if i were going to comment on a deep philosophical doctrine, i would first outline what that doctrine was,has the wtbs ever dne this properly with the trinity?
from memory they have only ever reasoned at the level"one plus one plus one = 3, not one" type of argument,and odd references to trinities in pagandom.. surely a college education would be of benefit to them so they know how to present a thesis?.
love.
G.H.C Macgregor in The Moffatt N.T Commentary of the Gospel of John ,whilst commenting on John 16v13-16, states (page 299) "Like every N.T writer,John presents us not with any formulated doctrine of the Trinity,but only with those facts of Christian experience upon which such a doctrine must be based."
Note that "Like every N.T writer" so at least the WT seem to have got one thing right "the Trinity...NOT a Biblical teaching"
Love
Wobble
for those who haven't read 'my story' thus far, here are the links;.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/9/159554/1.ashx.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/9/159683/1.ashx.
Thanks so much for the update,and please let us know how you get on in the future,any upbeat stuff is great for those of us just leaving.
May God continue to bless you and yours
Your brother in Christ,
Wobble
if i were going to comment on a deep philosophical doctrine, i would first outline what that doctrine was,has the wtbs ever dne this properly with the trinity?
from memory they have only ever reasoned at the level"one plus one plus one = 3, not one" type of argument,and odd references to trinities in pagandom.. surely a college education would be of benefit to them so they know how to present a thesis?.
love.
I meant to add the question , do JW's/WTBS have a doctrine which is unique to them which IS correct?
Love
Wobble
if i were going to comment on a deep philosophical doctrine, i would first outline what that doctrine was,has the wtbs ever dne this properly with the trinity?
from memory they have only ever reasoned at the level"one plus one plus one = 3, not one" type of argument,and odd references to trinities in pagandom.. surely a college education would be of benefit to them so they know how to present a thesis?.
love.
Many Thanks to all who contributed to this thread, I really wanted to spark debate and feel that happened, I also wanted to establish the rather simplistic way that the WT approaches trying to de-bunk what it dosn't beleive in. I think opposing views deserve at least the respect of showing what they are.
I get the feeling that the WT does not want this,and many other doctrines to come under the microscope, as such examination shows up the paucity of their knowledge and the doubtfullness of ALL the doctrines unique to them.
Love to all,
Wobble
then what is this "spirit" that talks to gods "spirit" that lets them know they are annointed?
they arent spirit persons...they are alive still when this spirit interaction thing happens.
isnt that a soul?
I have a feeling the WT was back in 2007 as I seem to remember reading that s**t in a Day's Text in Jan 08? I know it was a big wake up moment for me, I thought "The've gone beyond silly here and into the realms of blasphemy" I pointed out the instances of this claim that members of 144,000 already in heaven were communicating with those on earth in the WT and Rev Climax book to an ex- Elder who was still attending meetings,as I was then, and he said "If you feel like that about it, leave then" so I did.
Love
Wobble
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7625145.stm.
flood =2370bc .
stonhenge built 70 years later.. good going..
Moshe where did you get your info. from? Wikipedia says NO match could be found with modern DNA ?
Kind Regards
Wobble
is enoch the son of man?
it would seem like it as jesus infers that the son of man may not be him, as he addresses him in the third person.. .
jesus seals his with this verse; verily i say unto you, there shall be some standing here which shall not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom (matthew 16:28).. .
Thomas, I agree with the spirit of your reply,but to use Revelation in this way is a little bit of WT technique,surely those words only apply to adding or taking away from Revelation,after all John's other writings were written after Revelation,and yet are canonical.
Love
Wobble
if i were going to comment on a deep philosophical doctrine, i would first outline what that doctrine was,has the wtbs ever dne this properly with the trinity?
from memory they have only ever reasoned at the level"one plus one plus one = 3, not one" type of argument,and odd references to trinities in pagandom.. surely a college education would be of benefit to them so they know how to present a thesis?.
love.
If I were going to comment on a deep philosophical doctrine, I would first outline what that doctrine was,has the WTBS ever dne this properly with the trinity? From memory they have only ever reasoned at the level"one plus one plus one = 3, not one" type of argument,and odd references to trinities in pagandom.
Surely a college education would be of benefit to them so they know how to present a thesis?
Love
Wobble
wt november 1st has a two page article on how the early sahidic coptic version of the new testament translated god with an indefinite article in john 1:1 and argues this supports the new world translation's rendering "and the word was a god".
online witness apologists have been using this piece of evidence in support of the nwt for a few years now.
in particular solomon landers promoted the coptic version of john 1:1 in discussions with evangelicals and other who oppose witness theology.
Well done Leolaia,
Straight to the heart of the problem as usual,those are the things I found on-line,that the use of "a" in the Coptic translation is no justification for putting it in an english tranlation. As you rightly ask it would be interesting to see the WT article alongside the original scholarly source, why would I not be surprised to find selective,edited quotes?
Love
Wobble
i now have the wt on cd rom and it goes back to 1950. if anyone needs quotes feel free to pm me, as i'd like to assist others, the way some have assisted me.. lostsheep.
Thanks Lostsheep,
I don't have a specific need at present ,but may take up your kind offer in the future. Just a question, is it just the Watchtower mag. you have or more,and is it based on WT's CD-rom or original mags. or bound vols (which )? As you are aware some changes have been made to hide things when mags. are re-published in another format.
Many thanks
Wobble
