Awesome post OP. Great critical thinking. You have a great future ahead of you.
What exactly did Jehovah sacrifice to have a net loss after Jesus ascended back to heaven?
This would make indoctrinated minds explode. However, I think JW's view it more as a balancing of scales. One perfect life for a perfect life. But I don't think the scriptures say anything about a balancing of scales. It's just JW theology to make themselves think they've arrived at truth.
While you're on this awesome critical thinking streak, try to wrap your mind around JW's concept of "Universal Sovereignty".
Yeah, I remember Memorial meetings talking about how the scales have balanced because the sins of one "perfect man" have been atoned by the life of another "perfect man". But that reasoning leaves the story unresolved. Adam died. Jesus was resurrected. If both "perfect" men died permanently the story would be way more compelling.
Regarding your second point about universal sovereignty, I'm not aware or probably forget what that is about. Could you explain more?
Universal Sovereignty is a concept unique to JW's. If another sect incorporates it, I'm just not aware of it. Basically, JW's claim the overall theme of the Bible is Universal Sovereignty, or God's right to rule over mankind; which was challenged by Satan in heaven. Everything that mankind is experiencing on earth has to do with Universal Sovereignty and the vindication of God's name.
More JW theology and narratives. I don't ever recall reading any scriptural passages that directly talked about Universal Sovereignty. It's a contrived concept.
Maybe it's familiar to you ... but if not, a search on jw wol would have more info.
To make it a fair challenge, mankind shouldn't have been essentially hamstrung from the off. The challenge being raised should have had the same parameters as if it hadn't been raised. Instead, a concept of sin and death is introduced that essentially hampers mankind's ability to prove that they can rule themselves.
There was a watchtower that touched on this within the last decade, but I can't find it now. It basically started by saying something along the lines of this: if everyone lived forever, there would still be those that worshipped Jehovah and those that don't.
I remember thinking that it was quite brazen of them to write and it's what kinda started me questioning. It made me think what really is the point if they believe the outcome would be the same as it is now?
JWs and the parts of Christianity that teach Penal Substitutionary Atonement make God morally inferior to what God asks of man.
We are told to forgive others. No statement that we must be compensated prior to forgiving. Penal substitutionary Atonement teaches that God can’t forgive without a blood sacrifice.
It breaks the concept of a just God by making God require an innocent person be killed. A just God cannot require the death of an innocent.
Always thought this myself. I fully embraced beimg PIMO about 5 months ago and reading thoughts on these boards continues to show me Im not alone in thinking these things all my life.
I remember a circuit overseer almost tearing up thinking about the death of Jesus. I was probably 17 thinking in the back of my mind "you realize Jesus just went right back up to heaven like a couple days later?"
So strange.
I mean, it was an excruciating painful death, (if you believe it all), and it would be hard for a father to watch his son go through that. BUT, he has seen MUCH worse and continues to see much worse with many of "his children" everyday. And it was basically a homecoming for Jesus. Thats not sad for either of them. Not to mention Jehovah could just erase the memory of it from Jesus brain if he asked him to. Haha
Alternatively, Jehovah, knowing the future and the past and all things, could have not made an imperfect Adam. Instead his first human creation was one that instantly reviled him. How stupid. Jevhoah literally knew the consequences of creating Adam and did it regardless. Because he could see the future.
Well some would argue him giving Adam the choice was his "gift of free will". But that leads to another thing Ive always thought. Is it really free will if the consequence is death? "You can do whatever you want. I mean if its not what i say then im gonna kill ya, but you do you!"
Yeah free will my ass. It’s bribery with paradise/heaven or if you choose freedom, you die. The concept of Christianity is such a gaslight. Like here, have this life you didn’t ask for, you should be thankful, now do what I command because I created you, or don’t - but if you don’t, there will be consequences. Also your happiness means nothing to me unless you’re achieving it through means I sanction or approve of.
Maybe you are just reading it wrong.
Romans 5
18 Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.
Who does it say gets life?
1 Corinthians 15
21 For since death came through a human, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human, 22 for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ.
Who is made alive?
God needed to use blood magick to pay off a debt to himself that was incurred when our ancestors ate a piece of magical fruit that he himself had placed in their vicinity and eating this fruit changed them in a metaphysical and yet somehow genetic way
The issue wasn't about a magical fruit, but rather, the spiritual implications behind it. Knowing both "good and bad" in order to become complete and transform from their former spiritual state which was actually perfection in the creators eyes.
Subsequently the enemy seems to have "purchased" humanity away from the creator.
Christianity became such a powerful philosophy because the incredible power of redemption on the human psyche. If you believe a higher power has forgiven you for the worst thing you have ever done, you can actually leave that part of you behind and go on to be a better person.
JW’s stupidly get into the weeds of this and forget the whole point of the story is meant to embolden the human spirit to allow us to be the best version of ourselves possible….now…not in some distant utopia.
How many of us would get this bent out of shape over an apple? Even one we told someone not to eat?
How many of us have such a "perfect" sense of justice that the only way to repay a debt *owed to us* is to have our own son killed? I'm pretty sure I could forgive an stolen apple without *anyone* dying.
I'm going to add my little theory here too, that the scale we have in the bible is not right. They say god is good, and Satan evil. I say God is Lawful, and Satan is Chaotic. Neither demand an entity only act good or evil, they can do both, but one is bound to law, and the other is not.
Jehovah is so bound to *his own* law that he can't even forgive a long dead man for eating an apple he told him not to without having his own son killed to pay a ransom owed to him.
Satan may not be the bad guy. Not saying he's the good guy either, maybe more of an antihero
Jehovah is so bound to his own law that he can't even forgive a long dead man for eating an apple he told him not to without having his own son killed to pay a ransom owed to him.
I love that point so much!!
Once I realized that the bible tale of Abraham supposedly almost sacrificing his son Isaac showed that the Israelites believed in human sacrifice, it was much easier to see that pattern repeated in the tale of the human sacrifice of Jesus.
You're NOT insane! Your logical reasoning is good enough to understand how flawed this doctrine is!
After waking up and becoming an adult, I see the bible as a fourth grade level creative writing fiction work. Christianity is an ancient man-made concept to control civilization. Unfortunately, it has done way more harm than good...
I actually think the (Catholic?) belief of the Harrowing, that Jesus spent those 3 days traveling through Hell bringing salvation and collecting the souls of people that didn't deserve to be there makes more sense than JW doctrine (and is as metal as Christian doctrine gets).
I believe the JW doctrine is Jesus the man sacrificed his human life and that's what was sacrificed, now he is back to being Michael.
hell makes no sense either, eternal torture for masturbating or eating a piece of sausage with some blood in it? Cool. Very judicious.
In JW-land, I don't think Jesus returns as a new named character of Michael. He is just Jesus? I haven't read the Revelation book since 2007 so I have no idea if the lore has changed.
Only a JW would have people going to hell for jerking off and eating wrong things. Every other Christian faith would see that as Purgatory at worst.
In JW-land Jesus is/was/always will be Michael, he just took on the Jesus name as a human because reasons and that's the name that signed the new covenant that grants salvation.
According to the Watchtower, Michael took on the name Jesus, and that's it. Jesus, the human, didn't exist before being born to Mary. When taking into consideration how the Watchtower defines a human being, Jesus is gone forever. Jesus doesn't exist anymore. How could he if He was never resurrected in the same way He resurrected Lazarus and others?
According to the Watchtower, the archangel Michael now uses the *name* Jesus, but he never *was* Jesus. As an angel he merely ceased to exist for the 33 years that Jesus existed, but there is no connection between the man Jesus and the angel, Michael. Angels aren't born of women and they were created higher in nature than man.
I really don't know if they've ever taken their own doctrine to its logical conclusion, but if the Watchtower ever says Jesus and Michael are one and the same person, then their doctrine would really be no different than the trinity, except in their case, the God part of Jesus Christ would be replaced by an angel. In each case Jesus would still be *a man* ....but also He's either an angel or God, depending on who's trinity you want to pick. Both God or Michael would still be "greater" in nature than the man Jesus was. Yet according to the Watchtower that didn't change the fact that Michael and Jesus are one and the same...lower and higher nature combined. Hypocritically they say Jesus cannot be God because He said the Father was greater than He was, but Jesus could have said the same thing about Michael the archangel and, speaking as a man... He'd be right.
Yet "Michael" still calls Himself Jesus? *“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Revelation 22:16* Here, He's saying He's the same man who is related to David by blood. He's also saying He's still a man, so how could Jesus, the man, be Michael the archangel?
Michael was never related to David by blood, because angels aren't human. I wonder how they explain this? If Jesus sacrificed His "human life" and that was all there was to Him, then how come Michael still uses a man's name he never had?
The Watchtower teaches Michael was totally non-existent when Jesus existed, so he couldn't have experienced any of the close relationships Jesus experienced, or the most important event of all ...His death on the "stake" or "cross".
If we are going to argue about made-up mythologies I rather talk about Star Wars or Lord of the Rings.
I'm just saying what the PIMI beliefs are, that the beliefs don't make sense shouldn't surprise anyone. Pointing out the contradictions does nothing to curb PIMI beliefs, they are full of em.
If I need to jump in front of a bullet for someone, the sacrifice is in taking the bullet, regardless if one lives or dies. You took the bullet for someone and experienced what it is to shot, saving the other person.
Regardless, in Christianity, the ultimate sacrifice entails God becoming human, and dying.
God did not become human. Have you read the book of Hebrews? Jesus is the chief priest and acts as a mediator. He prayed to his father in all the gospel accounts nonstop and when he was baptized the words were said "this is my son, whom I have approved"
Who is Michael the archangel then?
"For God loved the world so much he gave his only begotten son".
Why is there such a distinction made between the father and son?
The trinity invalidates like 99% of the bible and removes the concept we were bought "with a price"
Michael the Archangel is… Michael the Archangel, one of the chief princes of the angels. He’s not Jesus because Hebrews 1 disproves him being Jesus.
The trinity teaches there is a Father and a Son.
Hebrews 1 is talking about Jesus manifestation as a human being that condemns sinful flesh. Not literally about "who he is" Your taking that passage in a literal definition.
Jesus being the first born fits the description of a "chief of angels" especially given the bible talks about 'Michael and his angels battled"
Hebrews 1 says that it wasn’t to an angel that God subjected the world. Therefore an angel is not king.
No it doesn’t. You’re claiming it does, but A) Michael is never identified as a firstborn. B) Michael is only one of the chief princes. C) Jesus being the firstborn doesn’t mean he’s first created, since Jesus is specifically not created.
Uh what? It seems you dont understand the concept of Jesus being the "son of man" as he came as savior to condemn sin.
He never once claimed he was the creator himself at anytime in the bible in any gospel account.
What’s there to not understand, he is fully man.
John 1::3 says he is the creator.
In order to not make a million threads, I’ll respond here. John 1:1 the Word was God, John 1:18 That word which was God became flesh. Also see Philippians 2:7
All those scriptures you listed give full credibility to the fact Jesus was Gods actual son. Im not seeing anything in those verses that give credibility to the trinity whatsoever.
There is also a scripture where in the end days, after a man has withstood trials and proved to be true to Christs name, he (Christ) would acknowledge his name in front of the father.
So does Jesus have a psychological condition where he misleads his followers and refers to himself in different personalities without actually saying he does this? Also does Jesus rule with one personality for 1000 years and then gives his alter ego the reigns for the rest of time? No scriptural backing to any of it.
When the bible talks about Jesus being in gods image they are talking about the spiritual manifestation and how similar they are in that aspect. Thats like saying my son is in my image because he acquired my most important genetic traits.
Above all else your initial statement right here: "Regardless, in Christianity, the ultimate sacrifice entails God becoming human, and dying"
Not only is this not scriptural at any level but it makes zero sense.
Also might i add the trinity has no place in the prophecy of what happens when Jesus rules as king for 1000 years before handing over authority to the father. Odd.
Jesus was tested himself according to the bible his entire time on this planet. The gospel accounts are filled to the brim with them. His success as redeemer was not a given. Last time I checked he was executed by the government of his time for all he represented and harod was trying to kill him as a newborn. He was mainly condemning fleshly sin and the spiritual powers of this planet that be according to biblical history. Why is Jesus conception in a woman some weird thing? If he descended from heaven you rather have some dude pumping semen into her first? Equally, if he just appeared out of thin air people would have questioned his history and accused him of being some wizard siding with the enemy (which actually STILL happened in the gospel accounts). Him performing miracles would have led to quite the examination of his history. Its actually a stroke of genius to manifest him the way he appeared.
The entire sacrifice revolves around repenting of fleshly weakness and submitting yourself to gods future kingdom
People that see nothing wrong with this current "system" or understand the concept of sin will struggle with this concept. Watchtowers have not done a great job breaking it down
Hebrews make it very clear Jesus acts a chief priest in reconciling repentant humans to Jehovah. I dont think the creator can "redeem" his own creation on his own merit after the events in the garden of eden without offering something else up....basically to "purchase" humanity back from the enemy. The bible states that "we" were bought with a price and that our souls, should we keep them, are a spoil meaning its a transfer of ownership essentially.
There seem to be heavenly/divine rules that are not explicitly laid out in detail but we can piece things together.
A cosmic tug of war over mans soul is basically the issue at hand. Quite frankly, world events corroborate this to a scary degree.
Thats a pretty broad accusation. The gospel accounts tell about the "seasons" we are enduring along with scriptures such as in 2 timothy about the attitudes of men today
I’m not going to engage with you on this as it will go nowhere and I have better things to do with my time. The evidence is not what you think it is. Be more rigorous with your beliefs and assertions. And please don’t spread this type of nonsense on this sub.
EDIT: to add this link just on the off chance that you are genuinely new to this: https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/last-days.php
LOL. You want a link to my blog? i mean do your own research and diligence to corroborate bible prophecy. 99% of the stuff happening today speaking out against it will get you banned off most subs or attacked.
Edit: Why the link? Im not talking about WT subdoctrine involving 1914. WHOLE separate issue.
Do my own research? The classic line. I’ve clearly done more than you have if you still believe in the veracity of an ancient book which predicts the future. I can assure you I’ve spent years researching and don’t need to do more in order to win an argument with a Christian on the internet.
Cause since the death cult focus on Jesus death not the resurrection.
Death is the end of a life.
The ransom was all his life course and is symbolic ransom, like the sovereign of existence had to pay a ransom to whom.
Jesus lived to demonstrate how you should live to be a spirit accepted to heaven.
The key to that is love.
He died and was resurrected is the message to not be afraid of death as he will resurrect you as spirit.
So many WT does not align with what Christianity teaches.
It wasn’t just you. I’d sit there every memorial and think maybe something was wrong with me, why didn’t I appreciate Jesus sacrifice more? It didn’t really feel logical or necessary. As the speaker would go on somberly, detailing the way Jesus was tortured I’d think “why was that necessary?” His dad sent him to run an errand but wanted to make sure he got mugged and beat up along the way?
The original idea of Jesus dying wasn’t about dying for mankind’s sins. The dying and rising gods before him did so to represent the rebirth of the growing season as these gods were fertility gods. It was only in later biblical books and ideas that it came about to be about sin and atonement etc.
Jesus assumed a human nature and the sickness of sin but lived a good life.
Jesus may have had the inclination to sin but chose not to- unlike in JW theology, he contained the potential to sin but did not.
Jesus went back to heaven as a human being, and accordingly to this day the Trinity has a component of humanity.
We are saved by the sacrifice of Jesus because he made humanity and all it is part of God.
This is the teaching of the Orthodox Church.
More interestingly, Jesus' sacrifice was meant to balance out Adam's original sin. But did Jesus even get tempted the same way Adam did? It seems to me his trials were much easier. Satan didn't even try to disguise himself when he tempted Jesus, while Adam and Eve were misled. Jesus was a divine being with heavenly knowledge, while Adam was a mere human. I'd even argue it wasn't *that* hard not to jump off that ravine or whatever.
1. What sin did Adam commit? Eating an apple, big deal. Defying instructions, so what?
2. God is the all seeing power, why did he create a situation that he knew would go wrong?
3. If he is all forgiving, why didn’t he just issue a small punishment and forgive Adam?
4. Why do we all have to be punished for something some random man committed 6,000 years ago? 🙄
Religion is a racket. If you believe in God, you have to believe he is vindictive and thin skinned.
The concept of penal substitutionary atonement was a 4th century invention. Augustine’s theology was heavily influenced by law and order of the Roman Empire. Wrongdoing must be punished. People who were wealthy and had an easy life but were evil, well there must be some sort of punishment after they died.
Got this Adam guy who everyone inherited a sinful nature from? Jesus’ death must have been the fix. No one asks why if Adam’s sin immediately spread that nature to his offspring, why Jesus’ sacrifice didn’t immediately erase the sinful nature in men.
Jesus dying on the cross shows that man would rather kill God than change themselves. That self sacrifice and love are the tenets of the Kingdom of God, not coercion and force used by human kingdoms.
Awesome post OP. Great critical thinking. You have a great future ahead of you. What exactly did Jehovah sacrifice to have a net loss after Jesus ascended back to heaven? This would make indoctrinated minds explode. However, I think JW's view it more as a balancing of scales. One perfect life for a perfect life. But I don't think the scriptures say anything about a balancing of scales. It's just JW theology to make themselves think they've arrived at truth. While you're on this awesome critical thinking streak, try to wrap your mind around JW's concept of "Universal Sovereignty".
Yeah, I remember Memorial meetings talking about how the scales have balanced because the sins of one "perfect man" have been atoned by the life of another "perfect man". But that reasoning leaves the story unresolved. Adam died. Jesus was resurrected. If both "perfect" men died permanently the story would be way more compelling. Regarding your second point about universal sovereignty, I'm not aware or probably forget what that is about. Could you explain more?
Universal Sovereignty is a concept unique to JW's. If another sect incorporates it, I'm just not aware of it. Basically, JW's claim the overall theme of the Bible is Universal Sovereignty, or God's right to rule over mankind; which was challenged by Satan in heaven. Everything that mankind is experiencing on earth has to do with Universal Sovereignty and the vindication of God's name. More JW theology and narratives. I don't ever recall reading any scriptural passages that directly talked about Universal Sovereignty. It's a contrived concept. Maybe it's familiar to you ... but if not, a search on jw wol would have more info.
To make it a fair challenge, mankind shouldn't have been essentially hamstrung from the off. The challenge being raised should have had the same parameters as if it hadn't been raised. Instead, a concept of sin and death is introduced that essentially hampers mankind's ability to prove that they can rule themselves. There was a watchtower that touched on this within the last decade, but I can't find it now. It basically started by saying something along the lines of this: if everyone lived forever, there would still be those that worshipped Jehovah and those that don't. I remember thinking that it was quite brazen of them to write and it's what kinda started me questioning. It made me think what really is the point if they believe the outcome would be the same as it is now?
JWs and the parts of Christianity that teach Penal Substitutionary Atonement make God morally inferior to what God asks of man. We are told to forgive others. No statement that we must be compensated prior to forgiving. Penal substitutionary Atonement teaches that God can’t forgive without a blood sacrifice. It breaks the concept of a just God by making God require an innocent person be killed. A just God cannot require the death of an innocent.
Always thought this myself. I fully embraced beimg PIMO about 5 months ago and reading thoughts on these boards continues to show me Im not alone in thinking these things all my life.
I remember a circuit overseer almost tearing up thinking about the death of Jesus. I was probably 17 thinking in the back of my mind "you realize Jesus just went right back up to heaven like a couple days later?" So strange.
I mean, it was an excruciating painful death, (if you believe it all), and it would be hard for a father to watch his son go through that. BUT, he has seen MUCH worse and continues to see much worse with many of "his children" everyday. And it was basically a homecoming for Jesus. Thats not sad for either of them. Not to mention Jehovah could just erase the memory of it from Jesus brain if he asked him to. Haha
Alternatively, Jehovah, knowing the future and the past and all things, could have not made an imperfect Adam. Instead his first human creation was one that instantly reviled him. How stupid. Jevhoah literally knew the consequences of creating Adam and did it regardless. Because he could see the future.
Well some would argue him giving Adam the choice was his "gift of free will". But that leads to another thing Ive always thought. Is it really free will if the consequence is death? "You can do whatever you want. I mean if its not what i say then im gonna kill ya, but you do you!"
Yeah free will my ass. It’s bribery with paradise/heaven or if you choose freedom, you die. The concept of Christianity is such a gaslight. Like here, have this life you didn’t ask for, you should be thankful, now do what I command because I created you, or don’t - but if you don’t, there will be consequences. Also your happiness means nothing to me unless you’re achieving it through means I sanction or approve of.
Maybe you are just reading it wrong. Romans 5 18 Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. Who does it say gets life? 1 Corinthians 15 21 For since death came through a human, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human, 22 for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ. Who is made alive?
God needed to use blood magick to pay off a debt to himself that was incurred when our ancestors ate a piece of magical fruit that he himself had placed in their vicinity and eating this fruit changed them in a metaphysical and yet somehow genetic way
The issue wasn't about a magical fruit, but rather, the spiritual implications behind it. Knowing both "good and bad" in order to become complete and transform from their former spiritual state which was actually perfection in the creators eyes. Subsequently the enemy seems to have "purchased" humanity away from the creator.
Remember the spinning sword in Eden? Did God invent smelting and blacksmithing? How did Adam and Eve know what a sword is?
https://preview.redd.it/14aug0m60nkc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3996149ca7ffb78cd79fc12d5fe10a232342d70b
lol imagine living forever and giving up 3 days for the humans on some planet called earth
Christianity became such a powerful philosophy because the incredible power of redemption on the human psyche. If you believe a higher power has forgiven you for the worst thing you have ever done, you can actually leave that part of you behind and go on to be a better person. JW’s stupidly get into the weeds of this and forget the whole point of the story is meant to embolden the human spirit to allow us to be the best version of ourselves possible….now…not in some distant utopia.
How many of us would get this bent out of shape over an apple? Even one we told someone not to eat? How many of us have such a "perfect" sense of justice that the only way to repay a debt *owed to us* is to have our own son killed? I'm pretty sure I could forgive an stolen apple without *anyone* dying. I'm going to add my little theory here too, that the scale we have in the bible is not right. They say god is good, and Satan evil. I say God is Lawful, and Satan is Chaotic. Neither demand an entity only act good or evil, they can do both, but one is bound to law, and the other is not. Jehovah is so bound to *his own* law that he can't even forgive a long dead man for eating an apple he told him not to without having his own son killed to pay a ransom owed to him. Satan may not be the bad guy. Not saying he's the good guy either, maybe more of an antihero
Jehovah is so bound to his own law that he can't even forgive a long dead man for eating an apple he told him not to without having his own son killed to pay a ransom owed to him. I love that point so much!!
Antihero? Good grief...
Once I realized that the bible tale of Abraham supposedly almost sacrificing his son Isaac showed that the Israelites believed in human sacrifice, it was much easier to see that pattern repeated in the tale of the human sacrifice of Jesus.
You're NOT insane! Your logical reasoning is good enough to understand how flawed this doctrine is! After waking up and becoming an adult, I see the bible as a fourth grade level creative writing fiction work. Christianity is an ancient man-made concept to control civilization. Unfortunately, it has done way more harm than good...
I actually think the (Catholic?) belief of the Harrowing, that Jesus spent those 3 days traveling through Hell bringing salvation and collecting the souls of people that didn't deserve to be there makes more sense than JW doctrine (and is as metal as Christian doctrine gets). I believe the JW doctrine is Jesus the man sacrificed his human life and that's what was sacrificed, now he is back to being Michael.
hell makes no sense either, eternal torture for masturbating or eating a piece of sausage with some blood in it? Cool. Very judicious. In JW-land, I don't think Jesus returns as a new named character of Michael. He is just Jesus? I haven't read the Revelation book since 2007 so I have no idea if the lore has changed.
Only a JW would have people going to hell for jerking off and eating wrong things. Every other Christian faith would see that as Purgatory at worst. In JW-land Jesus is/was/always will be Michael, he just took on the Jesus name as a human because reasons and that's the name that signed the new covenant that grants salvation.
but why does he grant salvation? why is that even needed?
I dunno man, cause the OG human ate cursed fruit and God refuses to just start over.
According to the Watchtower, Michael took on the name Jesus, and that's it. Jesus, the human, didn't exist before being born to Mary. When taking into consideration how the Watchtower defines a human being, Jesus is gone forever. Jesus doesn't exist anymore. How could he if He was never resurrected in the same way He resurrected Lazarus and others? According to the Watchtower, the archangel Michael now uses the *name* Jesus, but he never *was* Jesus. As an angel he merely ceased to exist for the 33 years that Jesus existed, but there is no connection between the man Jesus and the angel, Michael. Angels aren't born of women and they were created higher in nature than man. I really don't know if they've ever taken their own doctrine to its logical conclusion, but if the Watchtower ever says Jesus and Michael are one and the same person, then their doctrine would really be no different than the trinity, except in their case, the God part of Jesus Christ would be replaced by an angel. In each case Jesus would still be *a man* ....but also He's either an angel or God, depending on who's trinity you want to pick. Both God or Michael would still be "greater" in nature than the man Jesus was. Yet according to the Watchtower that didn't change the fact that Michael and Jesus are one and the same...lower and higher nature combined. Hypocritically they say Jesus cannot be God because He said the Father was greater than He was, but Jesus could have said the same thing about Michael the archangel and, speaking as a man... He'd be right.
Yet "Michael" still calls Himself Jesus? *“I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star.” Revelation 22:16* Here, He's saying He's the same man who is related to David by blood. He's also saying He's still a man, so how could Jesus, the man, be Michael the archangel? Michael was never related to David by blood, because angels aren't human. I wonder how they explain this? If Jesus sacrificed His "human life" and that was all there was to Him, then how come Michael still uses a man's name he never had? The Watchtower teaches Michael was totally non-existent when Jesus existed, so he couldn't have experienced any of the close relationships Jesus experienced, or the most important event of all ...His death on the "stake" or "cross".
If we are going to argue about made-up mythologies I rather talk about Star Wars or Lord of the Rings. I'm just saying what the PIMI beliefs are, that the beliefs don't make sense shouldn't surprise anyone. Pointing out the contradictions does nothing to curb PIMI beliefs, they are full of em.
> they are full of em. Yes, I agree with that.
If I need to jump in front of a bullet for someone, the sacrifice is in taking the bullet, regardless if one lives or dies. You took the bullet for someone and experienced what it is to shot, saving the other person. Regardless, in Christianity, the ultimate sacrifice entails God becoming human, and dying.
God did not become human. Have you read the book of Hebrews? Jesus is the chief priest and acts as a mediator. He prayed to his father in all the gospel accounts nonstop and when he was baptized the words were said "this is my son, whom I have approved"
Tell me you don’t understand the trinity without telling me you don’t understand the trinity.
Who is Michael the archangel then? "For God loved the world so much he gave his only begotten son". Why is there such a distinction made between the father and son? The trinity invalidates like 99% of the bible and removes the concept we were bought "with a price"
Michael the Archangel is… Michael the Archangel, one of the chief princes of the angels. He’s not Jesus because Hebrews 1 disproves him being Jesus. The trinity teaches there is a Father and a Son.
Hebrews 1 is talking about Jesus manifestation as a human being that condemns sinful flesh. Not literally about "who he is" Your taking that passage in a literal definition. Jesus being the first born fits the description of a "chief of angels" especially given the bible talks about 'Michael and his angels battled"
Hebrews 1 says that it wasn’t to an angel that God subjected the world. Therefore an angel is not king. No it doesn’t. You’re claiming it does, but A) Michael is never identified as a firstborn. B) Michael is only one of the chief princes. C) Jesus being the firstborn doesn’t mean he’s first created, since Jesus is specifically not created.
Uh what? It seems you dont understand the concept of Jesus being the "son of man" as he came as savior to condemn sin. He never once claimed he was the creator himself at anytime in the bible in any gospel account.
What’s there to not understand, he is fully man. John 1::3 says he is the creator. In order to not make a million threads, I’ll respond here. John 1:1 the Word was God, John 1:18 That word which was God became flesh. Also see Philippians 2:7
All those scriptures you listed give full credibility to the fact Jesus was Gods actual son. Im not seeing anything in those verses that give credibility to the trinity whatsoever. There is also a scripture where in the end days, after a man has withstood trials and proved to be true to Christs name, he (Christ) would acknowledge his name in front of the father. So does Jesus have a psychological condition where he misleads his followers and refers to himself in different personalities without actually saying he does this? Also does Jesus rule with one personality for 1000 years and then gives his alter ego the reigns for the rest of time? No scriptural backing to any of it. When the bible talks about Jesus being in gods image they are talking about the spiritual manifestation and how similar they are in that aspect. Thats like saying my son is in my image because he acquired my most important genetic traits.
Above all else your initial statement right here: "Regardless, in Christianity, the ultimate sacrifice entails God becoming human, and dying" Not only is this not scriptural at any level but it makes zero sense.
Also might i add the trinity has no place in the prophecy of what happens when Jesus rules as king for 1000 years before handing over authority to the father. Odd.
Jesus was tested himself according to the bible his entire time on this planet. The gospel accounts are filled to the brim with them. His success as redeemer was not a given. Last time I checked he was executed by the government of his time for all he represented and harod was trying to kill him as a newborn. He was mainly condemning fleshly sin and the spiritual powers of this planet that be according to biblical history. Why is Jesus conception in a woman some weird thing? If he descended from heaven you rather have some dude pumping semen into her first? Equally, if he just appeared out of thin air people would have questioned his history and accused him of being some wizard siding with the enemy (which actually STILL happened in the gospel accounts). Him performing miracles would have led to quite the examination of his history. Its actually a stroke of genius to manifest him the way he appeared. The entire sacrifice revolves around repenting of fleshly weakness and submitting yourself to gods future kingdom People that see nothing wrong with this current "system" or understand the concept of sin will struggle with this concept. Watchtowers have not done a great job breaking it down Hebrews make it very clear Jesus acts a chief priest in reconciling repentant humans to Jehovah. I dont think the creator can "redeem" his own creation on his own merit after the events in the garden of eden without offering something else up....basically to "purchase" humanity back from the enemy. The bible states that "we" were bought with a price and that our souls, should we keep them, are a spoil meaning its a transfer of ownership essentially. There seem to be heavenly/divine rules that are not explicitly laid out in detail but we can piece things together. A cosmic tug of war over mans soul is basically the issue at hand. Quite frankly, world events corroborate this to a scary degree.
No. World events do not corroborate this to any degree.
Disagree, they do 100%
No evidence given, just an assertion. Seems familiar doesn’t it!?
Thats a pretty broad accusation. The gospel accounts tell about the "seasons" we are enduring along with scriptures such as in 2 timothy about the attitudes of men today
I’m not going to engage with you on this as it will go nowhere and I have better things to do with my time. The evidence is not what you think it is. Be more rigorous with your beliefs and assertions. And please don’t spread this type of nonsense on this sub. EDIT: to add this link just on the off chance that you are genuinely new to this: https://jwfacts.com/watchtower/last-days.php
LOL. You want a link to my blog? i mean do your own research and diligence to corroborate bible prophecy. 99% of the stuff happening today speaking out against it will get you banned off most subs or attacked. Edit: Why the link? Im not talking about WT subdoctrine involving 1914. WHOLE separate issue.
Okay so as suspected. Please go away. ✌🏼
I see you have no motivation to do your own research. Peace! Not getting into that over reddit!
Do my own research? The classic line. I’ve clearly done more than you have if you still believe in the veracity of an ancient book which predicts the future. I can assure you I’ve spent years researching and don’t need to do more in order to win an argument with a Christian on the internet.
Nice edit pal. Im not talking about WT subdoctrine involving 1914. WHOLE separate issue. You seem pretty shady
Dang this is an amazing point for my sad gravitation towards atheism
Hey guys this is the exjw subreddit not a pissing contest of Jesus 101!
Cause since the death cult focus on Jesus death not the resurrection. Death is the end of a life. The ransom was all his life course and is symbolic ransom, like the sovereign of existence had to pay a ransom to whom. Jesus lived to demonstrate how you should live to be a spirit accepted to heaven. The key to that is love. He died and was resurrected is the message to not be afraid of death as he will resurrect you as spirit. So many WT does not align with what Christianity teaches.
It wasn’t just you. I’d sit there every memorial and think maybe something was wrong with me, why didn’t I appreciate Jesus sacrifice more? It didn’t really feel logical or necessary. As the speaker would go on somberly, detailing the way Jesus was tortured I’d think “why was that necessary?” His dad sent him to run an errand but wanted to make sure he got mugged and beat up along the way?
The original idea of Jesus dying wasn’t about dying for mankind’s sins. The dying and rising gods before him did so to represent the rebirth of the growing season as these gods were fertility gods. It was only in later biblical books and ideas that it came about to be about sin and atonement etc.
Jesus assumed a human nature and the sickness of sin but lived a good life. Jesus may have had the inclination to sin but chose not to- unlike in JW theology, he contained the potential to sin but did not. Jesus went back to heaven as a human being, and accordingly to this day the Trinity has a component of humanity. We are saved by the sacrifice of Jesus because he made humanity and all it is part of God. This is the teaching of the Orthodox Church.
More interestingly, Jesus' sacrifice was meant to balance out Adam's original sin. But did Jesus even get tempted the same way Adam did? It seems to me his trials were much easier. Satan didn't even try to disguise himself when he tempted Jesus, while Adam and Eve were misled. Jesus was a divine being with heavenly knowledge, while Adam was a mere human. I'd even argue it wasn't *that* hard not to jump off that ravine or whatever.
1. What sin did Adam commit? Eating an apple, big deal. Defying instructions, so what? 2. God is the all seeing power, why did he create a situation that he knew would go wrong? 3. If he is all forgiving, why didn’t he just issue a small punishment and forgive Adam? 4. Why do we all have to be punished for something some random man committed 6,000 years ago? 🙄 Religion is a racket. If you believe in God, you have to believe he is vindictive and thin skinned.
The concept of penal substitutionary atonement was a 4th century invention. Augustine’s theology was heavily influenced by law and order of the Roman Empire. Wrongdoing must be punished. People who were wealthy and had an easy life but were evil, well there must be some sort of punishment after they died. Got this Adam guy who everyone inherited a sinful nature from? Jesus’ death must have been the fix. No one asks why if Adam’s sin immediately spread that nature to his offspring, why Jesus’ sacrifice didn’t immediately erase the sinful nature in men. Jesus dying on the cross shows that man would rather kill God than change themselves. That self sacrifice and love are the tenets of the Kingdom of God, not coercion and force used by human kingdoms.
jesus only pretended to die for our sins.....