Posts by zen nudist

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

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.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

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.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

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.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

zen nudist

Stephen, being filled with The Spirit, sees a vision of God The Father on His throne, and then He sees Jesus next to Him.

here is an interesting mental game you trinitarians play but fail to notice... you ASSUME that GOD alone means GOD the FATHER, why?

the TEXT says Jesus and GOD and not THE FATHER....

here is why you do it... the NT has over 100 instance where Jesus and GOD, not the father, is mentioned together...and but assuming it means the father you avoid the obvious, that your GOD cannot be a trinity.... since Jesus is always shown in relationship to GOD...which presumably is the trinity, not just the father. we never find the construct GOD and THE FATHER, now do we? or GOD and the holy spirit?

why? because GOD with anyone is always the FATHER, right?

to us there is but ONE GOD....who? 1 cor 8:5-6

with you father, the ONLY TRUE GOD [Jesus in John 17:3]

tell my brothers that I ascend to my GOD and your GOD, my father and your father [Jesus to Mary Mag.]

there is one mediator between GOD and MAN, the MAN, Jesus [Paul]

GOD has over looked the times of ignorance and has APPOINTED a MAN....Jesus...[Paul to the pagans in the areopogus Acts 17]

GOD has subject all things [with the exception of himself] to Jesus.... when all things have been made perfect, Jesus will submit himself and all that was given to him back to GOD so that as in the beginning, God can once again be all things to everyone [Paul--a truly idiotic and stupid thing to teach if Jesus is God, no?]

Again, the visions are clear, they give all words in the bible a foundation which is hard to evade unless you demand your belief take presidence over them...which clearly all trinitarians must.... they are taught the 3 headed monster by the distorted teachings outside the bible then they, having this FALSE vision in their heads, see the words of the bible in relation to them, ignoring the clear visions found in the bible in doing so.... cast out the distorted fantasy trinity and embrace the visions found in the bible and the three headed dragon will vanish.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

zen nudist

several times I have made this point and it has never been answered properly... lets try again...

words are pointers to experiences, without understanding the experience, the words can only reflect the readers bias...

so the bible gives us visionary experiences which we can use its words to understand....

what do the visions show in regard to heaven, God, trinity or no? lets see...

first vision Daniel.

We find a heavens filled with angelic beings ministering to ONE seated upon a throne as the Ancient of Days... this is the mental image that jews to this day still hold, no?

we are told that someone from amoung man, a SON of man, is GRANTED access to this one to receive the authority over the kingdoms of the earth... this is also the standard jewish view, the messiah would be a man who God choses from the seed of david [which of course means it could not be Jesus, since he was not made from human seed]

the important point to consider is that NO trinity exists here...no three persons as one God is seen, nor implied.

******************

vision #2

******************

when Stephen was being stoned to death he looked into heaven and was given a vision of Jesus standing at the right hand of GOD...

plain and simple, he saw no third person.

and he only identified ONE as GOD, the ONE Jesus was WITH.

********************

vision #3

*********************

in the book of Revelations we are given a vision of ONE seated upon a throne called THE LORD GOD ALMIGHTY, the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end.... and we are shown that another approaches the throne to RECEIVE the scroll, the only one worthy in heaven and earth to do so, but we are clearly shown this OTHER is not GOD, but instead, the LAMB, the LION of JUDAH, Jesus...etc.

there is NO person representing the holy spirit, but rather, count them, SEVEN bowls of FIRE, matching the impersonal IT nature of spirit, as opposed and in contrast to a FATHER and a SON....

*******************************************************************

conclusion, you are wrapping your words around NO experiences found in the bible if you try to see a trinity behind them...there is NO such thing found anywhere in the bible... the bible gives the images behind the words, look at them for yourself....see where the words point.

trinitarians use OUT of CONTEXT verses which do not point to THESE clear experiences.

6

Bible versions, Psalm 83:18, which one to buy?

by def in

i want to buy a new bible, nasb or niv.

my jw friend says that the translation is not correct if psalm 83:18 left out the word jehovah.

is this correct?

zen nudist

does it really matter?

after all, if there is a god who will give you his spirit to educate you, you cannot go wrong no matter what translation you use...

if there is no god, you will only be able to read your own experiences into the words no matter what words are used.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

zen nudist

So you added the word Spirit and did not bother to mention it eh? Ok but I do not have the time for such games.

As I needed to plainly point out the above, and, that you were unaware of the relevance of that verse, I can't concur that you have " amply covered the topic " on your webpage.
Though you point to "the complex use of this term in scripture", it seems to me as basic stuff, or so my Teacher tells me.

I think you are either missing or ignoring the point.... the term TEACHER in the verse you murdered is not referring to the holy spirit, but to Jesus...and you are artificially trying to wedge your trinity fantasy into that verse. so my original point still stands you have not demonstrated ONE verse of bible scripture which TEACHES the trinity to anyone by anyone.

117

Was Jesus the first creation of God ?

by enquirer in

i am discussing this subject with a friend who believes this and who uses the passage in col 1 vs.15-17 as 'proof'.

he also uses john 8 v 58. it is of course a question of greek interpretation.

is there anyone out there who is a reliable greek scholar who could verify what these verses really say?

zen nudist

first born of creation... he was born...there was no one birthed before him...

first born of the dead, he was raised from the dead to immortality first.... no one prior holds this

the bible is clear and EVERYONE agree that there is a FATHER and SON mentioned with regards to the relationship

of GOD and messiah...but what does SON mean? does it mean what we normally think it means? why use the term SON if it has nothing to do with sonship?

did Jesus use it to refer to son ship? my father and YOUR father? we are all brothers?

did Paul mean we are children of God as sons? heirs of God and joint heirs with christ?

while the term son in hebrew can often mean part of a group... to say Jesus was part of God would not be accurate because there would be no FATHER involved in such a group...but as the HEAD of that Group, which would violate the trinitarian concept that Jesus and his FATHER are co-equal... [how anyone could get the idea that any part of the bible teaches they are or ever were equal is beyond me. there are simply too many verses which clearly show otherwise.]

while I was a JW, I was still a skeptic and sat down one day and just started cataloguing every verse I could find in the NT that had Jesus and God mentioned together or Jesus and the father, etc...anything which showed their relationship.... I came up without about 125 verses, the vast majority were clearly showing a distinction not only in power and position but in other ways too, I suggest anyone who believes in the trinity do this and see for themselves instead of going by the standard trinitary brainwashing...namely being taught that a trinity exists and then mining out of context verses to see it....

JWs are not the only unitarians around.... unitarians go back to before the 325ce councils and persisted ever since....

modern day examples are tiny, but still around, like the christadelphians and the unitarian universalists...etc.

since I view all of the bible as jewish mythology, I have no ulterior motive to see one over the other but as a purely academic excersize I am mystified at how many believe so blindly in something that is clearly NOT a bible teaching in any way shape nor form.

having said that I do acknowledge a tiny fraction of confusing verses which seem to support the trinity, but I would point out that NONE of those verses, NOT ONE is in context someone explaining the trinity to anyone else...NOT ONE of them is even teaching the nature of God to anyone....all of them are statements in passing regarding something else more important to the author.

you will not find a single verse in the entire bible which, in context, is about teaching the trinity to anyone.

24

from another Bible help please..

by strawpuppy in

jw
friends

i have a post from another forum that i am very interested in, but, i would love to hear a few of your views on the subject.. i am now going to dig into my bible to have a look to see what he is talking about, but i know that the view of jehovah's witnesses is about as close to the best intereptation of the bible there is...this is the post..... "-the eastern or golden gate, which was sealed for almost a 1200 years is a key part to bible prophecy.

ezekiel recorded the prophecy about the closing of this gate.

he told how the lord brought him to the eastern gate.. .

zen nudist

when someone says thats true, or thats right or theirs is the best....compared to what?

how can any interpretation be the best unless you met God and he told you?

people say that God did speak to them... but I ask, how did you KNOW it was God? again they just KNEW it... which to me means they had some ideal fantasy within them and had an experience which triggered a match...nothing more.... perhaps their lack of alternatives and lack of imagination played into this...who knows?

as an agnostic, as I myself am, I would caution you to challenge all beliefs invented by your mind until you acheive omniscience (^_^)

everyone has their own BS [belief system], its important to understand that taking anyones BS too seriously will only cause you grief.

10

Read the Bible alone for 2 years and you will lose the truth?

by TowerWatch in

anyone remember the publication where russell said that if someone read his works for 2 years even without the bible they would learn the truth but if they read the bible without his publications they would lose the correct understanding of the bible in 2 years?

it was something like that, i can?t find it i?m trying to quote it and i?m not sure which watchtower or book it was in, can someone help me.

towerwatch

zen nudist

Zen, try reading the Kitab'Iqan then reconsider your conslusions.

what do you think I said wrong?

in reading this on line, I find no significant difference from the con game of other religions, what I am supposed to be seeing?

I see the same BS [beliefs system] presented by other as an excuse for why only believers can "get it" and unbelievers can see no evidence.... just like the emporers new clothes.