I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God! (page 28)

MOG

Tell you what folks.. I CANT WAIT TO FIND THE ANSWER IN THE AFTERLIFE (I HOPE THERE IS ONE) ELVIS and TUPAC - HERE I COME!!!

jwfacts

Jwfacts what Trinitarians seem to forget is WHAT JESUS CALLED HIMSELF? Son of God- 234 times .....Son of Man-127 times....God- Zero! This would confuse the hell out of hid diciples since as jews they believed in "one God." While on earth Jesus not once said :"Iam the Father or God {except in the book of Mormon he does} he never explained the doctrine at all.....and this was the newest thing since sliced bread!!

Witness 007 - don't forget that Jesus did not write the books that appear in the New Testament (and the numerous other Christian writings from that time), it was written by Christian followers decades after he died. They called him God as that is how they perceived him.

Hey JWFacts
Hmmm..so are you saying the bible DOESNT call men, Jesus, satan GOD??

Mog - no that is not what i am saying. The point I make is that the Bible highlights that it is wrong to look up to anyone but the Creator as God. So if Christians are quoted as saying Jesus is God, than he must be the one true God of this Monotheistic religion.

Trinitarians say God is a Divine Three, not a Divine One. Jews and Muslims are in agreement that Christianity as practiced today is not a monotheistic religion.

fjthoth - That is because most Jews, Muslims and JWs have not bothered to learn what the Trinity doctrine is. The Trinity doctrine is that "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah -Deut 6:4. There is one God. That God may be revealed in the form of Father Son and Holy Spirit, but there is still only one God in the Trinitarian teaching.

fjtoth

jwfacts,

most Jews, Muslims and JWs have not bothered to learn what the Trinity doctrine is.

How many Catholics or Protestants do you know who have "bothered to learn what the Trinity doctrine is"? Polls and surveys over the years have provided a devastating glimpse into the common ignorance that prevails in churchianity on this topic. It is a rare churchgoer indeed who can explain the Trinity in understandable terms. Many church pastors themselves are at a loss as to how to do it. The Trinity is generally accepted only because it's a requirement for church membership whether it is understood or not.

The Trinity doctrine is that "Jehovah our God is one Jehovah -Deut 6:4. There is one God. That God may be revealed in the form of Father Son and Holy Spirit, but there is still only one God in the Trinitarian teaching.

Even your own definition is sadly and sorely lacking in clarity, and it is far from the definition of the Trinity as given in church statements of faith and in common dictionaries and encyclopedias. It isn't honest or truthful to deny that Trinitarians worship a god that has THREE frames of reference - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It is a THREE-in-one god mentioned not even once in the divine Scriptures.

fjtoth

reniaa

I agree with fjtoth, explanations of trinity are numerous but very vague in their essence if you can quote a scripture but have add more to make it fit than surely you can see that it's wrong, we don't have to add to scriptures to find one that says I am "One God" but you have to add words to make it say i am "One God" but 3 in 1 :s

reniaa

MOG

Hey JWFacts

As you said WE are not suppose to look at anyone else but the creator as GOD..I dont call Jesus MY GOD, that I reserve to the Father as Jesus also said - Jesus never called himself THE GOD. When I say he is GOD, its different that what you are thinking..Has God The Father called Jesus God? Yes he has..and that is coming from Jehovah..thats exactly how I believe..

But about the Son he says,
"Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever,
and righteousness will be the scepter of your kingdom. (Heb. 1:8).

And also:

I just listed a bunch of verses that shows his worthiness of worship (dont we close our prayers in the name of Jesus to the FATHER GOD)..of course we do

You keep getting the word GOD mixed up easily...that is why I listed other ways to look at the word..Again, men (even Moses), Satan, other pagans (gods) and Jesus have all been called GOD. You keep looking at it as GOD THE FATHER - thats your mistake .just read John 1:1..how hard is this to understand? I dont care if its says "the God" or just a "god"..the word god is there for the Logos (The Word)..

Also

Since the bible was written by men decades ago as you said..does this mean its not inspired?? Does it mean its not the word of God?
if your supporting your theory by using the bible, please do not throw this in..You can support your beliefs using the bible and say something like that..

Deputy Dog

fjtoth

I can understand the Scriptures, and I can understand why you are denying what they say. Many people resist accepting views that oppose their own.

I'm not so sure about that.

You said:

Jesus was indeed in the image or form of God, but he was not God himself. The word for "form" simply means "image," "impression," or "appearance" as shown by lexicons and by examing its other appearances in the New Testament.

Just a quick look at strongs would show you that the Greek word for "form" G3444 is morphe¯

µ??f?´

morphe¯ mor-fay'

Perhaps from the base of G3313 (through the idea of adjustment of parts); shape; figuratively nature: - form.

Had the writer meant to say "image" he would have said "image" and used the Greek word eiko¯n G1504

e????´?

eiko¯n i-kone'

From G1503; a likeness, that is, (literally) statue, profile, or (figuratively) representation, resemblance: - image.

Then you said:

In Philippians 2:7, it says Christ took "the form of a bond-servant," but Christ was never a bond-servant or doulos (Greek). He was sent to be our Lord and Master. In the parable of the landowner (Matthew 21:33-46), Jesus showed he was God's Son and not a doulos like all others who were sent by God. If Jesus was "in the form of" a bond-servant, yet was never actually a bond-servant, how can it be argued that "in the form of" God means that Jesus was actually God himself?

If the bible tells me that Jesus took the "form"/ morphe¯ of a "servant"/

doulos , I believe he did do what it says.

You don't

"but Christ was never a bond-servant or doulos" (to most people this looks like you don't believe or don't "understand the Scriptures")

I believe God has the ability to become what ever he wants to become.

MOG

Can someone tell me how to add EXCERPTS from other people within my response.. PLEASE

BurnTheShips

I can understand the Scriptures, and I can understand why you are denying what they say. Many people resist accepting views that oppose their own.

I HAD the view you have on this. I found the Trinity abhorrent. I debated against it on the Internet for years. I came to accept it because I realized it was true. In my library I have books on famous Unitarians such as Michael Servetus. I have books defending Unitarian doctrine. I understand where they are coming from because I was one of them for a very long time and not just because I was a JW. I came to understand that mainstream, hitstoric, and orthodox Christianity has it right.

By the way, in all those 60 years I've never met a Bible-believing unitarian who switched to accepting the Trinity doctrine, but I have met several Trinitarians who finally realized that the teaching has no merit at all when put to the test with Bible in hand.

Here "before" you is one who has switched--in the other direction. Had you spoken to me just two years ago it would have been different.

You have not answered my questions:

Is the Bible the only thing to define what we believe as Christians?

There were many books that claimed to be from God. Many of them are extant but are not part of the Bible. Others are. How do you know which ones belong in Scripture?

Burn

BurnTheShips

What you seem to be saying is, "Put the Bible aside. It's useless for settling questions about God. Even Christians in early centuries disagreed about some of its teachings. So just forget about the Bible, and everything will turn out all right."

If the Bible is so easy to interpret, so clear at settling questions, why are there tens of thousands of "Bible believing" churches, all with mutually exclusive teachings based on the same book? And hundreds of new one spring up every year. You are giving us your interpretation of scripture. What authority do you have to tell us what scripture really means?

The Bible tells us that every bit of it is inspired. It also foretold that scoffers would come along and ridicule what it teaches. But my experience, and the experience of millions of others, is that the Bible "is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16, 17)

Scripture is inspired, and profitable. BUT DEFINE WHAT IS SCRIPTURE.

Who defined what is Scripture for Christians? You continue to evade the question.

Burn

mouthy

Press on the yellow next to the red A then cover your mouse over what you want to copy then paste ,( it will all go yellow,if you can understand that your clever

I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!

Share this