Jehovah's Witnesses and other Christians: Why do most leave out the last seven words when they quote?

Trinitarians try to use Philippians 2:5-11 to "prove" the Trinity (which is actually pretty funny because it does the exact opposite). Saying "every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord" helps them prove the Trinity. But tagging the words "to the glory of God the Father" to the end of the quote helps disprove the Trinity. Hence, they tend to leave it out. And I too have noticed that some tend to do this.

Philippians 2:5-11 disproves the Trinity because verse 6 says, not that Jesus WAS God, but that he existed in God's "form," i.e., he was a spirit creature. (Likewise, verse 7 says that he took a slave's "form," and became a man. He didn't become The Slave, or The Man, but a slave, and a man. Therefore, being in the "form" of God doesn't make Jesus God.)

Then verse 7 says that Jesus did not consider seizing something that did not belong to him: that he should be equal to God. Some translations say that Jesus didn't "grasp" at being equal to God, implying that he was already equal to God, but then let go of his grasp. However, this is an inaccurate translation. The Greek word is a form of "harpazo." "Harpazo" and it's related forms ONLY mean trying to seize or rob something that doesn't belong to you. It NEVER means releasing one's grasp of something one already had.

Verse 8 says that Jesus was obedient. How can God be obedient?

Verse 9 says that God (it says "God," not "the Father") exalted Jesus to a superior position. How can Jesus be exalted to a superior position if he already had the highest position in the universe: God?

Finally, verse 11 says that Jesus being exalted was, not to the glory of Jesus himself, but to the glory of God the Father.

No Trinity here.

Mrp says that Jehovah's Witnesses misquote Philippians 2:11 and then refers to Isaiah 45:23.

Philippians 2:11 dos not refer to Isaiah 45:23. Compare both scriptures. Phil. 2:11 does not say that every tongue should swear to Jesus. It says that every tongue should confess that Jesus is lord to the glory of God the Father. “Jehovah” is the divine name, but Phil. 2:9-11 says that the name of the Son of God is Jesus, not Jehovah; and the name Jesus really means “Jehovah is salvation” or “the salvation of Jehovah. This title “Lord” in the Greek text is ky′rios (without the definite article).

In the New Testament Greek the word ky′rios (without the definite article) is used in places when addressing a person and so doesnt mean Jehovah. It means Lord or Sir. So Phil. 2:11 is an appropiate place to render ky'rios as a title (without the definite article).

This is a quote from one of the articles that I read on the subject:

" All the English versions of Christendom, even those in Hebrew, show that in Philippians 2:11 the ky′rios without article is used as a title, not as a personal name. That is the reason why the New World Translation renders Philippians 2:11: “Every tongue should openly confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” No Christian has to confess that Jesus Christ is Jehovah, because that is not the truth. Jesus told us to pray for his Father’s name to be hallowed or sanctified, and every informed Bible scholar knows that the name of God the Father is Jehovah."

Because usually that verse is quoted when referring to non-believers kneeling before Christ (the verse right beforehand) on his 2nd coming and confessing that Jesus is Lord. The fact that it brings glory to God the Father is a related but different topic.

Well, cant speak for everyone but I don't use this verse.

It may be that some may grasp at the "God the Father" and think there must be a God the son.

The cross reference for this verse is Psalms 22:27 - All the ends of the earth will remember and turn back to Jehovah. And all the families of the nations will bow down before you

I never have, but then maybe those that believe in the trinity don't like that part where is says that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the GLORY of GOD the Father.King James says: And [that] every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Jesus g2424 Ἰησοῦς Iēsous

Christ g5547 Χριστός Christos

[is] Lord, g2962 κύριος kyrios

to g1519 εἰς eis

the glory g1391 δόξα doxa

of God g2316 θεός theos

the Father. g3962 πατήρ patēr [in this scripture when it refers to Jesus' Father, God the Father separate from Jesus(lesous), once again disproves the trinity.

πατήρ patēr, Outline of Biblical Usage ) generator or male ancestor, either the nearest ancestor: father of the corporeal nature, natural fathers, a more remote ancestor, the founder of a family or tribe, progenitor of a people, forefather: so Abraham is called, Jacob and David, fathers i.e. ancestors, forefathers, founders of a nation, one advanced in years, a senior.

I find that people do that with a lot of scriptures.

Either they dont remember the whole verse

or are trying to manipulate the scriptures to make it prove 'their' point

or that is how they have been taught and have never bothered to look up the scriptures in a few different bibles themselves.

Philippiens 2:11 et que toute langue reconnaisse ouvertement que Jésus Christ est Seigneur à la gloire de Dieu le Père.

traduction du monde nouveau

I think it's obvious. That verse calls Jesus Jehovah if it is translated the way the NWT translates other verses in the New Testament that is quoting an Old Testament verse that is using the divine name. That verse is actually quoting Isaiah 45:22-24 and this verse teaches that the Father is Glorified when we confess that Jesus is Jehovah, in other words, God... Watchtower Publications actually say it's rediculous to translate Lord as Jehovah in that verse for no other reason other than it conflicts with their beliefs. Must be nice to pick and chose how you translate a word based on what they already believe, hence, the reason for their own bible...

Good afternoon Student, because it's just like the rest of the quotes. They only use what they want and which ones suit them at the time.

Good question by the way.

its not always 'seven' words, but most people leave out some words because they were only pointing out a small part in the quote or that the rest of the quote is irrelevant to the subject.

for example, if someone wants to point out how much the president likes cheese, they would leave the latter part of this quote out:

(president):"cheese is absolutely awesome! but i dont like cheese pizza."