hi designs
I don't think they are that bad they have the truth of the bible to hand but they need to throw off 1700 years of a faulty theological veil which might be impossible for them.
Reniaa
The Son in two persons
by Deputy Dog 332 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
-
quietlyleaving
hi quietly leaving
The appeal of the witnesses to me is that their doctrinal points are purely bible driven! God is one YHWH, deut 6:4, soul dies, ec 9:5, annointed bride class -bible again, armageddon- bible again, earth promise - isaiah and jesus "meek inherit earth". Jesus is God's actual firstborn of creation son - extremely biblical. YHWH is the father - isaiah, Father is the one true God - Jesus own words at John 17:3. these aren't just references to these things taken out of context read into them, they are specifically saying it.
Deut 6:4 is extremely clear "YHWH is one YHWH"
JW's don't go off into reams of theological or philosophical speculations then repaint them on the bible, basically "a spade is a spade" with them.
the best trinitarians have for 3 in 1 is the baptism scripture in mathew which is about baptism and not God at all. Unlike deut which is on topic. Or they use John 1:1 which does mention God but says Jesus is WITH God which gramatically in itself shows he cannot be God but also has been shown to be innacurate in translation.
Have you heard of the sahidic coptic? it's a 3rd century copy written before trinity got accepted as doctrine and more importantly not written in greek so it's grammer was clearer, and it clearly renders John 1:1c as divine/a god/god-like basically qualative completely! absolutely no identity as "The God " at all.
Reniaa
well this takes us back to deputy dogs op
The WT and JWs around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence. When in fact they have quite a mystery of their own. One son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures Archangel Michael/Human Jesus.
and if you want to continue this discussion with me I'm simply going to copy and paste from this thread to reply to you (it would save a lot of time if you simply re-read the thread)
-
designs
Reniaa,
These are adults whose idea of God is of someone who hurts people in the afterlife.
What a sad and terrible thing to teach their children, much less believe themselves.
There are many structural changes that need to be addressed in the Witness religion, and sadly most will not be changed short of a complete split and reformation occuring as has happened in so many other denominations. Fundamentalists and Evangelicals who hold to their monstrous concept of God offer no solution.
Its heartening to see many here becoming activists in the needs of humanity and this earth, that's our stewardship.
-
Narkissos
Another problem they have is that (according to JWs) Jesus existed for years on earth before what ever came down, came down. Jesus was his own person (separate and distinct) up until then.
DD: This is reminiscent of the pre-orthodox christologies where "Christ" / "the Son of God" was the Spirit descending on the man Jesus at baptism (cf. the Western variant reading quoting from Psalm 2:7 in Luke 3:21f: today I have begotten thee; compare Acts 13:33 linking the same prooftext with the resurrection). However JWs cannot take it fully in that sense since they also suscribe to the nativity stories which make Jesus God's Son at birth or conception. (I seem to remember, though, that they used to teach Jesus became the Son of God at baptism, and that earlier references to this title were proleptical, but I'm not quite sure about that now).
To term the (implicit) JW doctrine, I propose SIRHU: Sequential-intermittent-retrospective hypostatic union. The WT Jesus will have been one person of two (or three) different natures ('stuffs': A-H-A+?) successively with at least a blank during a couple of days when he was not.
Reniaa,
You are still completely mistaken about the (orthodox) Hypostatic union but never mind.
The point I have tried to make is on the first page of this thread. It's about what JWs would have to think if they did think their own doctrine as thoroughly as historical orthodoxy did with its. It would result in a theory just as complex if not more.
But of course no one is forcing them (let alone you) to do that. Beliefs need no rhetoric at all if you don't venture into thinking. I believe, I just know. It's all right. The curious thing is that, contrary to official theology perhaps, there is much more rhetoric in the mind of the average JW than that of the average Catholic for instance...
-
reniaa
hi quietly leaving
Absolutely not! becasue he's putting words in witness mouths which is really what Nark is doing as well be saying we believe Jesus is in anyway hypostatic.
witness believe michael is just an extra name thats all! the biblical principle on him having a few names is there, If Jesus had an extra personality for every name he has we are talking about 10 new Jesus's here.
We've always believed Jesus was an Angel/messenger Powerful spirit creature. more importantly the bible absolutely gives no scriptural proof of any dual or triune consciousness in one body or being it just isn't there!
Saying we believe anything other than what say is just putting your own frames of references on our beliefs.
Reniaa
-
reniaa
hi nark
were is your proof that then when you look at a patch of red the starting place was a red bus with 4 wheels and not a patch of red?
why if someone who has amnesia and recovers regaining his memory and clearly doesn't have two consciousnesses would we think this was anyway different for Jesus ?
We are looking at Jesus rethinking from fantasy saying this is possible because it is Jesus, we are making them a special case with no biblical back up or human back up?
We are actually using the fact that he isn't human as a reason to support our fantasies.
Fact! a human cannot have two wills, conscousnesses, parts that can separate.
it is an eroneous equation to say
Jesus is not human therefore he does have two parts thats a fallacy jesus being human or not has no bearing on it
what you call "thinking" is what I call going into philosophical fantasy with no biblical back up.
Reniaa
-
fokyc
Reniaa said: "I don't think they are that bad they have the truth of the bible to hand"
IF that were true, Elders wouldn't keep lying to me about basic biblical truths, would they?
OR are you too, going to say "The Watchtower.org" website is wrong? I only take my JW information from their own published Bible, their CD-ROM, their official websites AND answers I receive from the Branch office.
YET I am still wrong, one really has to wonder about the JW's
fokyc
-
isaacaustin
isaacaustin Re: The Son in two persons posted ~ 15 hours ago (8/23/2009)
Post 2841 of 2856
Since 4/21/2005Deut 32:39 who alone puts to death and makes alive? John 5- who makes alive? reniaa Re: The Son in two persons posted ~ 14 hours ago (8/23/2009)
Post 2314 of 2321
Since 3/11/2008hi isaac
good scripture but Jesus himself explains it
John 5:26
For as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son to have life in himself.jesus was given this authority as well as judging by his father.
Reniaa
Exactly Reniaa! Maybe your little mind is getting it (doubtful). Jesus explains it. He is granted everytihng from his Father. The poerfect operation of the trinity. ONLY God puts to death and makes alive. The Son does this. The Son is God in nature, operating with the Father and Holy Spirit as one flesh. Again, all you have shown is submission and distinct individuals.
-
reniaa
hi nark
we use perdicted equations to do calculations from and if the equation we use is correct we can apply it to various situations and get the predicted outcome.
If we predict that Jesus is a hypostatic union because we think it can only be that way, we should be able to see this when we apply it to the bible it shouldn't create contradictions that we have to ignore or rewrite in our minds.
When the bible says God sent the son of God to be a sacrificed that is an observable contradiction to a hypostatic Jesus. Because it's saying it is the son of God from heaven who was sent that died.
Reniaa
-
reniaa
hi isaac
not really, all that scripture shows is Jesus is given authority by his father which fits him simply being his fathers son nothing more nothing less!
Reniaa