keypurr
Well-known member
NOPE, it was written in ARAMAIC and HEBREW.
These were translated to Greek and then that translated to English.
The Trinity
- Thread starter Bright Raven
- Start date
NOPE, it was written in ARAMAIC and HEBREW.
These were translated to Greek and then that translated to English.
journey
New member
JWs are a false cult. You have described yourself pretty well in this post. You butcher Scripture to try and make it fit your sick and twisted doctrines. You are here to spread your poison and deceive others.
journey
New member
JWs make more sense than you do, and they're an obvious cult. JWs don't appear to be as confused as you are.
musterion
Well-known member
In '75? The very year they blew the return of Christ prediction? You must be a die hard...probably think you're one of the 144,000.
G.O. will not touch the Trinity challenge several pages back, and LA isn't smart enough. It's your turn to take one for your team.
musterion
Well-known member
I dont hate those at all, but you still havent replied to the ones in the graphic. Do you hate them?
It's because you know there's a strong case for the Trinity view but dont want to admit it by addressing it.
KingdomRose
New member
The H.S. does not have a "distinct personality." Whatever personality it evidences is the personality of the Father, Jehovah. Your quote shows that I am correct. Lying to the H.S. is lying to Jehovah, since it is His spirit. The statement, "you have not lied to man but to God," shows that, indeed, lying in that situation was lying to Jehovah. Jehovah is God, as Jesus said, and therefore lying "to the H.S." is actually lying to Jehovah. The H.S. is not something separate from Jehovah.
Jesus also said that the H.S. was Jehovah's H.S.---not his own. If they were three equal entities, the H.S. would have been his also. If Jesus said that the Spirit was his, it was only because the Father allowed him to use it. If the H.S. was Jesus' also, he wouldn't have said that it was the Father's.
"For it is not you who speak, but it is the Spirit of your FATHER who speaks in you." (Matthew 10:20, NASB)
"I will ask the FATHER, and He will give you another helper....that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive...." (John 14:16,17, NASB)
"But the helper, the Holy Spirit, that the FATHER will send in my name...." (John 14:26, NASB)
"When the helper comes, whom I will send to you from the FATHER, that is the Spirit of truth that proceeds FROM THE FATHER...." (John 15:26, NASB)
Jesus quoted from Isaiah 61 and applied it to himself, as the one being anointed. The Spirit was the Father's Spirit. "The Spirit of the LORD [YHWH] is upon me, because He anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives....[etc.]" (Luke 4:18, NASB)
"If you, then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly FATHER give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13, NASB)
How could there be any question as to whose H.S. the H.S. is? And if it were a person by itself, surely it wouldn't need to be sent by anybody else! After all, you say that it is equal to the other 2 Gods. But the truth is obviously that the H.S. is an immaterial entity emanating FROM the Father, and does not act on its own.
KingdomRose
New member
Thank you for at least taking time to read my posts. Yes, I remember 1975 like it was yesterday, and I know the WT didn't push that year as the final year. In fact, as I remember, the final magazine of 1974 didn't even mention it. Everyone in my congregation thought "if the end comes in '75, good; if it doesn't that's OK too." I don't personally know anyone who cancelled their insurance or sold their house. You know---what would've been the point of doing that anyway? If the end was coming, why bother to cancel your insurance or sell your house?
Anyway, no, I never have thought I was of the anointed 144,000 who will rule with Christ. I'm excited to have the hope of living here on Earth in paradise conditions.
As for your last comment....I have been "taking one" for my team for several posts now on this thread. I'll bump up what I wrote a couple days ago and add to it.
:thumb:
genuineoriginal
New member
Does the case for the Trinity really sound strong to you?
You ask how many gods are mentioned in the Bible, the answer is that there are many gods mentioned in the Bible.
Judaism (the religion of the Hebrews in the Old Testament) was thought to be odd because it was a monotheistic religion (worship only one god) in the midst of a pantheistic (worship many gods) world.
Christianity (the religion of the New Testament) was a restoration of true Judaism during a time when Judaism had turned into a religion of faithless works.
For forty years after the crucifixion, there was no question about whether Jesus was God Himself, since the Christian church was under the leadership of the disciples, and the disciples had all walked, talked, ate, slept, and wept with Jesus, and knew Him as a man sent by God.
As the disciples died out, the Gentile converts to Christianity brought in a number of heresies based on their pantheistic religions and Greek philosophy.
Gradually it became more important to understand the nature of Jesus and His relationship with His Father instead of believing the scriptures which clearly state Jesus is the Son of God. These pantheistic converts to Christianity couldn't accept that Jesus could be anything other than a god, but they were also being chastised for that by the Christians with the monotheistic belief that there is only one God, so a compromise was made, and the Trinity doctrine developed for three hundred years until it was formulated in the Council of Nicea.
According to the Bible, the only god who is to be worshiped as a god is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Even if you find several verses that appear to say that Jesus is a god, the only god who is to be worshiped as a god is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Even if the Trinity doctrine is true, God did not reveal Himself to anyone writing the Bible as a triune god, God did not say to worship Him as a triune god, and the only god we are told to worship as a god is God the Father.
KingdomRose
New member
I brought this up from page 10 because I don't think anyone has commented on it (except LA, who agreed if I remember correctly). Bright Raven had said, "Let's get straight who Jesus is before we go into that," or something to that effect, and I posted who Jesus was, but Bright Raven never commented on my first post. Just avoiding some uncomfortable points?
Anyway, there is my post, and I would appreciate any comments...esp. if they are thoughtful and aimed at really explaining why they disagree---pointing to specific parts of my citations, and not just calling me names and saying "you're wrong."
Now, to expand on that post. I think most of us here believe that God reveals Himself in the pages of the Bible. So wouldn't we take it on ourselves to examine whatever evidence there is in the Scriptures that will help us to figure out who God is? Someone who is really seeking for the truth will carefully sift through all the relevant texts, like the Beroeans (Acts 17:11). They dared to see "if these things were so", that Paul was telling them.
I like what Thomas Jefferson said about the trinity doctrine: "The Trinity is an unintelligible proposition of Platonic mysticisms that three are one and one is three; and yet one is NOT three and three are not one!" (See The Religious Life of Thomas Jefferson, C.B. Sanford, 1987, p.88)
It can be seen, upon scrutiny, that such opinions are quite sensible. Nevertheless, religious leaders insist that you must believe in the trinity to be a Christian! Otherwise, they teach, you must be branded a "cultist." But how can we be expected to agree with something that can neither be explained nor understood??? Answer this: Is it fair to ask Christians to accept the doctrine "on faith"?---A doctrine that is never mentioned by name and never discussed in the pages of the New Testament (or the O.T.)! Isn't it reasonable to expect somewhere in Scripture a precise, clear formulation of the strange proposition that God is "three-in-one"?
Church history shows that the idea of even two equal persons in the "Godhead"---the Father and the Son---didn't receive formal approval of the Church until three hundred years after Jesus walked the earth, at the Council of Nicea in 325 A.D., and this through political agitation. Why did it take so long for the Church to formally present the doctrine of a "Godhead" of two persons, and later of three? And then only under heavy political pressure??? Following Nicea, hundreds if not thousands of Christians died at the hands of other "Christians" because they believed, still, that God was a single Person!
The trinity doctrine defies both logic and rational explanation, but that doesn't seem to dampen the trinitarian's resolve to protect AT ALL COSTS this complex theological formula. The anger & agitation caused by anyone questioning the trinity doctrine is actually puzzling....does this betray a lack of confidence in this so-called unquestionable "party-line" of all of the ministers in Christendom?
Indeed, the majority view does not make the doctrine true. All of Christendom was once required to reject Galileo & Copernicus and hold the opinion that the earth was the center of the solar system. Didn't the pope apologize for this in the 20th century? I wonder if he'll wind up apologizing for the spurious trinity doctrine.
:maxi: (The Church to Galileo, for centuries.) :think:
KingdomRose
New member
musterion
Well-known member
http://www.jwfacts.com/watchtower/1975.php
I went to college with a very intelligent guy, now an atheist who essentially worships Star Wars, whose family was Watchtower in '75. He said they lost everything because they bought into it...house, job, all of it. Same with other families that he knew. That didn't happen by accident.
Please show me where in the Scriptures the words "God the Son" appear.
The term "God the Son" does not need to appear in scripture. We all know each kind reproduces after its kind (Genesis 1:24).
Jesus said this flesh profits nothing and we must be born of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God.
KingdomRose
New member
I took a look, and he didn't answer wrongly; he just didn't give complete answers, or, embellish his points. I don't think he "pretended to misunderstand." But I will enjoy refuting your graphic, point by point, though I'm not sure if I actually saw this "graphic." (I'm computer illiterate, actually!)
(1) Does the Bible mention three distinct Persons?
Not a very clear question. It was answered truthfully. But I think I get what you're getting at. No, the Bible does not mention THREE distinct Persons that are involved in a "Godhead." There is no "Godhead," but there are TWO distinct Persons that are over all others, though not equal.
(2) Does the bible refer to each as "God"?
No, not at all. Jesus himself referred to the Father as the only God, and he said that he was the SON of God.
(3) Does the Bible teach that there is only one God?
Yes, absolutely, and that God is the Father of Jesus.
"For even if there are so-called gods whether in heaven or on earth, as indeed there are many gods and many lords, yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom are all things...." (I Corinthians 8:5,6, NASB)
Jesus to the Father: "YOU are the only true God." (John 17:3)
"I ascend to my Father and your Father, and my God and your God." (John 20:17, NASB)
Further comment?
Yes, God is the Father of Jesus and us by his spirit power.
Jesus' mom became pregnant by the power of God's spirit (Luke 1:35).
Paul explained that God's spirit is a spirit of power and love and a sound mind (2 Timothy 1:7).
Jesus told his disciples they would receive power through the holy spirit (Acts 1:8).
Paul told the Corinthians that the kingdom of God is not in word but in power (1 Corinthians 4:20).
Please show me where in the Scriptures the words "God the Son" appear.
You have to follow the dots. Are you ready to do that?
KingdomRose
New member
musterion.....I just posted somewhere that most of us did not sell our houses, quit our jobs, cash in our insurances, max out our credit cards, etc. What would have been the point, if the end was coming right then in 1975? Why did some lose everything? Were they hoping to rip off all of the people they owed money to and live it up big-time before the year turned? It makes no sense otherwise.
Those people were fools, and they obviously cared more for their material stuff than they did their God. I find it ridiculous that people actually did that to themselves. It wasn't pushed by the WT because if it was, we would've been expecting it with no reservations.
KingdomRose
New member
You never read my post where I asked you to comment on this! I said that if "kind reproduces after its kind," and that proves that Jesus is God because God produced him, then what of the other angels and mankind? God made the angels and humans.....does that mean that they are all "God" also?
Your argument falls flat.
(And I haven't argued against the idea that one must be born of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God.)