Commentary Press - Trinity

by Greenpalmtreestillmine 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Greenpalmtreestillmine

  There's a new essay on Commentary Press discussing the Trinity.

  http://www.commentarypress.com/eng-onetruegod.html

  For any interested in that topic.

  Sabrina
• 

  frankiespeakin

  I guess Raymond Franz has not come completey out of mind control. And for that matter,,no body ever really comes completly out of it,,some just come far out than others.
• 

  fjtoth

  frankiespeakin:
  
  Apparently you didn't see the shaded area that accompanies the article. It says, in part: "This booklet was submitted to Commentary Press by one of our readers. ... The views expressed are those of the author (Jay Dicken) who can be be contacted directly ..."
  
  It's difficult for me to see evidence of your claim of "mind control." The article refutes the Trinity, but it's position on the topic is quite different from the Watchtower's. For example, JWs are similar to trinitarians in claiming that "the Word" of John 1:1 is Jesus in a prehuman existence, but the author (Jay Dicken) gives an explanation that is quite different.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  Fj,

  I'm sure they express views close to those of Franz or else they wouldn't be on the site.

  I don't think Franz would welcome a essay on disproving the bible as god's word? What do you think?
• 

  fjtoth

  frankiespeakin:
  

  My point is this: There might be some substance to the charge of "mind control" if the article entirely reflected the JW viewpoint. But it doesn't. I think it's clear and easy to see that some of his arguments would be denied by JWs.
• 

  Narkissos

  There might be some substance to the charge of "mind control" if the article entirely reflected the JW viewpoint. But it doesn't. I think it's clear and easy to see that some of his arguments would be denied by JWs.

  As a general observation, I would not agree with this. Most people get free of mind control very gradually. When people who have just left the JWs are given the opportunity to express their beliefs or to back them up (which is the worst thing that may happen to them imho), their talk will generally be 90 % JW. We have had quite a few examples on this board. For the majority it doesn't last too long, but those who are unlucky enough to gather some audience and get trapped in their own writings, conferences, answers..., can still be found in JW-like talk and doctrine many years after. Who knows what they would think now had they not been asked to provide an "alternative truth" that early.

  This being said, I have the greatest admiration for Ray Franz and his work. His experience and the way he worked it out are unique and unvaluable. His decision not to be a religious leader anymore should be really respected. Creating a JW-bis religion around him would be the worst thing to do to him and to the people escaping the WT to lead their own lives. My 2 euro cents.

  Edited to add: I was reacting to fjtoth's comment but hadn't read the article yet. Now I have: this is 90 % JW.
• 

  fjtoth

  Nark:

  You seem to feel a need to defend frankiespeakin. Otherwise, why insist, as he claims, that a writer is under mind control simply because his views are similar to those of JWs? It's easy to take on a feeling of superiority and to pass judgment on others with labels that not merely imply but actually accuse them of being inferior in their ability to think and reason things out.

  Despite your "general observation," I stand by my statement that the article does not reflect the JW viewpoint entirely and that some of its arguments would be denied by JWs. The writer's views reflect those of other non-trinitarian groups more closely than they resemble what the WT puts forth. You claim the article is "90% JW." Having been a JW for 50 years, and having been one who was experienced in defending the JW position during those years, I have to say I think you're stretching things a bit.
• 

  Narkissos

  fjtoth,

  We all evaluate things by what we know. I am grateful not to have spent 50 years in the WT: I lost "only" 15 years there, 10 of them full-time, and I was df'd over 18 years ago.

  From my own experience, if I had written some religious stuff, say, one year after leaving the JWs, it would have been conceptually much closer to the WT teaching (even though antagonistic to it in intent) than what I would have written 2, 3, 5 or 10 years after. But then I would have been somewhat stuck in my own writing, defending it, and so on. Fortunately I didn't (I actually began writing something but gave up very soon). Obviously the bliss of laziness is not given all people.

  Now I'm interested in what you say about unitarian groups. Here in France Protestantism in general is a minority, and Biblicist (or fundamentalist) unitarians are quite unheard of. I do know a few liberal unitarians (universalist u. or otherwise), but those would never argue from the Bible this way. Thus I naturally tend to associate this kind of reasoning with the JWs, but perhaps I am mistaken. Now in North America are there many Christians/Churches of this sort? How do they compare in numbers and public visibility with JWs? How long have they been around? Are there many xJWs among them? Some additional information on this subject would probably help me make a better assessment.
• 

  pc

  What does it really matter. If God wanted it to be so clear why would we need all this translation and definite article nonsense. How about if you believe the bible you just pick it up and read it. I too have exhausted myself from trying to "figure it out" and guess what I DON"T UNDERSTAND! I love to read everyones input, but at the end of the day I pray for faith. I am not sure what I believe, I only hope I'm being a better person and helping someone who needs it other than myself. If you believe Jesus is God fine, if you don't that's fine too. I think trying to mimic what Christ represents is probably the first step to being something better than we are. Just my 2 cents.
• 

  ellderwho

  Proposition # 5: John 5:18 says, "For this cause therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill [Jesus because he] ...was calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God." And at John 10:30, 38 Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" and "the Father is in me and I am in the Father." This shows that he is with the Father in a triune God.

  Response: Paul helps us to get the proper sense of John 5:18 at Galatians 4:1 where he wrote, "the heir ...is owner of all the estate." By claiming to be God's Son, the Jews understood Jesus to be claiming to be God's heir, and therefore, making a claim to His authority; but they did not construe this to mean that he was literally God The above is the same baloney that "Reasoning From the Scriptures" explanation of John 5:18 What

  is the meaning of John 5:18?

  John 5:18, RS: "This was why the Jews sought all the more to kill him, because he not only broke the sabbath but also called God his Father, making himself equal with God."

  It was the unbelieving Jews who reasoned that Jesus was attempting to make himself equal with God by claiming God as his Father. While properly referring to God as his Father, Jesus never claimed equality with God. He straightforwardly answered the Jews: "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of his own accord, but only what he sees the Father doing." (John 5:19, RS; see also John 14:28; John 10:36.) It was those unbelieving Jews, too, who claimed that Jesus broke the Sabbath, but they were wrong also about that. Jesus kept the Law perfectly, and he declared: "It is lawful to do good on the sabbath."

  They both totally dispose of the text "making himself equal to God"