Here are just a few scriptures that plainly state who Jesus is. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:” ( Eph 1:3 KJV ) “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,” ( Eph 1:3 NASB ) “Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” ( 1 Joh 5:5 NASB ) “Who is he that overcomes the world but he that believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” ( 1 Joh 5:5 Codex Sinaiticus ) In both cases, it states: “Son of God”, not “is God”! Here is a scripture that needs some thought. “And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, even in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.” ( 1 Joh 5:20 KJV ) Who is the “him” that is true? “And the tempter came and said to Him, ‘If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.’” ( Mt 4:3 NASB ) The “tempter” is Satan the Devil. Did he think he was speaking to HIS creator, GOD? Here is a case where the demons had a question for Jesus. “And they cried out, saying, ‘What business do we have with each other, Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?’” ( Mt 8:29 NASB ) Again, who did the demons think they were talking to?
English-speaking readers of the Bible have an embarrassing wealth of good translations of the Bible from which to choose. Although it is fine to have a “favorite,” it would be a mistake to claim that one translation is “the best,” let alone the only good or acceptable version. (Institute for Religious Research) Ahhhhh, but I repeat myself. “For there are three that testify: the Spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.” ( 1 Joh 5:7-8 NASB ) “For there are three bearing witness in Heaven: the Father the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. And there are three who bear witness on the earth: The Spirit, and the water, and the blood; and the three are to the one.” ( 1 Joh 5:7-8 LITV ) “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.” ( 1 Joh 5:7-8 KJV ) “For they that testify are three, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood, and the three are one. ( 1 Joh 5:7-8 Codex Sinaiticus ) So, the Codex and the NASB do not have “in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost” in verse 7. That part was added to The Clementine Vulgate of 1598. In the translations which use, “the three are one”, have translated the Greek word heis (hice) literally “one”. But, the subject matter is not speaking about numbers. The subject is about Jesus Christ being the Son of God, and that He and God are in agreement, and with the driving force of God’s Spirit. It is the same use of: “For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.” ( Gen 2:24; Mt 19:5-6; Mk 10:8; 1 Co 6:16; Eph 5:31 NASB ) “Then a voice came out of the cloud, saying, ‘This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!’” ( Lu 9:35 NASB ) “And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my beloved Son: hear him.” ( Lu 9:35 KJV ) It did not say; “This is ME, God Almighty, Listen to ME! HE and I are the same!” Think about this; The two witnesses are metaphors [in a way], those true Christians at the time of His [Jesus] arrival. The olive tree represents the fruit of the message of Christ’s return to power. The lamp-stand represents those true Christians as having the light for the world. ( Mt 5:14 ) The olive trees represent the fruit of God’s word. “Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people, producing the fruit of it. (Mt 21:43; Eph 5:9; Heb 12:11; 13:15; Jam 3:18) “With the fruit of a man’s mouth his stomach will be satisfied; He will be satisfied with the product of his lips. Death and life are in the power of the tongue, And those who love it will eat its fruit.” ( Pr 18:20-21 NASB ) Is this literal, or metaphor? “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” ( Mt 12:37 NASB )
Hi brother.. I like what you said about the olive trees, and wanted to add a little about the lampstand. We at one time discussed the emblems of the sanctuary and what they represent, such as in the Holy Place. The showbread and the body of Christ, with their prayers at the alter of incense. I agree the lampstand is the light of the world, but I might add it is the Word itself. Pr 6:23 "For the commandment is a lamp, And the law is a light," Psm 119:105 "Your word is a lamp to my foot, And a light for my path." While I believe the Two Witnesses represent individuals, I also believe they represent the body of Christ as a whole. While they are described as two olive trees and "the fruit of the message to the world", they feed the lampstand with their oil, they will present prophecy to the world, the sacred secret from their Lord. That capstone in Joshua's and Zerubabel's hands have seven eyes, and these are the seven spirits of God, the seven lamps... These two stand on either side of the Lord as we see in the transfiguration, and will represent him in the time of the end to the world just as Moses and Arron. Before I go on and on...lol All love...
Hey Josh, I agree with you. We will see the truth when our King returns. I’m sure that most of you have heard the phrase; “I’ll choose the lesser of two evils.” How could a true Christian make such a statement? Yet, that is what many say, while claiming to vote for some government politician. I then have to ask them; “So, you are choosing evil? Why? Does God want you to choose evil? Here is what the Bible says! “My son, fear Jehovah and the king; do not meddle with those who change, for their calamity shall rise suddenly, and who knows the ruin of both of them?” ( Pr 24:21-22 LITV ) “And Jehovah saw that the evil of man was great on the earth, and every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the day long.” ( Gen 6:5 LITV ) The Hebrew word that is translated from Hebrew as Evil is ra’ (rah). This is the same word that is used at Gen 2:9 when speaking of fruit from “the tree of the knowledge good and evil.” (Gen 2:9) There is no lesser. It is either good or evil, period. “Woe to those who say to evil, good; and to good, evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness;” ( Isa 5:20 LITV ) Well, wait a minute: What about this scripture? ( Rom 13:1-7 ) It says WE MUST BE IN SUBJECTION to the existing authorities. Does it not? Yes, it does. But, it does not say to PARTICIPATE in that government. The Greek word used here is hupotasso (hoop-ot-as’-so), a compound of hoop-o’ = by, or under. Plus, tas’-so = to put in order, to station, to place in a certain order. A Greek military term meaning “to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader”. In non-military use, it was “a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden”. Paul gives the true meaning in his letter to the Corinthians. “For ‘He subjected all things under His feet;’ but when He says that all things have been subjected, it is plain that it excepts Him who has subjected all things to Him. But when all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who has subjected all things to Him, that God may be all things in all.” ( 1 Co 15:27-28 LITV ), (Psa 8:6)
“Dost thou believe that God is one? thou doest well: the demons also believe and tremble.” ( Jam 2:19 Codex Sinaiticus ) The word translated as one, is heis (hice) and, the NASB states: “One early ms reads there is one God.” It reads; “Dost thou believe there is one God?” Unfortunately they do not give the name of the manuscript. This involves verb, noun, placement because Greek is similar to Latin and other languages which place the noun before the verb. In this case heis is used as a number. Either way, it still defines God as being one, singular. Once again, we must read this in the context of the subject James was speaking about. What was that? Conduct of Christians. You can talk all week about your faith, but if your actions are counter productive, what good is your faith. “So speak and so act as those who are to be judged by the law of liberty.” ( Jam 2:12 NASB ) I had been thinking about peoples viewpoint on certain matters when the word perspective entered into my thoughts. Opinions are derived by “perspective”. It isn’t necessarily what one sees visually, but what one thinks of in the mind. What are the influences that effect the perspective? perspective (n.) late 14c., “science of optics,” from Old French perspective and directly from Medieval Latin perspectiva ars “science of optics,” from fem. of perspectivus “of sight, optical” from Latin perspectus “clearly perceived,” past participle of perspicere “inspect, look through, look closely at,” from per “through” (from PIE root *per- (1) “forward,” hence “through”) + specere “look at” (from PIE root *spek- “to observe”). Sense of “art of drawing objects so as to give appearance of distance or depth” is first found 1590s, influenced by Italian prospettiva, an artists’ term. The figurative meaning “mental outlook over time” is first recorded 1762. The apostle Paul gives Timothy good advice about having the right perspective on life as a Christian. (1 Tim 6:1-7) I had to smile when I read the following. I got side tracked while looking for perspective. https://www.etymonline.com/columns/post/cloud-of-uknowing Effect is an interesting word that has an Affect that can Infect. Jesus was a Nazarite. Dedicated to Jehovah from birth. (Nu 6:1-4) How are we to resolve these seeming contradictions of scripture? This is Jehovah speaking to Elizabeth about the birth of John. “For he will be great in the sight of the Lord; and he will drink no wine or liquor, and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit while yet in his mother’s womb.” ( Lu 1:15 NASB ) John was a Nazarite as written in Numbers 6. “For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb.” ( Lu 1:15 KJV ) Jesus was also a Nazarite. Jesus said: “But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.” ( Mt 26:29 NASB ) “Truly I say to you, I will never again drink of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” ( Mk 14:25 NASB ) “. . . for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine from now on until the kingdom of God comes.” ( Lu 22:18 NASB ) “And taking the cup, and giving thanks, He gave to them, saying, Drink all of it. For this is My blood of the New Covenant which concerning many is being poured out for remission of sins.” ( Mt 26:27-28 ) All accounts of the “last supper” do not mention Jesus literally drinking the wine. Also, the wine is a metaphor/representative of “his blood” in the same sense that the bread was “his body.
I don't mean to hijack your thoughts, but you mentioning the wine reminded me of another post I wrote about the cup: What I am about to do is challenge what you think you know about our Lords famous prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane. Here is the part of the prayer I wish to address; Luk 22:42 "Father, if you want to, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, let, not my will, but yours take place.” The only explanation for Jesus words I have ever heard have been to say our Lord was asking his Father to somehow remove what he was about to go through. The Watchtower holds that our Lord was wishing to not disgrace Jehovah's name, and this was the cup he requested to be removed from him, but is this so? While most of Christendom simply say this event shows Jesus human nature in fear of the events he knew were about to transpire, and a desire to somehow avoid what was to come, but is this so? What I am about to do is to dispel both and all of these explanations! The first thing I am going to say is this, our Lord never once wished to circumvent our Fathers will, and in fact I am going to share with you a couple of times he emphatically resisted any thought to escaping his fate! Mth 16:21-23 "From that time forward, Jesus began explaining to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and chief priests and scribes and be killed, and on the third day be raised up. At this Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying: “Be kind to yourself, Lord; you will not have this happen to you at all.” But turning his back, he said to Peter: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you think, not God’s thoughts, but those of men.” As well; Jhn 18:11 "Jesus, however, said to Peter: “Put the sword into its sheath. Should I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?” So what I am about to do is to take a stand, and draw a line in the sand, and say that there is no way our Lord prayed for his Father to remove any of the events that were about to occur, and instead I will offer you an alternative frame of mind for our Lords prayer. Jesus felt that he had accomplished all his father had willed for him to do up to that evening, and was ready to fully accomplish his Fathers will by offering his life for mankind. Never, not even once did our Lord waver, or question this fate he was destined to accomplish! This cup he requested his Father to remove was the cup of blood, his life force, that cup that contains our Lords soul! Luk 22:20 "This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in your behalf." What I understand our Lord to be saying is, he prayed for his Father to pour out that cup of blood, his life force in behalf of mankind, but not by his will, for if there were still things Jehovah wanted him to accomplish, he was willing to do them, if he hadn't completed his Fathers will then he was still willing to do so, whatever that might be, but ultimately he was ready to now finish his destiny by offering his perfect life in behalf of mankind! Our Lord sweated blood because he was so focused on doing his Fathers will that he didn't want a single thought or action to detract him from accomplishing his Fathers will! Luk 22:44 "But he was in such agony that he kept praying more earnestly; and his sweat became as drops of blood falling to the ground." The more I have prayed to understand my Lord Christ Jesus, and the more I have prayed to understand his relationship with our Father, I have been blessed to understand how dedicated our Lord was to not only us, but to Jehovah, and I publicly thank them from the inner most parts of my heart and soul for that opportunity to know them ever so much more! Thank you Jehovah, and our Lord Christ Jesus!"
You know, it's interesting brother, after I replied above I got to thinking more about what you said, and what I replied. You know, the text doesn't say "He took the wine and gave it to them" or "He had them drink the wine", he talks about the cup. He took the cup, gave it to them and told them it represented the pouring out of his blood. He says, "This cup represents the new covenant." I thought it interesting when you said the text doesn't mention he drank any, and I hadn't thought of that before, and your right, it doesn't say he did. In fact it says he wont drink any of it until he returns, but previously he was talking about the cup, not the wine. In fact he separates the "fruit of the vine" from his blood simply for brining it up. We, (or I have) just assumed he meant the wine, after all it is like blood, and one could just assume it was the wine inside the cup that Jesus was directing his disciples too, but was it? If I'm right and his prayer to his Father asking him to remove the cup from him was in fact Jesus wanting to fulfill his role as sacrifice, and the cup represented the pouring out of his blood, then that's why he asked his father to remove it, because it was the cup that represented his blood, not the wine. Jesus never once veered from doing his Fathers will, and even when Peter suggested it he turned his back on him, so in fact, it must be the cup, not the wine that represents his blood. It's the cup... Interesting..........
I had to read your text several times to be able to understand the thought you wanted to express, but I am not far from thinking that you are right. I will make it the subject of a deep reflection tonight. And thank you too, Tsaphah. Why can't we have that kind of reflection in the KH?
Shalom, to you Joshua and to all e-jw family. There is a Key text to know what Jesus meant by asking his Father to remove that (CUP) it is Marc 14:35. Also Mat 20:22,23 gives us insight on what the cup meant. May Jehovah and Christ Blessing be with you all. Christ Love, Regent
Our Lord wishing the hour would pass was not surprising, knowing your destiny is coming, and when it was coming, I'd want to get it over with too. All that night he knew exactly what events were going to transpire, and when they would. This goes back to my post above #46, in no way did he ever wish to get away from Jehovah's will that he offer his blood for mankind, but instead with that in mind he wished that the time would pass quickly, the hour pass physically, so that he could more quickly offer his life. He was showing his willingness to do his Fathers will at every opportunity without fail, he was quite simply PERFECT... Yes it most certainly was the "cup" that represented his sacrifice, not the wine. Luk 22:20 "This cup means the new covenant by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in your behalf." I really cherish these moments beyond words... When our Lord allows us to understand his Word that much more, it is truly such a gift, and often requires huge shifts, but that's just the fun of it!
You know, I thought about that movie last night too... From what I remember it was Harrison Ford who made sure Jehovah's name was used in the movie...
Brethren Joshua, Mat: 26:42 gives the Key to what Jesus meant by this" cup pass away from me". Was it not if his father permitted it to pass away, he would need to drink it? God's Love to all. Regent
No way brother, in no way can that be correct... Remember what he said when Peter suggested that? Mth 16:22,23 "At this Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him, saying: “Be kind to yourself, Lord; you will not have this happen to you at all.” But turning his back, he said to Peter: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me, because you think, not God’s thoughts, but those of men.” No, instead what our Lord was praying for in the garden of Gethsemane was for our Father to remove that cup that represented his blood from him so the he would fully accomplish his will. Never, not even once did Jesus ever suggest or hint at not wanting to go through with his sacrifice to come, that is the essence of his perfection... Jesus was asking his father to allow him to pour out his blood for mankind, but according to his Fathers will, not his own. The cup represented his blood that he was about to pour out in behalf of mankind and he was asking his father to allow him to do so... That scene in the garden is a demonstration of how faithful our Lord was to our Father, and to us!
Hi, Joshua. Do you have a lot of patience? I hope so, You need a lot with me. First of all, I agree with your conclusion that Christ never failed in any way that his word that he used in that prayer was not to avoid the drinking of that cup, you have proved it with many Bible text, the Bible interpret the Bible. What I wanted you to do was the same for the choice of Jesus words in that prayer that seems controversial. He was certainly in very deep thought at such a time. To what I understand of the choice of those words, it was a resume of what he had discussed with his disciples. Like in Mat:7:28 ...I have not come of my own initiative. Joh 5:30 I cannot do a single thing of my own initiative... I seek, not my own will, but the will of him that sent me. Yes, I come to the same conclusion, but maybe with a different approach. Patience is a fruit of the Spirit Ga; 5:22 Godly Love, Regent
Okay, here we go... (Mth 26:42) Now our Lords words in his second prayer back up his first prayer, he still is praying that the cup be removed, that cup representing his blood. However, he says if it can't happen unless he drinks it, then his Fathers will be done, meaning he's saying that he's aware of how he's going to die, and saying he also excepts his form of death. His first prayer is saying he excepts his role as sacrifice, and his second prayer he excepts the method in which it will take place, after all he knew how egregious it was going to be. If I had to guess this is the first time he addressed his Father about the subject. After accomplishing all things except his death, he excepts before his Father his sacrifice, and the means by which it would take place. He's obviously asking for the cup to still be removed, that cup representing his blood, and he wants to fulfill his Fathers will, so he also is saying he excepts how that is going to take place... All love...
Can we present things this way?: The cup represents the covenant; this is confirmed by Luke 22:20. What will be poured is the blood, not the cup. The cup is not a liquid. "by virtue of my blood, which is to be poured out in your behalf.” So both are indissociable. Every covenant must be ratified by blood, as in the Mosaic Law, as Paul has confirmed. The blood that has been poured thank to Jesus’ sacrifice allowed to enter in the new covenant. In order for the blood of Jesus to be poured, the cup, his life, had to be emptied of his blood. In this case, the cup would represent his life, and the wine his blood. So what Jesus asked would be that his life be taken away so that his blood would be shed for the covenant to be validated.
Okay, let's start here, obviously we are discussing the words "wine" & "cup" in scripture when it uses them as a metaphor, not in a literal way. So with that in mind we have two different cups, one is the cup of Gods wrath, and the other the cup of the Lords covenant. So what it appears is, the drinking of either of these cups represents death. It appears scripture uses the drinking of a cup as a symbol of losings ones life, whether that be by the faithful or unfaithful. Mth 20:22 "You do not know what you are asking for. Can you drink the cup that I am about to drink?” Rev 14:9,10 "If anyone worships the wild beast and its image and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand, he will also drink of the wine of the anger of God that is poured out undiluted into the cup of His wrath," Now, the cup clearly represented Christs blood at the "last supper", and his prayers in the garden, yet the drinking of the cup for himself and his disciples represented death, and the pouring out of which complete acceptance of doing so; Mth 20:22 "Jesus answered: “You do not know what you are asking for. Can you drink the cup that I am about to drink?” Phil 2:17 "However, even if I am being poured out like a drink offering on the sacrifice and the holy service to which your faith has led you, I am glad and I rejoice with all of you." 2Tim 4:6 "For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time for my releasing is imminent." So clearly Jesus was telling his disciples they would suffer in the same manner as he would, for indeed Jesus always planned to drink this cup from his Father, without any doubt or falter; Jhn 18:11 "Jesus, however, said to Peter: “Put the sword into its sheath. Should I not drink the cup that the Father has given me?” So if we're going to die no matter which cup we drink from, which one would you choose? Now, if we go back to the cup of his covenant, the drinking of it represented entering into that covenant with him, but the wine was irrelevant, and was not part of the symbolism, the symbol of the cup was what mattered, and drinking from it in fact was excepting to give their lives in behalf of this covenant, but gaining it through the cup of his perfect life force, his blood. The bread represented his perfect body, and cup his perfect life force, the blood. Again, the contents were irrelevant... Now since that cup also represented his blood, that means the covenant was for eternal life, for within Christs blood was the gate by which mankind would gain eternal life; Lev 17:14 "For the life of every sort of flesh is its blood, because the life is in it." Jhn 6:53 "So Jesus said to them: “Most truly I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in yourselves." Drinking of the cup represented gaining eternal life through that covenant of Christ Jesus perfect life, because his life was in his blood. Then going back to our Lords prayer, and asking his Father to remove that perfect life from him, in order to do so he would have to drink of that cup of death himself. So our Lord drinking of the cup represented his willingness to do his Fathers will, and his disciples drinking the cup was to follow in Christs footsteps. Even our Lord had to drink from this cup in order to gain life. So even he had to count on his own blood in order to gain eternal life... He didn't need to drink of the cup at the table, because the covenant was his blood, but accordingly even he needed to drink of the cup, to die in perfection to gain eternal life. But what's important clearly is from what cup you are drinking, if your going to die either way, from drinking from the cup of our Lord, or the cup of the wrath of Jehovah, only one of them gives you eternal life, and that's through the covenant of the cup of our Lords blood, the same cup he drank from, not at the last supper, but at his death. Jesus prepared that cup throughout his life into perfection, and once made perfect in all things he accomplished in doing his Fathers will, he presented that cup to his disciples and lastly to his Father, so that all mankind could gain eternity... This is a metaphor for our Lords work during his kingship. After making all things new, and bringing all things to perfection he will hand that kingdom over to his Father at the end of his reign, and that's what he did here on earth, he accomplished all things to perfection and in the end handed over that cup to his Father. Thank you, it's through these discussions I come to a greater understanding, and I appreciated the discussions, I learn more when we have differing views then anything, it forces me to be sure of all things and dig deeper. Now you may still disagree at this point that the wine is irrelevant, and that's okay, I would still like to hear your reasoning after reading this post, if your still with me...
I have to be quick because my computer is about to die. The Cup, mentioned by Jesus. “And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not asI will, but as You will.’” ( Mt 26:39 NASB ) The Greek word, poterion = cup. metaph. one’s lot or experience, whether joyous or adverse, divine appointments, whether favourable or unfavourable, are likened to a cup which God presents one to drink: so of prosperity and adversity. “But Jesus answered, ‘You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?’” (Mt 20:22 NASB ) It wasn't the literal “cup”, just as the contents were not his blood.
When you have the opportunity brother, read the post just above yours #58, I argue the contents of the cup were irrelevant and had no part in the symbolism. I think you missed the gist, understanding it was the cup that represented his blood, not the wine is the argument. Yes metaphorically, but the wine was not the focus of the metaphor, it was the cup. If you miss that point you wont grasp the meaning. We aren't arguing a literal cup, we are arguing a metaphoric cup that represents Jesus life force, his blood, and the wine (or contents) has nothing to do with it. The cup in the metaphor represents his blood, not the contents...