Just glad somebody does . LOL I just don't get all the suspension of disbelief that's involved with "understanding" the trinity dogma . I'm not trying to convert anybody to anything just trying to get a better understanding of what's being said about the beliefs. The arguments for are weak so you can see where just tampering with some scripture actually doesn't help at all .For instance if jesus didn't want to tell anybody he was the christ or anointed one since he wanted them to see it by his works, then why would he say anything about being God? If he was equal to God then why was he not directing all worship towards himself?
Trinity?
by BFD 142 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
LittleToe
Maybe he wanted to be loved as a person, rather than for his job title
-
heathen
Funny how he never said you must love him. Instead the command reads ,"you must love YHVH God with all your heart mind and soul." Jesus wanted obedience and for people to act civily to each other .IMO
-
LittleToe
Isn't it very human to enjoy being loved? Are you saying he wasn't merely human??
-
heathen
My personal belief is that Jesus was a clone . A hybrid human, he apparently did not inherit the imperfections of adam and eve thru any actual genetic relationship with his earthly parents of joseph and mary , otherwise he couldn't have been an equal to adam prior to adams sin. That's the way I can see the virgin birth story making any kind of sense . Today we know cloning is a fact but thru most of human history would not have been something to consider . I'm not questioning his want for love but he was very strict on loving being based on obedience to him , it was not unconditional.
-
LittleToe
My personal opinion is that our physical form evolved and at some point "God" infused us with a soul; and later engaged in a similar process with sending the "Son". To that end trying to make distinctions as to whether love is unconditional or conditional is irrelevant (to me). Surely our love is only a reciprocation of the love that He first had for us?
1John. 4:9-13: In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
Hence, again I state, "God is Love".
-
gumb
The phrase "I am" (John 8:58 & 59)
"’I tell you the truth’, Jesus answered, ‘before Abraham was born, I am!’ Therefore they picked up stones to throw at him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the temple." (New International Version)
Jesus nowhere proclaims himself to be God in these scriptures. Some people home in on the phrase "I am" in order to prove that Jesus was claiming to be Yahweh (the Almighty God). To clear up this misunderstanding, it is useful to look at the Greek Septuagint at Exodus 3:14, where the English translation reads: "And God spoke to Moses, saying, I am THE BEING; and he said, Thus shall ye say to the children of Israel, THE BEING has sent me to you." "I am THE BEING" is translated from the Greek "ego eimi ho on". The emphasis is, according to the Greek usage, not on "I am" (that is not the actual name being declared), but on "ho on", which literally means "the being" or "the one who is." So the shock that drove the Jews to pick up stones to throw at him, was not that he claimed to be "the one who is" ("ho on"), but because he claimed to have existed before Abraham. It is apparent from the course of his conversation (from verse 12) that by the time the Jews said to him "You are not yet fifty, and you have seen Abraham!" (verse 57) they were quite indignant at him. His claim to have existed before Abraham was the final straw! However unusual the grammatical construction of the text may be, this scripture cannot with authority be used in an effort to promote the belief that Jesus is Almighty God (a doctrine that was conceived after the Apostolic Age). If Jesus had really meant to say he was Yahweh, then he could have simply said "ego eimi ho on" ("I am the one who is") just as the Alpha and the Omega of Revelation 1:8 declares himself to be "ho on" ("the one who is").
-
LittleToe
"I am, too."
There lots of ways I could phrase that better to explain what I mean, but that's the statement I decided to just let lay out there in the air for anyone to interpret as they will. The argument that "things could have been phrased more precisely to make the meaning someone wants" is pretty pathetic as evidence, one way or another. Unless you can get inside the head of the writer, or the context is so crystal clear as to completely remove ambiguity, then you're guessing. Admit it. Whether Unitarianism or Trinitarianism is correct is irrelevant as there will be believers and detractors on one side or the other. It divides, instead of unites.
My point? Merely that there are more important issues than continuing 1600 year old squabbles...
-
rassillon
Your argument is stupid.
NO, Your argument is stupid.
See my earlier post. Neither side can PROVE it one way or the other. That is a FACT.
-
Mad
I think what it "boils down to" is that if you WANT to believe something like this- your mind will see all the evidence entirely different than the one who WANTS to believe something else. Only the one who will put all that aside to take an honest look at what the scriptures say BY THEMSELVES- without any help from religion- have any chance to really understand them!
Mad