If Jesus is God, how is he called God's only begotten son?

Sorry...Jesus never actually or definatively said that he was god or the son of god...and his big chance was when he was in front of Pilot. You may "interpret" what he said to mean anything but he was clear and concise in all other things...why not this topic?
Answer: Jesus (if he reallly existed, because there is NO corroberating written evidence of his existance) was merely a rabi who beleived that all men should be included in the jewish religion and did not need priests or religious men to interceed for them...the individual man could go right to god. And I beleive if he existed he would be appalled by what people hundreds of years later made him into.

So when the Jews were punished for making the golden calf and calling it Jehovah (Exodus 32), God was just being picky, right? Was he having a bad day? I stay away. You embrace.

I do not think the congregation is equal to God. Jesus often spoke what seemed to be parables but when referring to his Father he meant there was no daylight between him and his Father; hence, when you see and hear me, the Son, you see and hear the Father. The congregation is made up of many souls and are not in perfect union, whereas God the father, and Jesus the Son are one and the same in spirit.

Well, you begin with amanifestly false assertion "There is NO corroborating written evidence of is (sic) existence.

Are not 4 separate testimonies to his life. As found in 4 separate gospels, written as biographical and in historical context corroborating? Not to mention the fact that the early Christians busied themselves with quoting from those gospels, and copying them to such an extent that there are thousands of complete and fragmentary witness in museums and collections around the world to this day.

And then we have testimony from sources outside the early Christian community, such as Josephus, Thallos, Pliny the Younger, Seutonius, Tacitus, Mara bar Serapion, Lucien of Samosata, Celsus, the Rabbinic tradition and the Toledot Yeshu. Some of these are neutral; some are downright hostile, but they all attest to Jesus' existence. There's more corroborating testimony to Jesus' existence than that of most other historical figures of the time to the extent that few scholars pro or con are willing to make the charge that his existence is even doubtful.

I addressed his claim to be God elsewhere in this post.

According to the evangelists, Jesus knew that he would be known throughout history, and that humans would do both good and evil in his name.

And what have we? We have both good and evil done in the name of Jesus. We have hospitals and relief work done, as well as hate mongering and even murder committed in Jesus' name. Clearly there's something to that.

Thanks, neologist, but I am not a religious person. I like discussing some parts of the Bible because I was once a Sunday School teacher and in my early teens was quite the believer. As I got older, my views changed. I wish there were an almighty powerful spiritual being, one I could go to in times of deep trouble, but I believe this to be wishful thinking. Mother Nature alone has killed so many people with hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, forest fires, etc. Then we reflect back on recent history, thinking of WW2 where humans were treated like cattle and tatooed before being killed. Surely these people cried out for their God, but where was he? What did humans do that was so dreadful that there was no interference from this almighty being? I lost my faith when reading about that Nazi era, but I'm not so sure that alone would have forced me to stop believing. I found the Bible to be contradictory with human flaws associated with this god. "Have no other god before me for I am a jealous god." This god can be vengeful, destroying the first new borns in his rage, destroying all of humanity by flood leaving only Noah and his immediate family.

God asks Abraham to slay his child by his wife Sara. Why? For Abraham to prove his undying love to his God? It seems to me God wanted a slave instead of a thinking man.

What you've displayed is a common argument from atheists in rejection of God. It's called the argument from the existence of evil. It's counter to a common theist argument for the existence of God called the "Moral Argument."

I think it would make for an interesting discussion.

I have developed my own theodicy that addresses many of these issues.

Well, maybe you should take the name Easter out of it then, if it no longer is about a goddess of fertility.

I personally do not believe God is offended by the use of the word Easter. It's a day that brings non-believers everywhere to church to learn about God's love for them. It would seem that God is glorified in Easter.

First, While Josephus did write of Jesus (and he is really the only one) he did not do so with direct knowledge of jesus but only heresay...allbeit he was some what of a contempoary as opposed to those who wrote of him HUNDREDS of years later.
I do not lend creedence to writings that are not authenticated as to author or time written or those that condradict each other but are supposed to be "the word of god". THIS IS NOT EVIDENCE, coroberating or otherwise.

If we are to belive the "gospels" why not belive all of them not just the ones codified by the council of Nicea...such as the infant gospel?

John 4…22"You worship what you do not know; we worship what we know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23"But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. 24"God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth."…

I don't think that God wants glory from anything pagan...that is rituals of false beliefs.

Josephus was not the only one to write about Jesus, we have 4 contemporary gospels. We have Paul's writings, and all others I mentioned.

You hold these things to modern standards of authentication, which no historian in his/her right mind would do when dealing with ancient sources. The life of Jesus was written down within 50 years of his death, which is unheard of for any other historical figure.

For example, what we know about Alexander the Great comes from sources 300 years removed; yet few doubt that he existed.

For historical record, you can't get any better than the life of Christ. Your bias against the canonical gospels as witness is very telling.

I know you would like to drag other issues into this, such as "other gospels," but you charged that it is doubtful if Jesus existed. I countered that with the mosttsignificant evidence. You then proceded to discount that evidence and bring up unrelated matters.

Josephus, whether first hand or 2nd hand is irrelevant. It corroborates that Jesus existed. The more testimony or even mention of Jesus you have, the more corroboration you have, regardless of the beliefs or motives of those testifying. This is why I brought in testimony that is hostile. Clearly the man Jesus had an effect on 1st Century Palestine and its surroundings. An effect that would be absent had he never existed. Your argument does not seem logical to me. But of course, I've heard it many times before and have dealt with it.

You have yet to establish that Easter is pagan. Names don't suffice, since the English language is replete with words that derive from pagan words, but which have nothing to do with paganism, as I've already pointed out.

Neo,

Having read and compared literally hundreds of translations, including linear Greek literal translations over my 30+ years as a believing Christian, with all due respect, only a handful of translations render John 1:1 as other than "and the word was God" or "and God was the word." The NWT is one of those that diverges from the norm by rendering it "(a) god," as if there are any other gods besides the one true God who doesn't give His glory to another. Jesus is the divine logos. That, I believe we all agree on. But what is meant by that is an area of (hopefully) respectful disagreement.

I think the "ego eimi" (I AM) statements in John 8 clarify this further, but your organization has repeatedly attempted to pollute the waters on this issue. I must emphatically proclaim, that if Jesus' divinity is apart from the divinity of God the Father, as the Watchtower organization repeatedly insists, then their beliefs are polytheistic, rendering them closer to the paganism hey accuse others of posessing.

A clear, unbiased, exegetical rendering of John 1:1, one that most unbiased scholars agree with because of the force of reason and evidence, rather than a commitment to certain theological presumptions, is that the evangelist intends to inform us that Jesus is God incarnate, One with the Father, which he makes explicit in passage after passage throughout his gospel. To read it otherwise is to commit to ideologically informed eisegesis. I hope you will consider the gravity of such a commitment in the face of our Lord's appeal that we speak the truth.

This notion that pagan cults had a trinitarian concept was a contention made over 100 years ago. It has since been sufficiently addressed and debunked. Read Larry W. Hurtado's excellent "Lord Je1sus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity," where he, as an ancient historian more than adequately dispels that myth.

To whom did Jesus pray?
Who resurrected Jesus?

I'll ask you the same question I asked Romeo:
When god punished the Jews for bowing to the golden calf in Exodus ch 32, calling it Jehovah, was god wrong? Was he just having a bad day? What?

Neo, you should really ask, "to whom did God say 'let us make man in our image'" in Genesis, and also, "now the man has become like one of us." Who is he talking to? Because it's really the same issue. That you cannot conceive of how God can be 3 in one is of no consequencne scripturally, because it's throughout scripture, but your organization has not told you this truth.

They refuse to, but God in his word has other plans. I loved reading the late Raymond Franz's book on how he and his wife came out of the organization in 1980, after having served as leaders at the Brooklyn headuarters until they began to question the official doctrine and were excommunicated. These were reasonable and good people, who allowed God to speak to their hearts through His word, which they read and took to heart. God's truth transcends the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, because it is truth, snd God is sovereign.

You do realize, don't you that our Creator is not currently managing this world? How else would Satan have been able to offer Jesus all the kingdoms of the world?

So, don't blame human misery on God. Blame it on Satan who shortly will be dispatched according to the prophecy in Genesis 3:15

Jesus, as God, resurrected himself, because death could not hold him. He prayed to the Father. The Father prayed to him. That's not a difficult concept if we understand that prayer is communication. Do you not believe that the Father communicated to Jesus and Jesus communicated to the Father? How would that be any different given that Jesus and the Father are One as Jesus himself proclaims? I fail to see any contradiction.

What does that have to do with anything we've discussed? I fail to see any relevance.