JWs take a page out of the Trinitarian playbook to support the generation of 1914

OneGenTwoGroups

Back in the "good old days", I would look for people in my territory, especially ministers in order to debate the Trinity with them. It was my pet subject that I had spent many hours over several years researching. I was such a good anti-Trinity apologist that I was actually disappointed with the Trinity brochure when it came out. (It spends way too much page real estate quoting people that don't believe the Trinity, for instance.)

One of my favorite things to do in my ministry was to force a person to define the Trinity and make them stick to it. And once they defined it, I started asking questions. Why was this fun for me? Because of the problem with the Trinity: there are three "things" that are called "one God".

These things I have heard and read called Persons, Personalities, Entities, and Beings. I read one pro-trinity book where the author swore there was ONLY ONE BEING! I had a pastor tell me that there are THREE beings but one ESSENCE.

Trinitarians and Jehovah's Witnesses have a similar problem now.

1. JWs are trying to make 2 = 1.

2. Trinitarians are trying to make 3 = 1.

I see the apologists in both camps making very similar moves. Inventing non-scriptural labels such as "groups" or "entities", and defining these labels with such gusto that they are actually creating a new definition for the words being used. But it doesn't matter what labels you use, confusion still abounds.

A nominal Catholic or Protestant usually doesn't understand the Trinity and doesn't talk about it. The same goes for JWs and their favorite "generation".

A Believer

The JW do not teach 2=1. Jesus is the weaker being and isn't God. It's funny how Jesus can tell people in the bible to not worship him-to worship God yet people today still worship Jesus anyway. He also flat out says Jehovah is more powerful than him in numerous scriptures.

OneGenTwoGroups

#A Believer

The JWs do teach 2 = 1.

2 Groups = 1 Generation

pale.emperor

The JW do not teach 2=1. Jesus is the weaker being and isn't God.

A Believer, what OneGenTwoGroups is referring to is the "overlapping generation" teaching that came out quite recently. The Watchtower organization for decades referred to "this generation" as those alive in 1914 who recognized the sign of Christs Presence. Now the teaching is that "this generation" evidently is referring to those who were of the annotated but were alive at the same time as some of the 1914 generation.

Surely you can see that this is not in the bible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejO0Z8m2n-k

prologos

The move to have the proponent define the "thing" is a good debating tool.

Ask whether " all the things" Jesus predicted would include Armageddon, and have them prove it, then

Ask the jw to define the length of the overlapping anointed generation from 1914 to----? Make him/her commit to the wt charts, ends with rapture, at the beginning of the Great Tribulation, then ask: " so the generation passes, ends at that point? . Then have them read Mat 24:34. "-- generation will not pass.

added, after the previous, while I was writing seconds ahead, post by p.a. shows: The generation ends at the beginning of the Great tribulation, it, and Armageddon happens after the anointed are gone.

The wt overlapping anointed generation is not what it seems to be. scripturally true, but the talking snake is.

The Searcher

"A nominal Catholic or Protestant usually doesn't understand the Trinity."

"Indeed, of all revealed truths [the trinity] this is the most impenetrable to reason.......the plurality of Persons in the Godhead is a truth entirely beyond the scope of any created intellect." (Catholic Encyclopedia - http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15047a.htm#IV)

If the religion who formulated it can't explain it......................

Steel

If you understand the nature of god of being invisible and untouchable and who scholars believe jesus was in the old testament ( the word of the lord or the angel of the lord), it's really not hard explain.

The new testament explains who jesus was in quite simple terms. The visible image of the invisible God or no one has seen the father only the son. Not really how they get a third member but the concept isn't as mysterious as some would like to believe.

Now if God comes to earth as a human limited by his finite mortality is he really god? The arguments at that point just become idle circular philosophy that really goes nowhere. Watchtower reasoning.

Londo111

There is more scriptural “evidence” to argue for a Trinity then there is for the Overlapping Generation.

The key thing to understand is different Bible writers had different ideas of who Jesus was. The writer of Mark had believed a very human messiah adopted as God’s son, whereas the writer of John clearly believed that Jesus was fully divine, while a distinct person from the Father and the Holy Spirit.

To 'disprove' the Trinity, or to 'prove' it, one must span different Bible books written by different writers.

To discount the Overlapping Generation of Matthew 24:34, one simply goes to Matthew 1, within the same book of the Bible, by the same writer.

scratchme1010

I see the apologists in both camps making very similar moves. Inventing non-scriptural labels such as "groups" or "entities", and defining these labels with such gusto that they are actually creating a new definition for the words being used. But it doesn't matter what labels you use, confusion still abounds.

I guess it was fun while it lasted. Too bad it turned out to be all crap from either side.

BluesBrother

JWs were fond of mocking Trinitarians for saying 1+1+1=1... and that they were said to just say"It is a divine mystery "

Now as the O/P says, this generation teaching is an admitted mystery to most of them, the rest just repeat the mantra blindly like the silly sheep in "Animal Farm". They also are saying that one gen. plus the next gen. = one generation....

Bah..bah ..bleat bleat ....

JWs take a page out of the Trinitarian playbook to support the generation of 1914

Share this