TRINITY Challenge for JW's, Unitarians and Anyone Else

by UnDisfellowshipped 457 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Think About It

  15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.

  If Jesus is the "image" of the invisible God, that would imply being a separate or duplicate entity and not the original. (see definition of image below) Would also explain that Jesus would not be a Superman in heaven in a human body if he is an "image" of the "invisible" God.

  n.

  1. A reproduction of the form of a person or object, especially a sculptured likeness.
  2. Physics. An optically formed duplicate, counterpart, or other representative reproduction of an object, especially an optical reproduction formed by a lens or mirror.

  Think About It
• 

  designs

  TAI, in line with your good point.

  One of the difficult questions among Catholic, Protestants, and Fundamentalists is whether the Jesus part of God is eternally confined to this human body or can he transcend it at will. 'firstborn of all creation' also presents some problems and the theology text books seem divided on this also, especially in light of Judaism.
• 

  Chalam

  eikón from Colossians 1:15 means literally the statue or icon i.e. the physical representation invisible God.

  Indeed as Hebrews puts it, He is the exact imprint of God's nature and the raidance of His glory.

  Hebrews 1:3 (English Standard Version)

  3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature

  Now what better qualifications are there for worshipping Jesus?

  Blessings in Christ,

  Stephen
• 

  designs

  Stephen it still does not address the issue of Homoiousios and Homoioosios and Homoiusios that the early Bishops argued and literally fought over nor the transcendence issue.

  These were the fundamental issues that seperated the Monotheist Jewish Nazarene community and the Gentile Church ruled by Bishops who were trying to remake a Jewish Messiah into something else.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  designs

  Answering that question wouldn't settle anything. What YOU fail to see or understand is any answer I (or anyone else) would give you outside of what the bible says, is pure speculation. These things are fine to talk about, and answers found may help some to understand, but these issues don't change what is written.

  So go ahead and make fun if you must, it's just not going to change anything.

  Gentile Church ruled by Bishops who were trying to remake a Jewish Messiah into something else.

  The only problem with this view is, the early church were mostly Jews. Paul was a Jew and was most influential in defining most of the ideas the church still holds to today.

  I'm also a bit puzzled by your belief that a Rabi today would necessarily agree with Rabbis at the time of the early church, when there is such disagreement today among themselves as to the nature of God.
• 

  designs

  Deputy dog-

  The basic problem with the NT, both the 4 Gospels and St. Paul's Epistles, is the very apparent flaws in their understanding of the Jewish Beliefs. This gives the entire account a very suspicious underpinning meaning these characters probably aren't who they are claimed to be.

  The Bishops of Asia and Europe basically invented an entirely new religion that only sort of resembled some things with Jewish origins. The difficulties these Bishops kept encountering with their new theory of the Trinity highlights this.
• 

  PSacramento

  The basic problem with the NT, both the 4 Gospels and St. Paul's Epistles, is the very apparent flaws in their understanding of the Jewish Beliefs

  WHich Jewish beliefs? Of which Sect? of pre or post 70AD? of pre or post second temple? of pre or post "age of the Rabbis"?
• 

  Think About It

  Indeed as Hebrews puts it, He is the exact imprint of God's nature and the raidance of His glory.

  Heb 1:3 (English Standard Version) 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature

  Same problem for Trinitarians here as in Col 1:15. Just as the image is not the original, in Heb 1:3 the imprint is not the original type. Hebrews 1 shows here that the Son was an heir (hence he was given heirship by someone), things created "through", sat down at the "right hand" of the "Majesty", became superior to the angels (hence given more of divine nature), was begotten, was a firstborn, says God "his God" annointed him.

  Hebrews 1 (English Standard Version)

  1 Long ago, at many times and (A) in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but (B) in these last days (C) he has spoken to us by (D) his Son, whom he appointed (E) the heir of all things, (F) through whom also he created (G) the world. 3 He is the radiance of the glory of God and (H) the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. (I) After making purification for sins, (J) he sat down (K) at the right hand of the Majesty on high, 4 having become as much superior to angels as the name (L) he has inherited is more excellent than theirs. 5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, (M) "You are my Son, today I have begotten you"? Or again, (N) "I will be to him a father, and he shall be to me a son"? 6 And again, when he brings (O) the firstborn into the world, he says, (P) "Let all God’s angels worship him." 7 Of the angels he says, (Q) "He makes his angels winds, and his ministers a flame of fire." 8 But of the Son he says, (R) "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever, the scepter of uprightness is the scepter of your kingdom. 9 You have loved righteousness and hated wickedness;therefore God, your God, (S) has anointed you with (T) the oil of gladness beyond your companions." 10 And, (U) "You, Lord, laid the foundation of the earth in the beginning, and the heavens are the work of your hands; 11 they will perish, but you remain; they will all wear out like a garment, 12 like a robe you will roll them up, like a garment they will be changed. [a] But you are (V) the same, and your years will have no end." 13 And to which of the angels has he ever said, (W) "Sit at my right hand (X) until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet"? 14 Are they not all ministering spirits (Y) sent out to serve for the sake of those who are to (Z) inherit salvation?

  Think About It
• 

  designs

  PSacremento-

  Most notibly on three areas: The hereafter, human's relation to God, original sin. Jews didnot believe in eternal punishment for wicked people but a temporary level of punishment meant to rehabilitate a person so they could enter Paradise. This goes directly against the words ascribed to Jesus who sends people to the everlasting flames of Hell. Also Adam is said to be sitting at the gates to Paradise already welcoming his children home, a Jew listening to 'Jesus' or 'Paul' would have wondered what happened to Grampa. All Humans are considered Children of God, Gentiles are already considered in the Noah Laws and a Jew, even if not a very Observant one, gets to go to Paradise. This leaves 'Paul's' rants in Romans, Galatians, Colossians, and Hebrews sounding kind of weird, more like you would hear from a Self-Loathing individual.. And the issue of Origina Sin, entirely different take within Judaism, read up on some of the Jewish Sages and the Talmud/Midrasch stories to get the views held. Read also about what is called the Two Views on covenants, Paul completely omits this so you really have to wonder about his Jewish education.

  The Dead Sea Scrolls are a good source to understand what Messianic expectations were in the time of Jesus of Nazareth. 11Q13
• 

  PSacramento

  Designs,

  I don't think all Jews agreed on the "afterlife" or "thereafter", I recall there were and still are differences of opinions from different sects.

  I do agree that ALL are God's children and I think that many things Paul said CAN be and WERE/ARE taken out of context, considering he is speaking from HIS experience as applicable to HIS SECT that he came from.

  Ah, original sin, I think THAT was Paul very own unique interpretation of that.

  I have discussed these things, and others, with some Jewish friends of mine, one of them has an uncle that is a rabbi (orthodox) and he always has awesome input not only from TODAY's jewish perspective but the historical one.