†ICXC NIKA†

Does that include the Holy Orthodox Church, and can you cite a source for this belief of yours?

7(5t-4)-(2+15t)<60

14-(9t-2)<-t+30

To be the Son of somebody is to have their nauture.

I am the Son of my Father, so I have the nature of my father as a man.

Jesus is the Son of the Father, so he has the nature of his father as God.

"Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God." John 5:18

"Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods." Galations 4:8

Only the Almighty God (Jesus) is BY NATURE God.

I have heard many Protestants say that the Bible is read in their Church, and I know that a reading from the Bible is a big part of the Divine Liturgy (Eastern Orthodox Mass).

"Justin Martyr, who died about 165 C.E., called the prehuman Jesus a created angel who is 'other than the God who made all things.' He said that Jesus was inferior to God and never did anything except what the Creator . . . willed him to do and say."-The WatchTower, Should You Believe in the Trinity? Available here: http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm

In reality, Justian Martyr never taught such heresies, but rather taught: “the Father of the universe has a Son; who also, being the first-begotten Word of God, is even God.” First Apology—Chapter 63

Another example of misquotes is when talking about Clement of Alexandria, the WatchTower states: "Clement of Alexandria, who died about 215 C.E., called Jesus in his prehuman existence "a creature" but called God "the uncreated and imperishable and only true God." He said that the Son "is next to the only omnipotent Father" but not equal to him."

In reality, Clement of Alexandria never taught this AT ALL, but rather had this to say:

“For when he says, That which was from the beginning, he touches upon the generation without beginning of the Son, who is co-existent with the Father. There was; then, a Word importing an unbeginning eternity; as also the Word itself, that is, the Son of God, who being, by equality of substance, one with the Father, is eternal and uncreate.” Fragments III— Comments on the First Epistle of John.

Why would the Watchtower misquote the Church Fathers on such matters?

FYI: I don't misquote the Church Fathers, as I actually provide the source of my information. You can verify these quotes on: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/ or http://www.ccel.org/ or the Ante-Nicene Fathers books.

Can you use freerice.com to donate to the hungry, or are you not allowed to, as it is donated through the United Nations World Food program?

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last... I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star... He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus." (Revelation 22:12-13,16,20)

"I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." (Revelation 1:8)

This clearly shows that Jesus is the Alpha and Omega, the Almighty. So much so, that in the early 1900's, the WatchTower admitted that Jesus was almighty.

"It is since His resurrection that the message has gone forth—'All power in Heaven and in earth is given unto Me.' (Matt. 28:18.) Consequently it is only since then that He could be called the Almighty" (p. 15).

Jesus is clearly then, the Almighty.

F.Y.I. I have a copy of this book that this quote came from in my possetion, as we type this. If you doubt this quote, I can e-mail you a scan of this page.

The book says this in regard to itself: "Have you enjoyed this work so far? Are you convinced that it is of the Lord— prepared under His guidance? Have you carefully and prayerfully read the comments on Rev. 7:1? Then brace yourself for the truth..." (126)

This work claims itself to be prepared under the guidance of God, however it makes very odd claims.

It says things such as:

"... in that of His Twelve Apostles, His representatives—St. Paul taking the place of Judas..." (p. 18)

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I thought that it was Matthias who relpaced Judas. (Acts 1:21-26)

"... The Spring of 1918 will bring upon Christendom a spasm of anguish greater even than that experienced in the Fall of 1914." (62)

What do you think of this book?

"Jehovah hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."- Proverbs 16:4

"Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him."- Colossians 1:16

Jehovah made all things for himself.

Christ made all things for himself.

Also, to the common objection that the title "Firstborn of all creation" means the Christ was the first created, it does not and I will quote the Doctor of the Church, the most Holy Saint John Chrysostom on the matter:

"But if a creature: how is He the Image of the Creator? For neither is a horse the image of a man. If the Image mean not exact likeness to the Invisible, what hinders the Angels also from being His Image? for they too are invisible; but not to one another: but the soul is invisible: but because it is invisible, it is simply on that account an image, and not in such sort as he and angels are images.

The Firstborn of all creation. What then, says one, Lo, He is a creature. Whence? tell me. Because he said 'Firstborn.' However, he said not first created, but firstborn. Then it is reasonable that he should be called many things. For he must also be called a brother in all things. (Heb. ii. 17.) And we must take from Him His being Creator; and insist that neither in dignity nor in any other thing is He superior to us? And who that has understanding would say this? For the word firstborn is not expressive of dignity and honor, nor of anything else, but of time only. What does the firstborn signify? That he is created, is the answer. Well. If then this be so, it has also kindred expressions. But otherwise the firstborn is of the same essence with those of whom he is firstborn. Therefore he will be the firstborn son of all things— for it said of every creature; therefore of stones also, and of me, is God the Word firstborn. But again, of what, tell me, are the words firstborn from the dead (Col. 1:18; Romans 8:29.) declaratory? Not that He first rose; for he said not simply, of the dead, but firstborn from the dead, nor yet, that He died first, but that He rose the firstborn from the dead. So that they declare nothing else than this, that He is the Firstfruits of the Resurrection." (Third Homily on Colossians)

Anyway, how is it that the creation was done by Christ for himself, and yet done by Jehovah for himself?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGZy_s_fz1c

Does anybody know a good Interlinear New Testament based on the Byzantiene Type-Text (Not the Textus Reciptcus [What the KJV was based off-of])?

Please, make sure it is based off the Byzantiene Text, not Alexandrian, nor Western type text.

On www.watchtower.org (The JW Official Website) it says:

"The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. is a legal organization in use by Jehovah’s Witnesses."

AND

"Copyright © 2008 Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania."

What's the difference between the Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, and the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, and together do they go by Watchtower, or Watch Tower?

Thw quote is: "The predicate (God) stands emphatically first, as in John 4:24. It is necessarily without the article... No idea of inferiority of nature is suggested by [this] form of expression, which simply affirms the true deity of the Word... in the third clause 'the Word' is declared to be 'God', and so included in the unity of the Godhead."

I want to know where it comes from (book preferably) and how I can verify it's authenticity. Thanks.

I remember a number of years ago, when I was having a Bible study, the elder studying with me told me that on Jeopardy, the New World Translation was called the most accurate Bible. I just remembered this, but haven't found any proof of this.

Did this really happen or is it just fable?