Why do Jehovah's Witnesses Believe?

Question

"Christ is God's Son and is inferior to him." Given in support of this position are these verses: "And lo, a voice from heaven, saying, 'This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased'" (Matt. 3:17). "I proceeded and came forth from God" (John 8:42). "If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28). "I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God" (John 20:17). "The head of every man is Christ, the head of a woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God" (1 Cor. 11:3). "When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one" (1 Cor. 15:28).

But what about John 10:30: "I and the Father are one"? Or, "He who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9)? Or, "All that the Father has is mine" (John 16:15). Or, "The Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the Sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God" (John 5:18)? Or, "[Jesus], though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (Phil. 2:6).

You forgot about John 1:1-18
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
He was in the beginning with God.
All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be
through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race;
the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
A man named John was sent from God.
He came for testimony, to testify to the light, so that all might believe through him.
He was not the light, but came to testify to the light.
The true light, which enlightens everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and the world came to be through him, but the world did not know him.
He came to what was his own, but his own people did not accept him.
But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in his name,
who were born not by natu

Answer 1

I think it's a misunderstanding of the Father being higher than the Son in office but the same in nature, essence, character

interestingly the apostles taught men like Polycarp the successor to John chosen by John, Clement the successor to Peter chosen by PEter and people of their day like Ignatius who Polycarp wrote to. As seirous challenge to all would be If you look at Polycarp, Celement and Ignatious writings see if they do or do not agree with Jehovah witness doctrines but rather would be consistent with orthodox Christian beliefs which they prefer to set aside and let the chips fall where thye may

We all make many mistakes and have to strive to see what is true and the treasure of God is worth the quest. I think the mistake partly comes, in part, errors are because Jehovah witnesses accept uncritically the mistakes of a person who broke off a seventh day adventist splinter group named Charles Russel and the anonymously translated version The New World translation In essence the actual doctrines expounded by real church fathers like Polycarp, Ignatius or Clement would not ever be studied by them although these men were successors to and taught by the real apostles with the real teachings of Jesus and the real gospel.
They prefer an anonymous translation by people unqualified to make a translation because they atre looking for confirmation of a preference rather than looking to serious study of the real scriptures They are sincere, but sincerely wrong in some respects

Answer 2

You forgot another one: John 14:28 ... The father is greater than I am."

The answer to your question is quite simple. Take John 10:30. He is referring to unity of thought and belief. John 16:15? I don't understand the question. How does that prove Jesus is God. It's talking about two different people. JESUS saying all that THE FATHER has is his. Phil 2:6 Jesus was in his Form, just as I am in yours. He was in a spiritual body just as his Father is. I am in your (human) form. Why do you dismiss the first part of that that says he gave no thought to a seizure that he should be EQUAL to God. Why would he even give that thought if he WERE God? Finally John 5:18...Jesus did not make himself equal to God. The religious leaders are the ones who felt he was doing so and were angered. It obviously didn't stick because later in the book of John you have ... John 10:36 "do YOU say to me whom the Father sanctified and dispatched into the world, ‘You blaspheme,’ because I said, I am God’s Son?" .. Jesus' worst enemies could have accused him of claiming to be God. Why didn't they? Why limit themselves to accusing him of blasphemy for claiming to be God's SON?

About John 1:1 - If you look at the structure of the sentence. How can the Word both BE God and be WITH God? I am no greek scholar so I can't properly explain this ... but the only explanation is that the word "a" is missing. In the beginning... the word was A god. That, in reference to Jesus Christ, would be accurate. The fact that light or life is said to come through him is perfectly in keeping with his being God's SON. God used him to bring those things into the word. It's in keeping with what Colossians 1: 15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; 16 because BY MEANS OF HIM all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. ALL OTHER THINGS HAVE BEEN CREATED THROUGH HIM and for him 17 Also, he is before all [other] things and by means of him all [other] things were made to exist,

Why does verse :16 not say, all other things were created BY him.

I hope that helps.

Answer 3

While it is difficult to perceive any actual "question" here, a few points of this "questioner" are easily refuted by those who believe that God and Christ are two distinct persons.

John 10:30 loses all trinitarian usefulness when it is juxtaposed with John 17:21.

John 5:19 explains why Jesus said what he did at John 14:9 ("The Son cannot do a single thing of his own initiative, but only what he beholds the Father doing. For whatever things that One does, these things the Son also does in like manner." satisfactorily explains "He that has seen me has seen the Father").

Yes, John 16:15 says that "All the things that the Father has are mine" but other verses plainly clarify that it was not always so. See Matthew 11:27;28:18, Luke 10:22; John 3:35;17:2.

John 5:18 does not express the apostle John's belief, but the opinions of Jesus' enemies who were seeking to build a case for blasphemy against Jesus. See Luke 6:2,7.

An alternate translation of Phil 2:6 reads thusly: "[Jesus] gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God."

Learn more:
http://watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm?article=article_05.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/rq/index.htm?article=article_03.htm
http://www.watchtower.org/library/pr/index.htm?article=article_04.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/dg/index.htm?article=article_03.htm
http://watchtower.org/e/lmn/index.htm?article=article_04.htm

Answer 4

“I and the Father Are One”

THAT text, at John 10:30, is often cited to support the Trinity, even though no third person is mentioned there. But Jesus himself showed what he meant by his being “one” with the Father. At John 17:21, 22, he prayed to God that his disciples “may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, . . . that they may be one just as we are one.” Was Jesus praying that all his disciples would become a single entity? No, obviously Jesus was praying that they would be united in thought and purpose, as he and God were.—See also 1 Corinthians 1:10.

At 1 Corinthians 3:6, 8, Paul says: “I planted, Apollos watered . . . He that plants and he that waters are one.” Paul did not mean that he and Apollos were two persons in one; he meant that they were unified in purpose. The Greek word that Paul used here for “one” (hen) is neuter, literally “one (thing),” indicating oneness in cooperation. It is the same word that Jesus used at John 10:30 to describe his relationship with his Father. It is also the same word that Jesus used at John 17:21, 22. So when he used the word “one” (hen) in these cases, he was talking about unity of thought and purpose.

Regarding John 10:30, John Calvin (who was a Trinitarian) said in the book Commentary on the Gospel According to John: “The ancients made a wrong use of this passage to prove that Christ is . . . of the same essence with the Father. For Christ does not argue about the unity of substance, but about the agreement which he has with the Father.”

Right in the context of the verses after John 10:30, Jesus forcefully argued that his words were not a claim to be God. He asked the Jews who wrongly drew that conclusion and wanted to stone him: “Why do you charge me with blasphemy because I, consecrated and sent into the world by the Father, said, ‘I am God’s son’?” (John 10:31-36, NE) No, Jesus claimed that he was, not God the Son, but the Son of God.

Answer 5

I'll go ahead and just take John 14:9-
Jesus was establishing that he and his father were in union in belief. Any translation would make the surrounding verses not make sense. For instance, verse 1 states "Do not let YOUR hearts be troubled. Exercise faith in God, exercise faith also in me. "
Why else would he differentiate faith in both of they were one and the same?
Or, how about verse 15 and 16 from the same chapter?
“If YOU love me, YOU will observe my commandments; 16 and I will request the Father and he will give YOU another helper to be with YOU forever,

Why would he have to request the father if he was the father?
Also, why would he say he was going his way to the father if he was the father in verse 12?

Answer 6

I don't see a question there. Why do we believe what?

That Jesus is God's son and not God.

John 3:16.

Jesus' own words.

Which outweigh John 1:1.

Answer 7

"Christ is God's Son and is inferior to him."

This alone is sound enough reason since it's Jesus' own words.

""If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, because I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I" (John 14:28).

Can't understand how anyone can misunderstand this clear statement from Jesus.

Answer 8

--JESUS WAS INDEED EQUAL TO: Mary Magdalene in this instance of an expression of humility:

(John 20:16-18) 17 Jesus said to her: “Stop clinging to me. For I have not yet ascended to the Father. But be on your way to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and YOUR Father and to my God and YOUR God.’” 18 Mary Mag′da·lene came and brought the news to the disciples: “I have seen the Lord!” and that he said these things to her.”
--JUST IMAGINE that a lowly person who once had demons was at EQUALITY in worship with Jesus--CAN YOU NOT put that together, or is that too simple for your trinity intelligence?
--AS A HUMAN he had nothing over anyone in his privilege of worship of his God & Father!
--FAITHFUL worship of Jehovah God, was ALWAYS Jesus primary concern and no flim flammery on anyones part with any NON-REASONING of the trinity, could ever change that.

Answer 9

"I and the father are one" Means that Jesus and God were in union with each other. They are not the same person. Jesus would pray to God. If he and God were one why would Jesus pray to himself. Remember that Jesus' mission here on earth was to declare the Kingdom of God. Just like when we say " I and my son are one. Meaning that if you have not met my son just knowing me will give you an idea of what my son is like.

Answer 10

John 10:30: "I and the Father are one"?

They are one, but one what?

Are they same being? John 14:28 says the father is a higher being then the son.

Are they the same deity? 1 Corinthians 11:3 says the father is a higher God then the son.

So what are they one of?

Since there is no third person being mention it must mean he is in Union with his father just as we are in union with Christ.

"may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, . . . that they may be one just as we are one.", he prayed to God that his disciples "may all be one, just as you, Father, are in union with me and I am in union with you, that they also may be in union with us, . . . that they may be one just as we are one." - John 17:21, 22

John 14:9 - Spirit creatures, angels, are able to behold the brilliance of Jehovah (Mt 18:10; Lu 1:19), an experience that no human eyes could endure, for Jehovah himself told Moses: “No man may see me and yet live.” (Ex 33:20) John said: “No man has seen God at any time.” (Joh 1:18)

Therefore, when Jesus told his disciple Philip: “He that has seen me has seen the Father also” (Joh 14:9), and when the apostle John said: “He that does bad has not seen God” (3Jo 11), obviously they were speaking of seeing God, not with one’s physical eyes, but with what the apostle Paul described as ‘the eyes of the heart.’ (Eph 1:18)

John 16:15 - "All that the Father has is mine" because his father gave it to him, prior to that he did not have thoese possessions.

(John 3:35) The Father loves the Son and has given all things into his hand.

What is the meaning of John 5:18?

John 5:18, RS: “This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God.”

It was the unbelieving Jews who reasoned that Jesus was attempting to make himself equal with God by claiming God as his Father. While properly referring to God as his Father, Jesus never claimed equality with God. He straightforwardly answered the Jews: “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing.” (John 5:19, RS; see also John 14:28; John 10:36.)

It was those unbelieving Jews, too, who claimed that Jesus broke the Sabbath, but they were wrong also about that. Jesus kept the Law perfectly, and he declared: “It is lawful to do good on the sabbath.”—Matt. 12:10-12, RS.

PHILIPPIANS 2:6 - Jesus even though in the same form of his father, being a spirit creature and divine did not considered to be equal it his father. This was of course differnt for the Angel who became Satan did grasped to be equal with God and had the first human pair to do the same even though they were just flesh.

John 1:1 - Since Jehovah is eternal and had no beginning (Ps 90:2; Re 15:3), the Word’s being with God from “the beginning” must here refer to the beginning of Jehovah’s creative works. This is confirmed by other texts identifying Jesus as “the firstborn of all creation,” “the beginning of the creation by God.” (Col 1:15; Re 1:1; 3:14) Thus the Scriptures identify the Word (Jesus in his prehuman existence) as God’s first creation, his firstborn Son.

That Jehovah was truly the Father or Life-Giver to this firstborn Son and, hence, that this Son was actually a creature of God is evident from Jesus’ own statements.

He pointed to God as the Source of his life, saying, “I live because of the Father.” According to the context, this meant that his life resulted from or was caused by his Father, even as the gaining of life by dying men would result from their faith in Jesus’ ransom sacrifice.—Joh 6:56, 57.