Questions about JW’s

[bluto]

How long ago did God create the universe along with the Earth and Adam then, how many years has it approximately been?

I don't know, I'm not going to guess and I don't really care how many years it may be. This is a "distraction" which you and your organization love to do, distract when confronted with questions you can't answer/change the subject.

My original question was why Jesus is credited with creation and without Him nothing came into being. (John 1:3). I even backed up the verse with other verses including Hebrews 1:0 where His own Father says He created the earth and the heavens with His own hands.

And no, God does not have hands. It's a "metaphor" showing He did it by Himself and all alone just like at Isaiah 44:24. And please, don't tell me that the verse is referring to God the Father. It explicitly says, "Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer." You can't "assume" this is referring to God the Father especially when John 1:1 says, "The Word was with God, and the Word was God."

So again, getting back to my question which you said, "It's a good question.?" Why is Jesus Christ identified as the creator? Maybe I can't put it another way. You have the Word/Jesus Christ at John 1:1 identified as "a god." Since you JW's teach that Jesus was the first one created how can He also be the creator Himself? Stick to the subject NWL.

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[bojack]

How long ago did God create the universe along with the Earth and Adam then, how many years has it approximately been?

You can add it up with information in the Bible , fathers, sons, and dates given from events to events and get about 6,000 years ..

 

[NWL]

Then this leads you to another error in the translation since not all of NWT has all the upper letter GOD or GODS that you are saying. Your assumption that older COPIES written in UPPER case letters, majuscules or uncial got it right and they are representative of the original copies. You seem not to understand that even though those 6th Ce manuscript display the true font rendering since these copies are independent to each other and were copies and copies of the originals so called which had over time had witnesses are more than what you imagine.

Papyrus 98 (in the Gregory-Aland numbering), is an early copy of the New Testament in Greek. It is a papyrus manuscript of the Book of Revelation. The manuscript palaeographically had been assigned to years "100–200 according to WIKI and other sources.

Now if you are looking for a reality, if you are looking for ancestral ‘older does better’ then you need to take note that P98 written “100-200” is also written in lower case Greek alphabet. And so your justification is still not a precise one, hence, you are in much trouble with your understanding in 1 Cor. and BTW, which majuscule or uncial you are in reference to?

περ]ι̣εζωσμμ̣εν̣[ον προς τοις μαστοις ζωνην
χρυ]σεν [1:14] και η κ̣ε[φαλη αυτου και αι τριχες λευκαι
ως] εριον λευκον [ως χιων και οι οφθαλμοι αυτου ως
φλ]οξ πυρος [1:15] και [οι ποδες αυτου ομοιοι χαλκολιβανω
ως] εν καμινω πε[πυρωμενης και η φωνη αυτου ως
φωνη υδατων π̣[ολλων [1:16] και εχων εν τη δεξια χειρι
αυτου αστερες [ζ̅ και εκ του στοματος αυτου ρομ
φαια διστομος ο[ξεια εκπορευομενη και η οψις αυ
το̣υ ως ο η̣λ̣ιος φ[αινει εν τη δυναμει αυτου [1:17] και οτε ει
δ̣ο̣ν̣ αυτον ε[π]εσα [προς τους ποδας αυτου ως νεκρος
και εθηκε̣ τ̣η̣ν̣ [δεξιαν αυτου επ εμε λεγων
μη φοβ̣[ο]υ̣ ε̣γ̣ω̣ [ειμι ο πρωτος και ο εσχατος [1:18] και εγε
νομεν̣ ν̣εκ̣ρ̣ο̣[ς και ιδου ζων ειμι εις τους αιωνας
τ̣ω̣ν̣ α̣ι̣ω̣ν̣ω̣ν̣ [και εχω τας κλεις του θανατου και
του α̣δ̣ο̣υ̣ [1:19] γ̣ρ̣α̣ψ̣ο̣ν̣ [ουν α ειδες και α εισιν και α μελλει
γε̣ν̣ε̣[σ]θ̣α̣ι̣ [μετα ταυτα [1:20] το μυστηριον των ζ̅
α̣στερ̣ω̣ν̣ [ους ειδες επι της δεξιας μου και τας
ζ̅ λυχνει[α]ς [τας χρυσας οι ζ̅ αστερες αγγελοι των
ζ̅ εκκλησ̣ι̣ω̣ν̣ ε̣ι[σιν και αι λυχνιαι αι ζ̅ ζ̅ εκκλεσιαι
εισ]ι̣[ν [2:1] τω αγγελω της εν εφεσω εκκλησιας γραψον ταδε λεγ
ε̣ι̣ [ο κρατων τους ζ̅ αστερας εν τη δεξια αυτου ο

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_98

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet

How do you know the ones after the 6th CE where are the true rendering when it was 500 years after the originals were written? This is pure conjecture.

The NWT translation is no more in error than any other bible is, it is the translator's responsibility to use both grammar and context to determine what is trying to be expressed in any given text. As I've mentioned already, the fact that all translations use capital G and lower case g's in relation to uses of theos and elohim (or other variations) does not mean they are in error if they believe that the terms mean something different when applied to a specific person, and by doing so is making a distinction by using the modern language and grammar, this is the whole purpose of translation.

Your example is pointless, an exception does not create the rule. The fact remains, NT manuscripts do not make a distinction of the text in question, some later ones may, but even so it would not make a difference

Please express how I'm in trouble with 1 Cor 8:4-6? I believe their is 'one God to the Father' in a unique sense despite their being 'many gods' and the scripture expresses exactly so, though there be 'many gods, to us, there is one God the Father'.

 

[Chester]

They all believe in Jesus is the way. Yet they all have different views on what "The way" means.

Who are the "they" in your statement? JW's might say "Jesus" is the way, but they do not believe the Jesus who walked on this Earth 2000 years ago is the way.

 

[bojack]

How do you know the ones after the 6th CE where are the true rendering when it was 500 years after the originals were written? This is pure conjecture.

The NWT translation is no more in error than any other bible is, it is the translator's responsibility to use both grammar and context to determine what is trying to be expressed in any given text. As I've mentioned already, the fact that all translations use capital G and lower case g's in relation to uses of theos and elohim (or other variations) does not mean they are in error if they believe that the terms mean something different when applied to a specific person, and by doing so is making a distinction by using the modern language and grammar, this is the whole purpose of translation.

Your example is pointless, an exception does not create the rule. The fact remains, NT manuscripts do not make a distinction of the text in question, some later ones may, but even so it would not make a difference

Please express how I'm in trouble with 1 Cor 8:4-6? I believe their is 'one God to the Father' in a unique sense despite their being 'many gods' and the scripture expresses exactly so, though there be 'many gods, to us, there is one God the Father'.

There is only One God and His name is Jesus .. Next you'll be saying Jesus was Michael an angel or something .. LOLOL

 

[Magenta]

My friend, you need to get a grip of yourself, it is not reasonable for me to defend anything and everything throws at me, or else someone could cite 300 verses at me at once and demand I explain all of them, Magenta posted over 10 verses to me at once, along with another post, no doubt directed at me, with another 50+ verses, the fact that I don't have the time to explain them all and make the reasonable request for her to post the ones she believes are the strongest ones should hardly excite you as much as it is. At present, you seem unhealthily obsessed with JW's.

It was only 44 verses. Please try to be more honest.

The weight of Scripture is against you.

Also, my apologies, as one verse of the 44 was repeated.

 

[Magenta]

Giving one verse alone or even two or three to show that God proclaims Himself alone as the Rock of salvation is not sufficient to prove that you are wrong when the FACT remains that Scripture also proclaims Jesus as the Rock of our salvation and the only means by which we may be saved... not once or twice, but multiple times. The weight of Scripture is against you and you complain about it.

 

[NWL]

I don't know, I'm not going to guess and I don't really care how many years it may be. This is a "distraction" which you and your organization love to do, distract when confronted with questions you can't answer/change the subject.

My questions was not a distraction, I will go instantly back to the topic in hand and has everything to do with our discussion, you would have known this if you simply answered the question. According to bible chronology, how long ago did Adam roughly exist, which would have been roughly the same time frame of the creation of the earth and universe right? How long approximately? I personally believe Adam was created approximately 6000 years ago,

My original question was why Jesus is credited with creation and without Him nothing came into being. (John 1:3). I even backed up the verse with other verses including Hebrews 1:0 where His own Father says He created the earth and the heavens with His own hands.

Yes and I gave reasoning and even asked you to answer a question regarding points I raised to explain the issue. I showed you Hebrews 2:8 that shows 'God subject all things under man, and left NOTHING NOT subject to him', and stated that using your reasoning that 'nothing' means absolutely 'nothing', does it mean that God and the angels were subjected to man? If not, then does 'nothing' here mean absolutely 'nothing'? Will you care to answer it this time.

If your answer to my above question excludes God from the "nothing" then how can you claim I can't exclude Jesus from the 'nothing' in John 1:3 despite the strong and definite language?

I also asked you to "when it states Jesus is "first in all things" in Col 1:18, does the "all things" literally mean 'all things' as in 'every single thing'? If so, then is Jesus the first murder?", you have yet to answer this too and solve the issue you have raised with me if you simply do.

And no, God does not have hands. It's a "metaphor" showing He did it by Himself and all alone just like at Isaiah 44:24. And please, don't tell me that the verse is referring to God the Father. It explicitly says, "Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer." You can't "assume" this is referring to God the Father especially when John 1:1 says, "The Word was with God, and the Word was God."

The verse is referring to the Father, Hebrews 1:1,2 demands this, it states "Long ago God spoke to our forefathers by means of the prophets on many occasions and in many ways. 2 Now at the end of these days he has spoken to us by means of his Son", notice the verse says 'God' spoke long ago to our forefathers by means of the prophets and then in v2, that  'now at the end of these days he has spoken to us by means of 'his Son'. God only started speaking by means of his son in the last days, or the 1CE, thus when YHWH states in Isaiah 44:24 "This is what Jehovah says, your Repurchaser" it has to be the Father speaking or else Hebrews 1:1,2 is telling lies. No, the verse doesn't state "Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer", it states "Thus says YHWH, your Redeemer", the redeemer here doesn't relate to Jesus Christ, who was yet to come, but rather, it was speaking about YHWH who redeemed Israel from slavery.

So again, getting back to my question which you said, "It's a good question.?" Why is Jesus Christ identified as the creator? Maybe I can't put it another way. You have the Word/Jesus Christ at John 1:1 identified as "a god." Since you JW's teach that Jesus was the first one created how can He also be the creator Himself? Stick to the subject NWL.

I've answered this and am waiting onthe questions I asked you about the use of 'nothing' in Hebrews 2:8 and whether it means nothing was not left under man, including God and the Angels, and whether "all things" literally mean Jesus is first in literally "all things". The sooner you answer the questions in green above the sooner I can finish answering your question.

 

[NWL]

It was only 44 verses. Please try to be more honest.

The weight of Scripture is against you.

Also, my apologies, as one verse of the 44 was repeated.

I was dishonest in nothing I said, it was far more than 44 verse. If I cite Genesis 1:1-10 it doesn't count as one verse but 10, counting the ones you posted, including ones you may have repeated, you cited 54 verses over two posts, this doesn't include the multiple verses you quoted in a single citation (such as 1 Peter 2:4-8 along with many more) which would bring the total to well over 60. It would be trival of me to call you out and claim you were dishonest over this simple mistake, it just shows your colours when you do it with me since its such a trvial thing to miscount, as you have done.

I cant see you agreeing to exegete 60+ verses I can produce, are you or are you not willing to do it?

 

[NWL]

Giving one verse alone or even two or three to show that God proclaims Himself alone as the Rock of salvation is not sufficient to prove that you are wrong when the FACT remains that Scripture also proclaims Jesus as the Rock of our salvation and the only means by which we may be saved... not once or twice, but multiple times. The weight of Scripture is against you and you complain about it.

Why can't you answer my questions where I'm only asking you to confirm what the scriptures themselves state, is the weight of the scripture to heavy against you the same way it apparently is against me?

Here are the questions again:

Is Satan "the god of this world" according to 2 Cor 4:4?
Was Moses "God to Pharaoh" according to Exo 7:1?
Are angels called Elohim/gods according to Psalms 8:5 compared to Hebrews 2:7?
Did Jesus tell some Jews "you are gods" in John 10:34?
Did Paul state there are "many gods" in 1 Cor 8:5?

"among whom [satan] the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers.." (2 Corinthians 4:4)
"And the Lord [YHWH] said to Moses: Behold I have appointed thee the God of Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.."
"You have made them a little lower than the angels [Elohim/gods] and crowned them with glory and honor.." (Psalms 8:5 NIV. Compare Hebrews 2:7)
"God takes his place in the divine assembly; In the middle of the gods he judges.." (Psalm 82:1)
"Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”..’ (John 10:34)

 

[notuptome]

Is Satan called "the god of this world" according to 2 Cor 4:4?

Satan has dominion in this world. The world you occupy that was created by Jehovah God. Satan is a god and not God Who is God.

Was Moses "God to Pharaoh" according to Exo 7:1?

A question that requires a deep answer but you can have only the simple answer. Pharaoh saw himself as a god. Many such gods existed in Egypt. Pharaoh thought his gods equal to the God of Moses and the Hebrews. God demonstrated His superiority by the plagues brought upon Egypt through Moses and during the exodus.

Are angels called Elohim/gods according to Psalms 8:5 compared to Hebrews 2:7?

Angels are never called God and you know that the original manuscripts in the original languages make that clear.

Did Jesus tell some Jews "you are gods" in John 10:34?

Jesus quoted Psalms 82:6 where it is clear that Jesus also tells them they are children of the Most High God clearly distinguishing them for God Himself.

Did Paul state there are "many gods" in 1 Cor 8:5?

Paul actually says they are called gods not the they are gods and most certainly not God Who is God.

John 10:30 Jesus says that He and the Father are One. One God of which Jesus is completely united and unified.

Poor exegesis on your part does not lend any credibility to your false doctrine. Failure to know Jesus Christ as Jehovah God incarnate will lead to your eternal condemnation.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[fredoheaven]

The Gothic Bible is an

How do you know the ones after the 6th CE where are the true rendering when it was 500 years after the originals were written? This is pure conjecture.

The NWT translation is no more in error than any other bible is, it is the translator's responsibility to use both grammar and context to determine what is trying to be expressed in any given text. As I've mentioned already, the fact that all translations use capital G and lower case g's in relation to uses of theos and elohim (or other variations) does not mean they are in error if they believe that the terms mean something different when applied to a specific person, and by doing so is making a distinction by using the modern language and grammar, this is the whole purpose of translation.

Your example is pointless, an exception does not create the rule. The fact remains, NT manuscripts do not make a distinction of the text in question, some later ones may, but even so it would not make a difference

Please express how I'm in trouble with 1 Cor 8:4-6? I believe their is 'one God to the Father' in a unique sense despite their being 'many gods' and the scripture expresses exactly so, though there be 'many gods, to us, there is one God the Father'.

So it must be you are in circular reasoning, and you are in also a pure conjecture. I have given a concrete evidence of small case letter Greek yet your fact is just an hearsay. You cannot validate your claim as I asked of the Codex or codices you are referring to. You might be in reference to the 4th Ce. AD as the uncials were possibly written.

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● John 1:1 . . In the beginning the Word was

The "word" is translated from the Greek word logos (log'-os) which basically
refers to something spoken, i.e. speech; for example:

● Gen 1:1-3 . . In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And
God proceeded to say: “Let light come to be.” Then there came to be light.

So the cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --came into
existence by means of God's voice, viz: by means of His speech rather than
His thoughts and/or His will.

● 2Pet 3:5 . . There were heavens from of old by the word of God

Had God curbed His tongue, there'd be no stars out in space, nor clouds in
the sky for us to look at.

Exactly how God's speech has enough power, force, and energy to bring
things into existence is just as mystifying to me how His speech is a sentient
being. The difference is quite large, viz: it's one thing to speak a sentient
being into existence while quite another for the voice itself to be a sentient
being; but there it is. Don't ask me how God's spoken words are sentient
because it is just too far beyond the capability of my below-average IQ to
figure out.

The Jehovah's Witnesses say that God's speech is a god. Well; that true, but
it's not the whole truth. In order to be spot on, we have to spell god with an
upper case G so that there's absolutely no mistaking whose speech we're
talking about. If someone wants to say that God's speech is a divine being;
okay, but we cannot allow God's own speech to have less personal value
as a divine being than Himself.
_

 

[garee]

Why can't you answer my questions where I'm only asking you to confirm what the scriptures themselves state, is the weight of the scripture to heavy against you the same way it apparently is against me?

Here are the questions again:

Is Satan "the god of this world" according to 2 Cor 4:4?
Was Moses "God to Pharaoh" according to Exo 7:1?
Are angels called Elohim/gods according to Psalms 8:5 compared to Hebrews 2:7?
Did Jesus tell some Jews "you are gods" in John 10:34?
Did Paul state there are "many gods" in 1 Cor 8:5?

"among whom [satan] the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers.." (2 Corinthians 4:4)
"And the Lord [YHWH] said to Moses: Behold I have appointed thee the God of Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.."
"You have made them a little lower than the angels [Elohim/gods] and crowned them with glory and honor.." (Psalms 8:5 NIV. Compare Hebrews 2:7)
"God takes his place in the divine assembly; In the middle of the gods he judges.." (Psalm 82:1)
"Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”..’ (John 10:34)

We as sons of God (gods) are not what we will be (male and female Jew and Gentile.) No procreation in the new order.

In that parable Moses was not literally God to the pharaoh .The Pharaoh did not believe in God . . Moses and Aaron were used to represent God not seen as a father, and Arron the priest as the son of man . Two attributes of one God working together as one. God is not a man.

 

[garee]

.
● John 1:1 . . In the beginning the Word was

The "word" is translated from the Greek word logos (log'-os) which basically
refers to something spoken, i.e. speech; for example:

● Gen 1:1-3 . . In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And
God proceeded to say: “Let light come to be.” Then there came to be light.

So the cosmos-- all of its forms of life, matter, and energy --came into
existence by means of God's voice, viz: by means of His speech rather than
His thoughts and/or His will.

● 2Pet 3:5 . . There were heavens from of old by the word of God

Had God curbed His tongue, there'd be no stars out in space, nor clouds in
the sky for us to look at.

Exactly how God's speech has enough power, force, and energy to bring
things into existence is just as mystifying to me how His speech is a sentient
being. The difference is quite large, viz: it's one thing to speak a sentient
being into existence while quite another for the voice itself to be a sentient
being; but there it is. Don't ask me how God's spoken words are sentient
because it is just too far beyond the capability of my below-average IQ to
figure out.

The Jehovah's Witnesses say that God's speech is a god. Well; that true, but
it's not the whole truth. In order to be spot on, we have to spell god with an
upper case G so that there's absolutely no mistaking whose speech we're
talking about. If someone wants to say that God's speech is a divine being;
okay, but we cannot allow God's own speech to have less personal value
as a divine being than Himself.
_

I would suggest. In the beginning was the word or breath of God. His word is Spirit and life giving. And His word worked in the Son of man to both will and do the good pleasure of the father. Just as it does in all apostles as prophets that do the good will of another. Jesus did not do the will of his corrupted flesh .

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

 

[Magenta]

I was dishonest in nothing I said, it was far more than 44 verse. If I cite Genesis 1:1-10 it doesn't count as one verse but 10, counting the ones you posted, including ones you may have repeated, you cited 54 verses over two posts, this doesn't include the multiple verses you quoted in a single citation (such as 1 Peter 2:4-8 along with many more) which would bring the total to well over 60. It would be trival of me to call you out and claim you were dishonest over this simple mistake, it just shows your colours when you do it with me since its such a trvial thing to miscount, as you have done.

I cant see you agreeing to exegete 60+ verses I can produce, are you or are you not willing to do it?

Yes, I failed to count the very few citations with more than one verse, and I apologize for asking you to be more honest. I was not expecting you to exegete them at all, though, and I said more than once why I gave so many at once, because taking ONE example such as God being the only Rock and showing how Jesus is the only Rock leads one to the inescapable conclusion that Jesus is God if one properly harmonizes Scripture, line by line and precept by precept, and as I showed, there are plenty of Scriptures to attest to Jesus being God using just that one example. You may refuse to do that, but here may be others who are not so adverse to learning, and perhaps someone will be helped in their understanding, even if you are not due to your preconceived ideas. Nor am I obsessed with JWs. Hey, YOU are the one who came here to push your false notions based on your corrupt translation. You have been flying under the radar for a long time. Meanwhile, denying the deity of Christ used to be the number one heresy that would get people banned here. Good luck.

 

[creative111]

Yes, I failed to count the very few citations with more than one verse, and I apologize for asking you to be more honest. I was not expecting you to exegete them at all, though, and I said more than once why I gave so many at once, because taking ONE example such as God being the only Rock and showing how Jesus is the only Rock leads one to the inescapable conclusion that Jesus is God if one properly harmonizes Scripture, line by line and precept by precept, and as I showed, there are plenty of Scriptures to attest to Jesus being God using just that one example. You may refuse to do that, but here may be others who are not so adverse to learning, and perhaps someone will be helped in their understanding, even if you are not due to your preconceived ideas. Nor am I obsessed with JWs. Hey, YOU are the one who came here to push your false notions based on your corrupt translation. You have been flying under the radar for a long time. Meanwhile, denying the deity of Christ used to be the number one heresy that would get people banned here. Good luck.

Magenta, you say all of this but then you still overlook answering NWL rather simple questions? Does it trouble you that you cant do this? This is, unfortunately, the typical behavior of many Christians and Trinitarians. They purposely overlook questions and turn a blind to scriptures like the ones quoted as it does not fit in with their theology. Its a classical example fitting the scriptures around your theology apposed to letting your theology fit around scripture.

I'm sure you'd relish the idea of NWL getting banned, that way you wouldn't need to hear things that make you uncomfortable. However, I don't believe NWL, if he is a JW, as he hasn't stated he is directly yet (from what I've read), has denied that Jesus is deity. JW don't deny Jesus is deity (Colossians 2:9), so, unfortunately, I don't think it would be grounds for banning,

 

[Magenta]

Magenta, you say all of this but then you still overlook answering NWL rather simple questions? Does it trouble you that you cant do this? This is, unfortunately, the typical behavior of many Christians and Trinitarians. They purposely overlook questions and turn a blind to scriptures like the ones quoted as it does not fit in with their theology. Its a classical example fitting the scriptures around your theology apposed to letting your theology fit around scripture.

I'm sure you'd relish the idea of NWL getting banned, that way you wouldn't need to hear things that make you uncomfortable. However, I don't believe NWL, if he is a JW, as he hasn't stated he is directly yet (from what I've read), has denied that Jesus is deity. JW don't deny Jesus is deity (Colossians 2:9), so, unfortunately, I don't think it would be grounds for banning,

What question? Would I exegete 60 verses? I did not give the verses for him to exegete, and I explained that in the very post you just quoted.

Oh, yes, you believe Jesus is A god, but not God. NWT Bible changes a lot of things. Worship is reserved for God alone. (Ex. 20:5, Acts 14:15, 20:26, Rev. 19:10). In many places Jesus is worshiped by both angels and mankind, but all references to the worship of Jesus have been systematically deleted or obscured in the NWT.

The NWT uses “I have been” to obscure the the Greek “ego eimi” - I AM when Jesus says I AM in John 8:58.

In John 14:11, the NWT has “I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me,” inserting the word “union” which is not in any Greek manuscripts, instead of “I am in the Father and the Father is in me."

In Colossians 1:16, the NWT inserts the word "other." Is your Jesus a created being?
You both seem to be averse to the sharing of information.

How can you be sure I would relish such a thing? Perhaps your imagination is over active.
You both seem to be adverse to the sharing of information.

 

[Magenta]

Edit timed out. I wanted to delete the repeated sentence
near the end, which was meant to be only at the very end.

 

[creative111]

What question? Would I exegete 60 verses? I did not give the verses for him to exegete, and I explained that in the very post you just quoted.

Oh, yes, you believe Jesus is A god, but not God. NWT Bible changes a lot of things. Worship is reserved for God alone. (Ex. 20:5, Acts 14:15, 20:26, Rev. 19:10). In many places Jesus is worshiped by both angels and mankind, but all references to the worship of Jesus have been systematically deleted or obscured in the NWT.

The NWT uses “I have been” to obscure the the Greek “ego eimi” - I AM when Jesus says I AM in John 8:58.

In John 14:11, the NWT has “I am in union with the Father and the Father is in union with me,” inserting the word “union” which is not in any Greek manuscripts, instead of “I am in the Father and the Father is in me."

In Colossians 1:16, the NWT inserts the word "other." Is your Jesus a created being?
You both seem to be averse to the sharing of information.

How can you be sure I would relish such a thing? Perhaps your imagination is over active.
You both seem to be adverse to the sharing of information.

These are the questions you seem to be overlooking FROM NWL and not myself. See below.

Here are the questions again:

Is Satan "the god of this world" according to 2 Cor 4:4?
Was Moses "God to Pharaoh" according to Exo 7:1?
Are angels called Elohim/gods according to Psalms 8:5 compared to Hebrews 2:7?
Did Jesus tell some Jews "you are gods" in John 10:34?
Did Paul state there are "many gods" in 1 Cor 8:5?

"among whom [satan] the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers.." (2 Corinthians 4:4)
"And the Lord [YHWH] said to Moses: Behold I have appointed thee the God of Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.."
"You have made them a little lower than the angels [Elohim/gods] and crowned them with glory and honor.." (Psalms 8:5 NIV. Compare Hebrews 2:7)
"God takes his place in the divine assembly; In the middle of the gods he judges.." (Psalm 82:1)
"Jesus answered them: “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I said: “You are gods”..’ (John 10:34)