Posts by Earnest

27

Help on translation of Lord/Jehovah in NWT

by eyeslice in

i am having great trouble with distinguishing between where the nwt refers to jehovah in the nt and where it should really read lord meaning, not god, but the lord; jesus.

the problem comes to light in a passage quoted in this weeks watchtower study.. the passage in question was romans 14:8, though you really have to read verse 9 as well to a better flavour of what paul was talking about.. in the nwt, the passage reads;.

9. for to this end christ died and came to life again, that he might be lord over both the dead and the living.. other translations, which do not attempt to substitute gods name, render the passage along the lines of;.

Earnest

eyeslice:

In most instances where the NWT uses Jehovah in the NT it is a passage or expression from the OT where the tetragammaton does appear. In some cases it is quite clear-cut because it says "as it is written" or something to that effect. However, that is not the case in the example you give and so a consideration of the whole passage may be helpful.

14:3,4 "Let the one eating not look down on the one not eating, and let the one not eating not judge the one eating, for God has welcomed that one. Who are you to judge the house servant of another? To his own master he stands or falls. Indeed, he will be made to stand, for Jehovah [kyrios] can make him stand."

14:6 "He who observes the day observes it to Jehovah [kyrio]. Also, he who eats, eats to Jehovah [kyrio], for he gives thanks to God; and he who does not eat does not eat to Jehovah [kyrio], and yet gives thanks to God."

It is talking about not judging on the matter of food and drink. As you can see from vss 3-6 below, the context is that we shouldn't judge because God has welcomed such a one (whatever he eats). It is reasonable that kyrios in verse 8 also refers to God. However, I must agree that there is some ambiguity in this passage.

Earnest

21

Who exactly is "JW" here?

by ScoobySnax in

jw
friends

recognising that this board is mainly for ex-jws/anti-jws/in the process of leaving/......... i'm interested to know how many here out of the thousands that post are pro-jw (or wt apologists to be more politically correct here) be that inactive/active, but still holding to the faith.

(p.s.

i'm not a p.o/c.o/ member of the gb either before u ask!

Earnest

Edited by - Earnest on 15 December 2002 20:40:24

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

LittleToe:

I take issue with your points 5 and 6. They are not factual .

I have rephrased point 5 to make it clearer and the logical consequence of points 1 - 4:

1) God is infinite.
2) Distinguish infinity into three parts.
3) You have three infinite parts.
4) Each part is infinitely different to the other parts
~~5) Jesus and God have as much in common as Jesus and the Devil.~~

5) There are fewer differences between Jesus and the Devil than there are between Jesus and God.
6) Heinz [beans] is limited to 57 varieties

The teaching of the trinity was so contentious, even at the time of Constantine, that the only "acceptable" definition was to say that Jesus and God were of the same substance, which allowed it to mean all things to all men. The holy spirit was added years later and the argument as to whether "he" proceeded from both the Father and the Son or just the Father has split the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches to this day.

So it turns out that to speak of the trinity means different things to different people. What is a trinity in the West is heresy in the East. And there are many other refinements besides. I have proposed a few of the questions that the Church Fathers considered and it is as clear now as it was then that there simply are no answers.

Earnest

Edited by - Earnest on 13 December 2002 18:15:11

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

Craig:

1) God is infinite.

2) Distinguish infinity into three parts.

3) You have three infinite parts.

4) Each part is infinitely different to the other parts

5) Jesus and God have as much in common as Jesus and the Devil

6) Heinz [beans] is limited to 57 varieties

18

Give Mrs Blaire an Oscar !

by Simon in

jw
friends

what a performance ... especially the bit where she 'choked the tears back' talking about her son.

remember what her father was?

an actor.

Earnest

Simon:

Shouldn't this be under Mental Health and Depression (mine) rather than Bible Research ?

Edited by - Earnest on 11 December 2002 5:1:34

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

SwedishChef:

The Father and Son are one, but God would not be God without the Holy Spirit. 1 John 5:7 "For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." The three make one God.

I understand that you believe the three are one God (although I do think you will find that verse is spurious but let us ignore that for the sake of understanding). And you explain that "God has manifested Himself in three forms, each presented to us as having personalities, and yet they are one God". But if that is so, and John 10:30 says that the Father and Son are one God...I do not understand why God needs to have three forms. John 10:30 seems to say that two forms is sufficient to be one God. Perhaps God is God whether he has two forms or three forms or forty-two forms. Or does Jesus mean that the three are one but he is just saying that two are one because the disciples wouldn't understand ?

I have another question about this scripture which is related and certainly has to do with God manifesting himself. I understand you believe that Jesus was both fully human and fully God while on earth. It is not quite clear to me whether the Jesus that is fully God was in heaven when the Jesus that was fully human was on earth or whether the "my God" that the Jesus that was fully human addressed included the Jesus that was fully God. But what puzzles me about this scripture is that it is apparently the Jesus that is fully human that is speaking when he says "I and the Father are one [God]". Does this mean that God is not only spirit but also partly human ? Then would it not also mean that God actually consists of the Father, the Holy Spirit and the two natures of the Son...which is a bit more than a trinity ?

Or maybe this scripture at John 10:30 does not mean the Father and Son are one God. Maybe it means that they share the same nature or substance. Of course there is still the problem that it is the fully human Jesus that is speaking but it is not quite as perplexing as presuming it to mean the fully human Jesus is one God with the Father.

I would certainly appreciate the answers to these questions as it seems to me the meaning of this verse cannot be that "I and the Father are one God". Now if you are more inclined to understand them as sharing the same nature then I have some more questions. On the other hand, if you still think it can mean they are "one God" then your answers to these questions will doubtless provide food for thought.

Earnest

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

Hi SwedishChef,

Thank you for your reply to the question as to what Jesus meant when he said "I and the Father are one". You answered :

"Does it mean I and the Father are one God?" Yes, I believe so.

This, of course, raises a number of questions. I understand that you believe that Jesus is God. And that his Father is God. And that the Holy Spirit is God. And that the three are one God, i.e. the trinity. Do I understand you correctly that Jesus and the Father are one God both with and without the Holy Spirit...that the two are one God and the three are one God ? If that is so then would it also be true that the Father and the Holy Spirit are one God both with and without the Son ? And that the Son and Holy Spirit are one God both with and without the Father ?

Please be assured these are not trick questions. I am asking them in this way to reason what it must mean to say "I and the Father are one God". I do have some further questions about this but would first wish to understand your thinking on the above.

Earnest

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

SwedishChef wrote:

What the Bible says:
John 10:30 "I and my Father are one."
What Herk Reads
John 10:30 " I and my Father are one in will."

I do understand how some come to identify Jesus with God the Father. I think that in doing so they ignore what the Bible as a whole says about both Jesus and God the Father, and they ignore the beliefs held by worshippers of the true God from the time of creation until the time of Jesus. But there certainly are scriptures that speak of Jesus and God the Father in the same terms.

But in order to discuss this sensibly it would help to know just what trinitarians mean by what they say. I have previously attempted to define this by means of the Nicene and/or Athanasian creeds but have had no response. So let us just take this one scripture. I and the Father are one. What does it mean ? What do you think it means ? Does it mean I and the Father are one God ? Or I and the Father are one in nature ? Or I and the Father are one in substance ? Or I and the Father are one in will/purpose ? Or I and the Father are one in mind ? Or...whatever.

And why ?

Earnest

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

SwedishChef,

In your reply of

Dec 5, 2002 22:56 you said :

I believe that there is one God eternally existing and manifesting Himself to us in three persons--Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
You then quote John 14:9-20 where Jesus says "I am in the Father and the Father in me" and another Comforter, the Spirit of truth, "dwelleth with you, and shall be in you...At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you." You conclude that this passage is proof that Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are ONE.

However, that does not answer my question but demonstrates the need for it. I do not question the oneness of God and Christ but it is quite evident from this thread that many will read this passage and conclude the oneness has nothing to do with a trinity because it is the same oneness that exists between Christ and the disciples.

To repeat my question for your consideration:

R.A.Torrey says that they cannot be three and one in the same sense. In what sense, then, are they one ? If you agree with the creeds that they are one in substance then I would appreciate consideration of my question: If you do not believe that the nature/substance of the angels is the same as the Son because they were created but he was begotten, why do you believe the nature/substance of the Holy Spirit, who was neither created no begotten, is the same as the Son and the Father ? If you do not believe they are one in substance in what sense do you believe they are one ?

Earnest

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

Earnest

Crazy,

The trinity is not three different views of the same person. It is one view of three persons.