gonna look at this later
Couple of questions for the Christians here - CO's talk mentioned some things that I want to understand
by Doubting Bro 50 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Band on the Run
Outright lies that enrage me. What a bigotted idiot. I am too upset to go through details. They lie, and lie boldly. It is bunk. There is no uniform view about Christ. Certain trends exist in Roman Catholicism, the Eastern Church, Protestantism. Someone posted a chart on the Internet that I agreed with. It showed that the Christian churches only disagree on about ten percent of doctrine. Christology, the study of Christ's nature, is extremely complex. The Nicene Creed and the Apostles' Creed are very ancient, formed before Rome was any impt part of the Church. They provide a consensus of belief. It was very much a politcal process. Other Christian groups existed, such as the Gnostics, that vehemently disagreed about the nature of Christ.
Others have answered. Two things are central to me concerning Christ. His physicality, both during his life and after the ressurection. Jesus pre-existed. The Logos, The Word. Jesus is God.
We discussed the Holy Spirit in great detail. The early Christians noted that they experienced God in different ways. The Trinity was a way to describe the different aspects or forces of God. I've studied that Christianity is a much a result of social and political movements as doctrine. Of course, I am Episcopalian. For a church whose founder loved frying Christian heretics, the Church is very hard to pin down on details today. Broad views are used to give coverage to as many people as possible. It is sort of the antiWitness religion. I don't fret the details. My Witness training is still in me. I ask about this little thing and what some spooky scriptural things means.
The ransom sacrifice is bunk.
Why would anyone consider a CO a source of info about mainstream Christianity? For goodness sake, you can't quote wikipedia but a CO in the JWs is authority. If he could accurately describe orthodox Christianity and then explain why Witnesses disagree, maybe I'd have a little bit of respect for him. When I studied religion in college, I veered away from Witness topics. My soul was aching to do the research to discover the "truth." I notice how frequently my thoughts here are a jumble and my grammar messed up b.c I get so agitated. He is making assumptions based on how to highlight Witness doctrine which he assumes to be true. No scholar can proceed in this fashion. A large part of practicing law is figuring out your adversary's best points. Points that you cannot deny. You don't sit down and just write what you want to establish. Often, you acknowledge certain points against you.
-
godrulz
Gnosticism was a heresy, not Christian in any sense.
-
mf6
"the Trinitarians pet translation, the KJV......"
Where do you get that? The KJV hasn't been the translation of choice (except for a few small groups) for quite some time.
mf6
-
WontLeave
@godrulz
Can't leave/won't leave
We are 2 different people. I am relatively new to this forum and didn't realize there was someone with a similar name, but they are very dissimilar in spirit. He obviously feels trapped - as many do. I, on the other hand, refuse to cower or slink off. I don't have family in the organization I treasure more than my relationship with God and I do not fear the losers in cheap suits who constitute the body of elders or the Governing Body. Jesus is my Lord and my leader.
I am not Catholic
I never said you were Catholic. I said you "parrot the same crap the Catholic Church made up". Most, if not all, "mainstream" churches are just Catholicism with some adjustments. Instead of taking something known to be broken and patching it up with tape and bubble gum, why not just start from scratch and let the Bible set doctrine? Obviously, you have no clue how the things you believe came about.
My beliefs in Deity of Christ, Trinity, etc. are rooted in Scripture, not the blind following of tradition, creeds, etc.
Right. Nobody saw the Trinity in the Bible for thousands of years in the OT or for hundreds in the NT, but you spotted it right off, with zero outside influence. The Catholic Church tortured people because they rejected this ridiculous doctrine and that's the only way it ever gained popularity.
Tell me you are not using NWT?
When dealing with JWs, I will. When dealing with people who reject the NWT, of course not. I don't use any scriptures, from any version, which are specious in nature.
The fact that you were deceived by WT gives you little credibility to pick a fight with me
If you had actually read nearly any of my posts, you'd know that I realized problems with the organization very quickly and rejected their authority and some doctrines nearly from the start of my association with them. You assume too much, believe too much, and know too little.
Truth does not run from error.
I'm right here, buddy. What'ca got? You do not want to throw down with me in the Bible. The fact that you're slinking around here, looking for someone disillusioned with their belief structure, to tear at everything while directing them to blasphemous church inventions which nearly everybody here knows didn't exist in Jesus' mind and weren't preached by his apostles betrays your desperation. It wasn't until the Catholic Magisterium started the Inquisitions, these vile canards began to take hold in Christianity, degrading it to the disgusting abortion it is today. And you're here preaching it.
-
godrulz
Who do you say Jesus Christ is?
Where did you get those ideas?
Have you considered what He said and claimed about Himself?
What is your preferred Bible version?
Are you a Russellite or something? Do you affiliate with any formal group? What are your influences and beliefs on essential doctrine? Why would you still identify with the WT if they are so corrupt/wrong?
I am from Canada. Where are you from?
How do you do quotes? How does one do a profile? Do you have to have so many posts to get more privileges?
-
WontLeave
@godrulz
Ah, a conversation; much better.
Who do you say Jesus Christ is? Where did you get those ideas?
The only begotten son of God. (John 3:16) The Way, the Truth, and the Life. (John 14:6)
Have you considered what He said and claimed about Himself?
Very much so.
What is your preferred Bible version?
Most real translations have strong and weak points. I avoid using interpretations like AMP, GNB/TEV, MSG. I avoid using any verses that suddenly appear in later manuscripts. Biblegateway.com is a good resource. http://lexicon.katabiblon.com is a nice Koine online interlinear and http://qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/ is a pretty comprehensive Hebrew interlinear.
Are you a Russellite or something?
I don't temper the Bible with human understanding.
Do you affiliate with any formal group?
While I am still a member of a Jehovah's Witness congregation, I feel like Jesus with the Pharisees. While I may have more in common with their beliefs than others, their pigheadedness and absolute devotion to erroneous human understanding puts us at odds, as there is zero tolerance for dissent. My feeling toward them is similar to James 2:19: You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.
What are your influences and beliefs on essential doctrine?
The Bible. Emptying one's cup and allowing the Bible to speak without preconception is extremely difficult and requires a true desire for truth and not to find "proof texts" for doctrines already held. I've had to uproot many things planted by many sources. Every time I read the Bible I discover new things I have to remove from my mind that have been introduced by outside sources. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
Why would you still identify with the WT if they are so corrupt/wrong?
I do not identify with the Watchtower. I neither read the magazine nor acknowledge any authority in the corporation. I believe God uses them to lead people toward truth, but no imperfect religion in Satan's world will ever be able to lead to truth. A human organization can only take us so far, then it's us, the Bible, and begging God for Holy Spirit to lead us to proper understanding. I feel I have graduated from the milk of the Watchtower and my "sola Scriptura" philosophy has introduced me to many things JWs have wrong. But that doesn't mean they have everything wrong. They are closer to true doctrine than any church I've examined, but they still miss the mark by a fairly wide margin.
Where are you from?
USA
How do you do quotes?
Just like that. I kid. Drop box that says "Styles". Just stick your cursor at the end of the line/paragraph you want to put in a box and click "quote". At least that's the way I do it. If you highlight multiple lines and do it, you'll get the lines lying on top of each other. Perhaps you've seen this phenomenon in some posts.
How does one do a profile? Do you have to have so many posts to get more privileges?
Not sure on either of those.
-
godrulz
Many people claim to just read the Bible and have a corner on truth. If your beliefs are closer to the WT than biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity, then you still have a long way to go.
I assume you are Arian and believe Christ is creature, not uncreated Creator (Almigthy God)? I assume you still deny the personality of the Holy Spirit? Many false groups can say Jesus is Son of God, etc., but there is a semantical problem since a Mormon, JW, Christian Scientist, Christadelphian, Evangelical will mean something different by the phrase. Quoting a verse generically is not interpreting or defining it. If I was asked, I would not hestiate to say that He is God Almighty in the flesh, the God-Man, one person with two natures (JWs are wrong about only begotten/monogenes, firstborn, beginning of creation of God, etc.).
Until you renounce the WT and embrace Jesus as Jehovah (I AM), you will still be lost in your sins.
Given your position, should the WT not disfellowship you? Should you not have the integrity to let them know where you are at so they can kick you out?
-
WontLeave
biblical, historical, orthodox Christianity
If you believe the Trinity is Biblical or historical, you need to research the origin of the doctrine. True, it has become "orthodox", but so have many other clearly false doctrines. Many of these are argued by various Catholic spin-off religions, but the vast majority cling to the Catholic invention of Trinity.
I assume you are Arian and believe Christ is creature, not uncreated Creator
Jesus has a unique relationship with the Father. He is the only-begotten and his position and nature can not be equated with anything else. Jesus was instrumental in creation; this is clearly stated in Scripture. I have posted brief essays of how the Bible describes the relationship between the Father and Son to me. There's one in this post.
I assume you still deny the personality of the Holy Spirit?
No more than anything else I've ever seen poured out or something filled with. Once again, Holy Spirit is unique and nothing else like it exists to equate it to.
Quoting a verse generically is not interpreting or defining it. If I was asked, I would not hestiate to say that He is God Almighty in the flesh, the God-Man, one person with two natures
And that is why your doctrine is flawed. Stick with what the Bible actually says instead of filtering it through church doctrine and trying to force Scripture to fit preconceived doctrines.
Until you renounce the WT
I don't recall ever claiming any sort of WT-centric faith.
embrace Jesus as Jehovah (I AM), you will still be lost in your sins.
Jesus is Jehovah? That is a patently false Mormon belief. Are you saying there is no father/son relationship? This would require higher and lower relative positions of separate individuals. If you cling to the Trinity, you're implying God used about the worst possible language to describe his relationship to Jesus. Just like the WT, you're attempting to "explain" what God meant to say and failed to. There is no "I AM". That is a blatant manipulation in translation to reach a Trinitarian goal. That particular argument is a dogmatic grasping at straws.
Given your position, should the WT not disfellowship you? Should you not have the integrity to let them know where you are at so they can kick you out?
I don't generally seek a fight with the elders, but will not run from one, either. I have been confronted for exercising Christian freedom or differences of opinion about various things and stuck with the Bible when it conflicts with WT doctrine. I have posted about this many times. I do not hide my beliefs in my congregation, which is why I have been attacked by the elders. This type of behavior and disregard for Scripture, in favor for Watchtower articles were instrumental in completing my awakening. When the dogmatic power structure does decide to cast me out of the synagogue (which I have no doubt will happen), I want it to be for the best possible reason: Standing up for the truths in the Bible. That doesn't mean I'm going to give personal information out over an Internet forum.
-
godrulz
You are still blinded by and steeped in WT/Russell thinking. ego eimi is present active indicative....I AM, Jehovahistic identity in specific contexts used by Jesus (e.g. Jn. 8:58). Even the NWT translates it correctly as I AM in virtually every other context (so sectarian bias vs grammar is the only reason it deviates one time). The WT invention of non-existent tenses, shoddy footnotes to explain their twisting, etc. displays profound ignorance of basic Greek. There is no blatant manipulation in virtually every other version. The WT is dead wrong and you would not defend it if you had a few months of introductory Greek under your belt (check with Greek masters instead of WT flunkies who rely on them, but out of context). Mormonism is tritheism, not triunity. Jesus is Jehovah is true in a monotheistic sense, not an LDS polytheistic sense. The same arguments used by the WT to prove the personality of Satan more than prove the personality (vs personification) of the Holy Spirit. Contexts about His power do not negate many more about His personality. You filter the Bible through WT lenses, except in some minor points you beat your chest about. You are still essentially WT on the essentials.
You have the same argumentative spirit as your fellow Russellites. You may be stubborn and independent (and thus don't belong in the WT), but you are still not a biblical believer (the acid test is the Deity of Christ).