Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer 117 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Tyre
• 

  zen nudist

  you are still blind to the obvious...you are believing in a trinity taught to you from outside the bible first, then finding scriptures which SEEM to support it AFTERWARDS.

  there is NOT ONE VALID verse that TEACHES a trinity anywhere in the bible, NO WHERE.
• 

  gumby

  The word "beginning" in greek:

  Το λεξικό βρήκε 1 λέξη.
  The dictionary found 1 word.
  

  αρχή	=	beginning, origin, outset, prime, principle, start, threshold
  archi

  Gumby
• 

  waiting

  I really don't care. really. just wanted to say "Hi Joseph! Been a while - good to read you again!"

  catchya later.

  waiting
• 

  UnDisfellowshipped

  Zen Nudist's latest response to my comments:

  you are still blind to the obvious...you are believing in a trinity taught to you from outside the bible first, then finding scriptures which SEEM to support it AFTERWARDS.

  I could say the exact same thing about you. I could claim that you have the pre-conceived belief that Jesus is NOT God, and you go through the Bible looking for any Verses that look like they support your belief. Zen Nudist said:

  there is NOT ONE VALID verse that TEACHES a trinity anywhere in the bible, NO WHERE.

  So, now we have to get approval from Zen Nudist before a certain Scripture can be declared "VALID"? What exactly is a "VALID" Verse and what exactly is an "INVALID" Verse of the Bible? How do you determine this? Who or what qualifies you to determine which parts of the Bible are "VALID" and which are not?
• 

  gumby

  Who or what qualifies you to determine which parts of the Bible are "VALID" and which are not?

  That was already done by the crooked church fathers around the 3rd and 4th centuries. The church tailored made the scriptures......remember? Gumby
• 

  LittleToe

  Gumby:

  The church tailored made the scriptures......remember?

  Agreed, and then again during the Reformation of more recent times.
  Personally I find the Apocryphal, Psuedopigraphyl and Early Church Father's writings to be most enlightening on these subjects.

  There's more to the subject that traditional Christian systems (be they Unitarian or Trinitarian) dare voice.
  People are all too busy trying to defend the orthodox and make every scripture, by a diverse range of authors, knit together.

  I honestly don't understand how Unitarians can defend against the idea that the NT offers Jesus as the author of Creation.
  I also don't understand how Trinitarians can be so blind to the obvious polytheistic culture in which the OT was written...
• 

  zen nudist

  I came from a catholic trinitarian background prior to my attachment to the borg...

  quite simply a VALID verse TEACHING the trinity is anyone anywhere in the bible explaining it to someone else... something you will find NO WHERE in scripture.

  my assumption, jews were as they still are, strictly monotheists with no belief in a trinity for the typical orthodox jew... some of the esoteric kaballistic jews may have a concept of a many in one sort of god, but that is not standard...

  so I assume that if Jesus were a real person living in a real jewish community and his followers were likewise real jews, someone would have to explain and ennunciate a trinity belief to them somewhere... yet we do not find anyone in the bible doing this... now try to grasp this... the words we read are triggers of OUR experiences, not the authors... if the ones reading were orthodox jews, they would find NO ONE teaching them anywhere that they should change their view of GOD as the father... they might have to alter their view of the messiah, but not of GOD... to them there is not one verse which shows them that their traditional view of God as Jehovah, the father is wrong... and if the trinity were crucial for salvation as some pretend, then it seems odd that this significant omission exists, no?

  the reason so many trinitarians are oblivious to this is because they were TAUGHT a trinity and when they think of GOD, they can see verses which point to it, but most of the time, they too, think of the word GOD in the bible to automatically refer to the father alone.... not to a trinity...and that does not bother them one bit...but it should.

  now, the likely reailty: there is no god as the bible depicts, but GOD is reality in total, of which we all are sharers...all part of the divine... the gnostics believed that the divine spark resides in all and needs to be awakened, as many other mystical schools taught... Jesus, rather than being a real person, was the name given to the hero with a thousand faces, which symbolizes that divine spark within us and its journey back to enlightenment.

  there is NO actual evidence other than legend, rumor, and myth that Jesus was more.
• 

  LittleToe

  Zen:
  Your opinion is interesting, but please don't lose sight of the fact that it is merely that, however well informed.

  I was raised as a JW, from birth. I came to an understanding of the Trinity merely from bible reading, and the hint of a twisted suggestion from the Watchtower.
  Did you really have a clear understanding of that doctrine, before becoming a JW? My general experience with Catholics was that they were largely ignorant of the bible generally, even the altarboys.

  I am totally happy to agree with your statement that there is no god as the bible depicts. I'd say that it was an attempt of various authors to express their experience of the divine. Thus a picture is drawn, but oft confusing, if trying to make it definitive.

  Anyhow, this isn't a Trinity debate, per se, so much as a biblical debate on whether or not "the Word" was created...
• 

  zen nudist

  Anyhow, this isn't a Trinity debate, per se, so much as a biblical debate on whether or not "the Word" was created...

  I never take anyones BS [belief system] too seriously, not even my own.

  and I care not about whether there is or is not a trinity, but just about the technical debate of whether or not it is a bible teaching or something read backwards into the bible....

  FIRST BORN of creation, the FIRST of the CREATION by GOD, would give no problems to anyone not demanding a trinity....the idea that SON is as eternal as FATHER kind of makes those terms rediculous and absurd...unless one sees SON as part of and FATHER as source or whole...in which case, joint HEIRS of GOD with Christ--- my GOD and your GOD, we as Jesus brothers... being ONE just as Jesus and GOD are one...would make sense.