 
Last edited:

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Oh, sure it does. Jesus refers to Moses and said "He wrote of me." As for the "always not explaining things" - That idea/statement is nothing less than just blatant falsehood. I'm very content to let readers decide between us on that.
Yes let them decide who has a better point. For one I do not see you arguing with me about the meaning of to and into and how they would apply to whether Jesus was on earth when he was sent into the world? Again it would have to say he was sent to the world to have been sent from heaven. How do you figure that since it was Moses who wrote about him at John 5:46 and it is talking about the OT there?
 

imJRR

Active member
Yes let them decide who has a better point. For one I do not see you arguing with me about the meaning of to and into and how they would apply to whether Jesus was on earth when he was sent into the world? Again it would have to say he was sent to the world to have been sent from heaven. How do you figure that since it was Moses who wrote about him at John 5:46 and it is talking about the OT there?

Yes, let them decide what Jesus openly, clearly directly, personally, and irrefutably said about Himself in John 14:9.

And let them decide for themselves what the founder of the JW cult said also. Isn't it "interesting" that that foundational doctrine got changed?

And - Explanation: I haven't argued about the meaning of "to" and "into" because to me, personally - I see that discussion as being as irrelevant as a ballpoint pen is to a mollusk.
 
Last edited:

Nathan P

Member
Yes, let them decide what Jesus openly, clearly directly, personally, and irrefutably said about Himself in John 14:9.

And - Explanation: I haven't argued about the meaning of "to" and "into" because to me, personally - I see that discussion as being as irrelevant as a ballpoint pen is to a mollusk.
You do not want to discuss to and into because it would prove that since Jesus was sent into the world that means he was sent from the earth into the world. And it is not talking about the OT at John 5:46.

Also what he wrote about Jesus at John 5:46 are prophecies. It is all on Google.
 
Last edited:

imJRR

Active member
LOL! Suuure.

I'll submit that your personal declaration regarding me, in terms of my not wanting to discuss "to" and "into" should be seen as being on the same level as you declaring that I believe the moon really IS made out of green cheese.

I really, actually, truly and genuinely DON'T believe that.

Yes, I really DO believe that that needed to be openly stated, considering the imaginations that have been seen in your posts.

Your posts are totally and completely off-topic from the original post.
 
Last edited:

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Suuure.

I'll submit that your personal declaration regarding me, in terms of my not wanting to discuss "to" and "into" should be seen as being on the same level as you declaring that I believe the moon really IS made out of green cheese.

I really, actually, truly and genuinely DON'T believe that.

Yes, I really DO believe that that needed to be openly stated, considering the imaginations that have been seen in your posts.

Your posts are totally and completely off-topic from the original post.
You do understand that what was written about Jesus in the OT were prophecies?
 

Nathan P

Member
LOL! Oh, sure it does. Jesus refers to Moses. As for the "always not explaining things" - That idea/statement is nothing less than just blatant falsehood. I'm very content to let readers decide between us on that.
It has to do with prophecies about Jesus in the OT.
 
Top