by ArtfulDodger 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Check your premises
Interesting response from your wife
It really seemed to stump her. She talked to sister-super-pioneer and came back with, "Satan is referred to as the god of this world. God (small g) is another way of referring to a spiritual being
Not a good enough explanation because Satan is a false god according to the bible. Even Paul (I think) was referred to as a possible god in the bible, but of course he wasn't and therefore was "false"
Sirona
in the beginning was the word [presumably a person who held the title THE WORD or LOGOS] and this one was with
THE GOD [presumably another person who held a different title].
and the Word was god or a god or divine [a description of the nature of the word, not a statement of being the same
person as THE GOD]
this fits many other examples in the bible in total... as when Paul said there is only ONE [out of the many gods and lords of the world] who is considered GOD to us [presumably christians], THE FATHER. and one who is LORD [which despite what idiotic trinitarians claim is not equal to Jehovah],... which Paul says is Jesus. 1 cor 8:5,6
Trinitarians fail to grasp that the christians who read the bible of the first century has no knowledge of any triune god of the jews and since there is no where in the bible explaining one to them, it seems that they fail to grasp this as significant as they have been brainwashed into ignoring this fact.
There is but one mediator between God and man, THE MAN, Jesus
we are Heir of GOD and Joint heirs WITH Christ
btw, to say there that calling the word a god means there is more than one god is just ignorance...the angels are all called beni-elohim and elohim meaning that they are all god[s] or part of the family of divine beings.....grow a freaken brain.
check out this site, it has a lot of useful info on it about their deity of christ thing.
http://www.kevinquick.com/kkministries/books/reasoning/deity.html
mnb77
And on top of that, Isaiah 43:10 and 11 indicates that there is one True God, who stands alone, who said he never did and never will create a god alongside himself. Hmmm.
Borrowing a little dubspeak, one way to resolve this would be to make "God" indicate a "class", the "God Class"... There is one True God Class...you can only be in it if you are truly "God"...
The Watchtower of May 15, 1977, page 320, even quoted this very analogy used in reference to John 1:1 from Greek Scholar William Barclay:
If I say, "James is the man," then I identify James with some definite man whom I have in mind; but if I say: "James is man", then I am simply describing James as human, and the word man has become a description and not an identification. If John had said ho theos en ho logos, using a definite article in front of both nouns, then he would have definitely identified the Logos with God, but because he has no definite article in front of theos it becomes a description, and more of an adjective than a noun. The translation then becomes, to put it rather clumsily, "The Word was in the same class as God, belonging to the same order of being as God... John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God
Incidentally, the part left out by the ellipses (...) is:The only modern translator who fairly and squarely faced this problem is Kenneth Wuest, who has: "The Word was as to his essence essential deity." But it is here that the NEB has brilliantly solved the problem with the absolutely accurate rendering: "What God was the Word was." (William Barclay; Many Witnesses, One Lord, p23-24)
Barclay, by the way, later accused the WTS of misquoting him so that his quote seemed to say the opposite of what he really meant.
.....grow a freaken brain.What is with all the hostility? Lighten up?
And whatever is intended in the scriptures, it is clearly only a small glimpse into the nature of God. I would liken our view of God to viewing the Pacific ocean through a pinhole. Does it really matter to God if we are honestly mistaken in this matter? How does it effect Him, or us in adverse way to be mistaken on this matter?
Do the thoughts of cockroaches concern you. Do you care if they imagine you a trinity or to be the One True Human? Will you squish/not squish them based on their choice?
I have just never thought this was a subject worth getting into a twist over. And it definitely is not a reason to imagine yourself superior to others.
CYP of the cockroach class
What is with all the hostility? Lighten up?
I just like taunting the trinitarians into thinking for a change, I reallty dont care either way as I dont believe Jesus was even a real person of history....however I do believe that the bible as a whole is quite clearly against such a notion as a trinity and that brainwashing has imposed this silliness upon the majority of modern christians who say the stupidest things in defense of it... such as
Jesus said I am... that proves he was claiming to be God.
I cannot think of a more stupid thing for anyone to say, yet I hear it all the time.
Zen,
As you know, I don't hold a strong opinion on the matter one way or another.
I have noticed that many of the Unitarian sects tend to be known more for their "brainwashing" then your mainline trinitarian types.
Maybe I am wrong. It is just an observation.
have noticed that many of the Unitarian sects tend to be known more for their "brainwashing" then your mainline trinitarian types
the distinction is subtle
the non-trinitarians are far more aggressive about their endoctrination methods, but the trinitarians are far more pervasive...its an emersion factor not unlike the emporer's new clothes, where very few dare buck the perceived system even if no one says a word directly about it.
for the most part, christians profess to believe in a trinity, but also have no clue about what it really means or why its so important to them.
the ones who argue for it often betray a blind parrotting.
(New Testament | Mark 1:10 - 12)
10 And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him:
11 And there came a voice from heaven, saying, Thou art my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
12 And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness.
- strong suggestion of three seperate people
(New Testament | Matthew 12:31 - 32)
31 ΒΆ Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.
32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.
- definately 2
(New Testament | Acts 7:55 - 56)
55 But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God,
56 And said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.
- definately 2
(New Testament | John 14:28)
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
(New Testament | John 8:41 - 42)
41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God.
42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me.
etc etc...
I have seen alot of books on the subject where trinitarians do in fact defend that position quite vociferously.
You mean to say that they have no legitimate basis for their arguments, and all of them are blindly parroting? Clearly there are some who believe it and have put alot of thought into it. Are they all fools or dishonest or both? For instance C.S. Lewis was a well educated, and intelligent man who did in fact argue in support of the trinity. I don't think he is either dishonest or a fool. Whether or not he is right is an entirely different matter.
My point is that I think there are probably some pretty better arguments for the trinitarian position then you are letting on.
