Why the jehovah witness do not pray to the Son?
Viewed 626 times
|Jaime l de Aragon||posted Sun, 14 Oct 2012 10:26:00 GMT(10/14/2012)|
Post 262 of 382
Why not pray Witnesses to the Son, only the Father?, Another biblical interpretation very `sui generis' of Wacthower
How to Pray the Son? (Say a witness) Pray the Son!!, Not only be taught to pray to God through of Son. Not, the requests to the Son of God are acceptable and desirable
Teaching excluding pray only to God the Son, not biblical
A supposed dialogue with a Jehovah's Witness
- If ud. said: "Father receive my spirit, who would you be praying?
- "Of course, the Father, the Creator." (Answers the witness)
. - Correct. Now, if you. said, "Iesous Xristo receive my spirit", who would you be praying?
I would be praying for her Son, but we do not do that. The Bible teaches us that we should pray only to the Father.
I understand, but I want to show you something Acts 7 is the story of the execution of the first martyr Steven .
Here the story about the end of the chapter, Acts 7, vers. 58: "And cast him in the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul - And they stoned Steven , calling upon God, and saying, Lord Iesous Xristo, receive my spirit."
Here is a prayer to her Son! In case there is any doubt about the meaning of the word "invoke", Psalm 116:4 and 118:5 consult. It means "to pray"
The first time I used this approach, some years ago, I made the mistake of not examining the NWT for possible differences in translation
Not knowing with what I could find New World Translation, I had no choice but to listen to the person reading aloud from the New World Translation:
"And after cast him out of the city, they began to throw stones. And the witnesses laid their outerwear at the feet of a young man named Saul. - They kept throwing stones at Stephen as he did request and saying, Lord Iesous Xristo, receive my spirit. " (Emphasis added)
I thanked God that the Jehovah's Witnesses, at least in this passage. Scripture had not changed.
Moreover, the passage is even clearer in the expression, use the word "request", leaving no doubt that it is a prayer.
Moreover, the passage is even clearer in the expression, use the word "request", leaving no doubt that it is a prayer. Following the advice of Ron Rhodes, top this: "Stephen prayed to Son, not through or by him. If he, being full of the Holy Spirit, he did, and if it was acceptable for him to do, I do not see why ud. unable to do so
The Watchtower has not taught properly in this regard. Could also were wrong in what they teach about the person of Iesous Xristo?
Unfortunately, the witness replied, "I trust the Watchtower"
- Acts 1:24: prayer to His Son by the disciples to guide them in choosing a replacement for Judas. The reference to Jesus in verse. 21 does not confirm that the "Lord" in Acts 1:24 is Jesus. (New World Translation of the changes and says "Lord", but the v. 21 says "Iesous Xristo")
- 2 Cor. 12:8. The context tells us that prayer is His to Son
The Bible is clear. Unfortunately we are dealing with people who follow an organization that practices a sectarian hermeneutics. Always claim or claims to have a direct line of communication with God, revelations, angelic visitations, visions, prophecies, etc.. All these things give them the key to interpreting Scripture and claim a total religious authority.
This authority supersedes the grammar, context, syntax, the cultural context of a passage, language.
"There is one God and one mediator between God and men Iesous Xristo a man" (1 Tim. 2, 5)
This mediation means (pray, beg, make requests to Son, not by a simple mediator magic word "Through your Son amen" means using his own Son in the full sense of the word mediator
What is Mediation? The mediator's role is to assist stakeholders to identify problems, evaluate and assess the strengths and weaknesses in the case, identify common interests, fostering joint problem solving and exploring alternatives ending in a settlement agreement. A mediator is never passive, and less Iesous Xristo who gave his life for us
Or put another way the expression "Pray to the Father through my" means nothing more or less, pray your child directly, that "Through my" "Talk to him" is not a formula to be present at the end of a sentence "Through your Son, Amen, "No, it's pray to your Son, go to the Father" by prayer to Christ "that request he hears, takes her to his Father. By me, said "talk to me"
Witnesses to misunderstand many biblical passages, have understood that prayer means adding a magic formula at the end of the sentence. "Through your Son amen", and they are wrong and have completely eluded her son, talk to him, giving him absolute silence and muteness. Steven erred according to them, a man full of the Holy Spirit
|mP||posted Sun, 14 Oct 2012 11:30:32 GMT(10/14/2012)|
Post 1828 of 4585
Because God has no son, have you read the OT ? God is never said to have a single son anywhere...Jesus the name is unknown in the OT, God can spend pages and pages worrying about men not shaving their beards but he never tells us about his "son".
|Chariklo||posted Sun, 14 Oct 2012 11:50:52 GMT(10/14/2012)|
Post 1868 of 2613
Jaime, you are, of course, absolutely right. The Witnesses have their own translation, and their own selective understanding of the Bible and what it says.
Of course Jesus is God's Son. The Witnesses refuse to pray to him because they somehow twist their minds to deny that he is also divine. Logically, a son is going to be of the same nature as the Father. But they manage not to believe it.
Why? Because, purely and simply, the Watchtower says so. It's as simple as that. It doesn't matter to them really what the Bible says, though they'll argue about it till they're blue in the face. All they care about is what the Watchtower says the Bible says. That's all.
|Jaime l de Aragon||posted Sun, 14 Oct 2012 12:05:27 GMT(10/14/2012)|
Post 267 of 382
You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.
in my name, either calling upon it, he being equally the object of prayer with the Father, or making mention of it, pleading the merits of his blood, righteousness, and sacrifice; whatever was according to the will of God, was for his glory, and their real good, he would do it for them, as well when absent from them, as present with them.
|Cold Steel||posted Mon, 15 Oct 2012 19:47:26 GMT(10/15/2012)|
Post 468 of 1403
Because God has no son. Have you read the OT? God is never said to have a single son anywhere...Jesus the name is unknown in the OT, God can spend pages and pages worrying about men not shaving their beards but he never tells us about his "son".
There are numerous references to the Messiah, such as Isaiah 53 . Also, Zechariah writes: " And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn. " (Zechariah 12)
Daniel also wrote about Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego, the faithful three that were thrown into the fiery furnace:
Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, and rose up in haste, and spake, and said unto his counsellors, Did not we cast three men bound into the midst of the fire? They answered and said unto the king, True, O king. He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God. Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace, and spake, and said, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, ye servants of the most high God, come forth, and come hither. Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, came forth of the midst of the fire." (Daniel 3)
There are many more similar messianic scriptures that Jesus fulfilled, and some that are remaining to be fulfilled. Jesus, too, correctly prophesied regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and the scattering of the Jews. When the Roman armies swept down on the holy city, the Christians had vacated to Pella and other locations because of revelations warning them to flee. Tens of thousands of Jews were crucified and put to the sword, but the Christians escaped because Jesus had warned them when to flee.
And in light of new discoveries and research:
Development of name-titles in Israelite history
I n the Old Testament, the title Elohim often emphasizes the strong, covenant-keeping qualities of God while the name Jehovah, the self-existent and eternal attributes; and Adonai, the characteristics of a sovereign lord; they have not always been applied to just one God.
A study of the various Hebrew words used for deity in the Old Testament reveals that the same name-titles were often used for both true and false gods as well as for human leaders. Thus, the Hebrew for Elohim and Jehovah were often used in a generic sense. Such usage could especially cause confusion if the text were later modified.
Eugene Seaich has indicated that many scholars have found that early Canaanite and Israelite theology recognized two separate and distinct sets of divine traits: one for a "Father of gods" and "Father of men" and the other for a son of the former who was a "dying-and-resurrecting god, who gave life to all creatures" and "managed the cosmos for his Father." Seaich explains that the High God was called "El and his son was called Ba'al at least through the time of the Israelite monarchy." The Israelites who returned from the desert with the Mosaic religion referred to El's son as Yahweh. Some evidence of this distinction still survives in our Old Testament scriptures (see Deuteronomy 32:8–9; Psalm 82; Proverbs 30:4). He also notes that Genesis chapter 1 speaks of Elohim (the longer form of El) as the creator while chapter 2 speaks of Yahweh-Elohim. Seaich writes:
...the Mosaic reform, which only began as an attempt to root out the licentious excesses to which the old polytheism had sunk (Ex. 32), took at least a half-dozen centuries to establish itself as Israel's "true" religion, eliminating in the process many former truths, before emerging as the "ethical monotheism" of late Judaism.... In the new monotheism...the earlier Elohim and Yahweh became the single "YHWH-Elohim" of Deut. 6:4.... The complete assimilation of two gods into one probably took as long as the "Monotheistic Reform" itself, i.e. from ca. 1500 to 500 B.C..... Finally, the Old Testament itself was thoroughly subjected to a corresponding revision (known as the "Deuteronomic Revision"). ( Seaich, pp.15–21)
|biblecheck||posted Tue, 16 Oct 2012 10:15:48 GMT(10/16/2012)|
Post 36 of 95
...are they throwing stones, or kebabs in that photo?