Has the WTBS ever explained the trinity? (page 2)

leavingwt

Christ has only one Bride. His Bride is made up of 144,000 persons. The 'Bride' is not one person. Neither is 'God'.

This is my simplest explanation of the basic gist of the doctrine.

The concept that the Father and Son are two persons but still one God (as LeavingWT mentions) seems to contradict statements of Jesus saying "the Father is greater than I" and that "no one knows except the Father". If Jesus were God himself how could only the Father know and how could he be inferior? The divinity of Jesus isn't questioned by the WT... at John 1:1 the NWT says "a god". What they, the WT, question is that they are one and the same "God".

Anything that is worshiped by someone as a god is indeed their god, but this doesn't make it a real god.

Jesus is the "Son of God" according to the scriptures, this makes him divine enough for me to be worthy of honor. But God himself has given him the right to be held in high esteem by believers.

How the Holy Spirit can be a person? Well, if you can be filled with it, anointed with it, then it makes it hard to think of it as a person.

--ILOOWY

iloowy

LeavingWT wrote:
> Christ has only one Bride. His Bride is made up of 144,000 persons.
> The 'Bride' is not one person. Neither is 'God'.

Hmmm... but the number 144,000 is as symbolic as the 12 tribes are symbolic.
I guess that would make your three-in-one somehow symbolic.
Not trying to argue with you and you can believe whatever you want.
Just offering a differing view which I read from the Scriptures.
If your reading of the Scriptures differs from mine, well then, we are
all entitled to differing views and free will. May Christian Freedom prevail,
I say.
--ILOOWY

leavingwt

If Jesus were God himself how could only the Father know and how could he be inferior?

In your statement above, I believe you are saying, "If Jesus were the Father himself". From a Trinitarian standpoint, Jesus is not the Father. He is the Son. The Father is indeed greater than the Son. It's a matter of position, or office, not of essence. As an example, George Bush is greater than me, but he is not better than me.

In this light, when I use the term "God", I am referring to three persons, not the Father.

(Please, I don't want anyone to misinterpret my comments as promoting the Trinity. Rather, I'm trying to explain it, as best as I can, based upon my studies. This, in contrast to Watchtower, which lied to me about the doctrine.)

leavingwt

I agree about the 144,000 as being a symbolic number. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear.

The point was that the 144,000 are 'the Bride', meaning the Bride is many persons. The term 'Bride' does not refer to one person.

I am in total agreement, regarding Christian Freedom. I'm personally on a journey to decide exactly what I do believe and whether or not I'm a person of faith.

Upon leaving the JWs, I wanted to understand why mainstream Christianity teaches the Trinity doctrine. If the doctrine is as stupid as WT had led me to believe, it didn't make sense that this teaching persisted for thousands of years. I quickly realized I didn't have a clue what the Trinity was. Nor, was it easy for me to wrap my head around, because I had preconceived notions about all of the words used to describe the specifics.

One of the more helpful lectures I listened to, was this two-part sermon, designed specifically for a JW audience, regarding the Trinity. It is beneficial, even if only it helps you to understand what a clergyman means when he says 'Trinity'.

http://www.waltermartin.com/audio_clips/trinity.ram (Part I)

http://www.waltermartin.com/audio_clips/trinity2.ram (Part II)

You'll need RealPlayer (ugh) or Media Player Classic to listen to this streaming content. He's quite a lively speaker, and his knowledge of Greek is impressive.

Again, I'm not saying this is true. What I am saying is that it helped me to understand what the doctrine is all about, and why man Christians believe it. It helped remove much of the mystery surrounding what had previously been a belief that I had scorned, without even understanding.

iloowy

> In your statement above, I believe you are saying, "If Jesus were the Father himself".

No, not really, what I was saying is that the Trinity doctrine says they are co-equal,
eternal and one isn't above the other. Check it out, go to the New Catholic Encyclopedia.
After all, the Catholics are the ones that started it. ¿Qué no? There's a lot of history
between Arius and Athanasius that one needs to keep in mind when considering the whole
Trinity as doctrine issue.

> From a Trinitarian standpoint, Jesus is not the Father. He is the Son.
> The Father is indeed greater than the Son.

I'm not quite sure if your version of the Trinity is what the official
Trinity doctrine states... but as one who was raised Catholic can tell
you... your interpretation doesn't jive with that they (i.e. Trinitarians)
teach.

> It's a matter of position, or office, not of essence.
> As an example, George Bush is greater than me, but he is not better than me.

Ok, well, see, that illustration just convinced me that I'm gonna have a real
hard time even understanding how you think. George Bush? George Bush?
Who do you mean... The father George Bush or the Son George Bush (i.e. W.)???

> In this light, when I use the term "God", I am referring to three persons, not the Father.

Ok, well you see again, if you're talking about Presidents, how do you and the 2
George Bushes make your illustrative Trinity? Are you their Holy Spirit? Ok... that
was just a joke. But your explanation isn't making much sense.

> (Please, I don't want anyone to misinterpret my comments as promoting the Trinity.
> Rather, I'm trying to explain it, as best as I can, based upon my studies.
> This, in contrast to Watchtower, which lied to me about the doctrine.)

I really feel for you, I really do. But you are trying to promote the Trinity.
You say you aren't but by bringing it up you are trying to "teach" and "preach"
about it on this board. That's how I read it. If I misunderstand you, I apologize.

> I agree about the 144,000 as being a symbolic number. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear [...]

That's good, we agree on something and that's a good thing, isn't it?

> I am in total agreement, regarding Christian Freedom.

That's excellent. We're making great strides to agreement on some things. It's good, I think.

> I'm personally on a journey to decide exactly what I do believe and whether or not I'm a person of faith.

If you read the gospels and put your trust in that what they say is true, then pray about it, and tell others what you've come to believe then that's a wonderful thing.

> Upon leaving the JWs, I wanted to understand why mainstream Christianity teaches the Trinity doctrine.
> If the doctrine is as stupid as WT had led me to believe, it didn't make sense that this teaching
> persisted for thousands of years.

The belief that the Earth was flat also persisted for a lot of years. But...
Even the last Pope apologized in a way about the Galileo thing.

> [...] One of the more helpful lectures I listened to, was [...]
> ...waltermartin...

Well, that explains a lot. Walter Martin is quite how can I say...
very... erhhh... messed up in a doctrinal sort of annoying way, for me.

> He's quite a lively speaker, and his knowledge of Greek is impressive.

That he is, very lively as you put it. But his pronunciation of Greek stinks,
judging from what I heard him quote. BTW I can't stand his lofty tone.

> [...] and why man Christians believe it.

People who call themselves Christians don't seem to agree on what they
all mean by the word Trinity. There are many different variations
within the denominations. That should tell you something about it.

> [...] It helped remove much of the mystery [...]

Yup. That's exactly what I was told as a child. It's a mystery.
Which reminds me of playing piano.

> [...] surrounding what had previously been a belief
> that I had scorned, without even understanding.

I can appreciate your search for truth. It is something we all do.
We all want to put trust in what is true, not in lies.
Jesus said he was the truth and the way. That's good enough
for me. We all need to come to terms with how we feel about the
WT Society's teachings and sort out the nonsense, filter it out,
and the strain of it is a very trying experience. Isn't it?

I wish you the best for your search of truth and may God, our God,
bless you with the assurance of faith. Believe what you would believe
and be sure of it, but always keep testing and proving what you hold
as your beliefs.

With Christian Love.
--ILOOWY

leavingwt

George Bush, meaning The President. (You may subsitute Senator, Prime Minister, etc.)

I should have stated, "The President is greater than me, however he is not better. I am not inferior to the President. His office/station is undoubtedly greater."

Sorry for the confusion.

leavingwt

But you are trying to promote the Trinity.
You say you aren't but by bringing it up you are trying to "teach" and "preach"
about it on this board. That's how I read it. If I misunderstand you, I apologize.

Indeed, I have been misunderstood. I thank you for the heads-up, and I will choose my words more carefully, next time.

LayingLow

It blows my mind that this how often that type of example is given. I've heard of the egg, the apple, the sun, etc.. As long as God is said to be one person who manifests himself in three forms a person is describing modalism. I have heard preachers say that it was like God has three masks that he can put on. This is not the trinity.

The trinity is saying that there is one life force, i.e. the life of God, that is shared by three persons. As soon as a person begins to describe it as one person and three aspects of that person (Like soul, body, spirit) they are leaving the trinity doctrine and explaining something else. If you want, go to a place like ccel.org and look up works by Athanasius such as the following link: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.xxi.ii.i.ii.html

Some of the descriptions he uses are further along in the text than where I linked to.

I just wanted to point out what they doctrine is vs. what it isn't.

leavingwt

Thank you, LayingLow.

Has the WTBS ever explained the trinity?

Share this