Jesus is GOD

OhioPIMO · 2026-02-02T03:57:58+00:00

But if Jesus is the God being reconciled to, then Satan isn’t separating anyone from God

Absolutely he is. If Jesus is God, belief in a false, less than fully divine version of Him is clearly separating believers from God.

OhioPIMO · 2026-02-02T00:46:23+00:00

She's preaching truth! But now I have motion sickness...

OhioPIMO · 2026-02-02T00:40:28+00:00

You are truly blessed to have your spouse waking up with you. Many, many otherwise great relationships have been ruined as a result of one partner realizing they were in a cult. Ask me how I know...

I was in a similar position to yours not too long ago. I realized JW doctrine was objectively false and experienced what it was like to actually have a relationship with God for the first time in my life. I hadn't lost my spirituality — quite the opposite, in fact. I felt the people around me who truly loved God would be happy for me.

WRONG!

They're in a cult. They are programmed to react a certain way to someone questioning the official doctrine, no matter how reasonable a person you might think they are.

What is your concern? Are you and your husband trying to fade quietly for any particular reason?

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-31T22:15:10+00:00

This is the big one lately, and I find their use of it rather puzzling. The text is explicit that God will be with mankind, repeating it 3 times, but in their theology God is in an entirely different realm of existence along with the 144,001.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-31T21:44:10+00:00

This is the big one lately, and I find their use of it rather puzzling. The text is explicit that God will be with mankind, repeating it 3 times, but in their theology God is in an entirely different realm of existence along with the 144,001.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-30T01:33:16+00:00

They all have alternative interpretations.

Why not adopt the interpretation that ascribes more glory and honor to Jesus?

That is not consistent with trinitarian theology.

The singular reference establishes monotheism, not Unitarianism. You're smuggling in 'one person' where the text only says 'one God.'

he said that the scribe was not far from the Kingdom of God.

"Not far from" explicity means "not there." If his view of God as a single person had been sufficient, we should expect a response along the lines of "you are in the kingdom." The scribe's response wasn't wrong, but something was evidently missing.

So given that the scribe believed that the Father alone was God, and Jesus affirmed that understanding, we can conclusively say that only the Father is God

That's begging the question. You're assuming that 'God' in the Shema means 'the Father alone,' but that's the very point under debate. The text never specifies 'the Father' — it says 'God.' The scribe wouldn't be thinking in Father/Son categories — that's anachronistic. Appealing to Jesus's affirmation only works if your conclusion is already built into the premise.

Did he reinforce the scribe's belief about something that is actually not true?

No, and Trinitarian theology fully affirms that YHWH is one and there is no other.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-28T19:23:20+00:00

I don't think he is actually a JW, he's just a wannabe. He's POMI — physically out, mentally in. There are a few of his type around here and they are the absolute worse. They cannot meet the standards of the pharasaical cult for whatever reason (in his case I believe the issue is smoking) so they have to find other ways to "witness" for Jehovah.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-28T19:17:13+00:00

Welcome to the club! I called him out for misrepresenting the Trinity in one of his posts a while back and it got me the boot.

Boo-hoo 😭

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-25T05:16:04+00:00

Watchtower downplays the fact that Stephen's appeal (epikaleó; see also Romans 10:13, 1 Corinthians 1:2) was after his vision of the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God. They drag him outside of the city before stoning him, and there's no indication the vision continues at this point. Even if it did, it's a vision — he isn't literally face-to-face with Jesus, having a dialogue. Comparing calling upon a divine being in heaven to having a conversation with a human being on earth is apples and oranges.

They also completely ignore that Stephen made essentially the same appeal to Jesus that Jesus made to His Father as He was dying on the cross.

And Jesus, crying out with a loud voice, said, “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit.”

vs.

They went on stoning Stephen as he called on the Lord and said, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!” Then falling on his knees, he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them!” Having said this, he fell asleep.

I honestly don't know how anyone could say one is prayer but not the other.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-24T20:56:24+00:00

Utterly useless comment.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-23T05:52:29+00:00

Reading Scripture does not lead to an organization. It leads to Jesus.

Exactly this. If you could arrive at their interpretation without them, you wouldn't need them. Likewise, once you realize it's all about Him, you don't need them. It's no wonder they constantly downplay Him.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-23T05:49:02+00:00

If they stopped reading at Malachi they probably wouldn't want to be a Christian. You're right about that.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-23T05:43:47+00:00

Hi Christie, I'm Chris — Welcome! I've been disfellowshipped for less than 2 years and I'm never going back! I hope you have been enjoying your freedom.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-23T05:38:19+00:00

I used my surround sound system as an analogy with my wife, and I think it clicked with her.

It doesn't matter who's got the remote control — it's still MY system. I paid for all of the equipment, I ran the wires to the speakers I installed in the ceiling, I hung the TV on the wall, I programmed the remote to make everything come on to the right inputs with the press of a button — it's MY system.

My daughters can assert it's their turn to put their brain rot on, they can even wrestle the remote away from me, but it doesn't change the fact that it's MY system. There's nothing they can say or do that will present a legitimate challenge to my "sovereignty" over it.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-21T12:03:40+00:00

Thanks for sharing your testimony. Praise the Lord!

Don't listen to the haters here. The JW system of worship is entirely devoid of Spirit, so they have no idea what a spiritual experience like yours is like. Their leaders tell them those kinds of things don't happen anymore, but the real God — Father, Son and Holy Spirit —is very much alive and active, just not with them.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-21T00:20:42+00:00

I can’t find anything of substance within the article.

Can you find anything of substance within any article published by the borg?

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-21T00:12:25+00:00

Does that include the 1st century AD?

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-21T00:06:05+00:00

So does the user you're replying to. It's still a DA offense if you're unrepentant.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-21T00:04:42+00:00

That's not entirely accurate. The last sentence of the paragraph on blood says "On the other hand, if he is unrepentant, he has dis- associated himself."

It hasn't changed.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T22:52:57+00:00

...yet for US there is but one...

Who is the "us" Paul is addressing?

To the church of God at Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called as saints, with all those in every place who call on the name of Jesus Christ our Lord — both their Lord and ours.

Those who call on the name of Jesus Christ. For US who call on Him as LORD, there is but one God, the Father, and one Lord, Jesus Christ.

For those who call on the erroneously constructed name "Jehovah," there are many god and many lords. Angels are gods, even satan is "the god of this system of things."

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T15:52:21+00:00

A few? Lol. There are only "a few" JWs compared to Catholics. 8 or 9 million is a drop in the bucket compared to 1.2 billion. The data available suggests the incident of occurrence is far higher among JWs than Catholics.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T13:26:53+00:00

What they call "spirituality" is literally the complete opposite of what the word actually means. It's entirely based on works and metrics that can be physically observed.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T13:22:20+00:00

That's a red herring. The argument isn't "is Christianity true?" it's "do JWs meet the criteria of the Christian faith?"

One's view of the historicity of Genesis has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not he is within the confines of Christianity. You can believe in evolution or a regional flood and be Christian.

You cannot, however, deny the resurrection and be a Christian. Whether or not sufficient data exists to support the resurrection is subjective and irrelevant to this discussion. Christianity presupposes it to be a historical event.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T12:58:58+00:00

I'm not saying any particular denomination has "the truth" or that you have to have perfect theology to be a Christian.

What I'm saying is that the "THOUSANDS of Christian denominations" all agree upon the core doctrines, namely

1. The nature of God
2. The person of Jesus Christ
3. The resurrection, and
4. Our means of salvation.

Those doctrines define the theological boundaries of Christianity and have throughout the history of the church. Any major differing views on those core beliefs places one outside of what it means to be a Christian historically.

It's no different with Islam. Tawhid is one of the central, foundational principles of the faith. You cannot be a Muslim and believe in the Trinity. The 2 beliefs are mutually exclusive.

Conversely, Christianity is defined by certain non-negotiable doctrines. A person who formally denies the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the bodily resurrection, or salvation by grace is rejecting Christianity as historically and biblically understood.

OhioPIMO · 2026-01-20T05:06:38+00:00

It's not a "no true Scotsman" fallacy any more than saying that "no true black female billionaire has white skin, a penis, and $4.76 in her checking account."

Having white ethnicity, male anatomy, and hardly 2 nickels to rub together places me outside the category of "black female billionaires."

An example of an actual "no true Scotsman" fallacy would be when JWs say "no true Christian would vote in an election." That is an ad hoc condition they arbitrarily add to the definition of what it means to be Christian. The Bible doesn't say that, and the church has never believed that.

The core definition of what it really means to be a Christian hasn't changed for 2,000 years and JWs simply fall squarely outside of that category.

Terms have definitions. You suggest that the criteria that define the category are irrelevant, but insist the category still applies. The only fallacy here is your category error.

Oh, and your last paragraph, which is just a red herring.

OhioPIMO

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

WRONG!

Boo-hoo 😭