this must have been mentioned before,but now reniaa is back it could be fun.. if jw's are even part way to the truth,and all other religions are false, then they must have a doctrine that is unique to them,given by holy spirit, but plainly taught in the bible,without resorting to fancifull exegesis and bouncing around from verse to verse out of context etc.. what is that doctrine?.
love.
wobble.. .
Hi, reniaa.
Why is the word "Trinity" always contained in your comment?
But the word "Trinity" which you use is not the true Trinity doctrine in fact.
Therefore, when you say "the trinity...", I feel that your explanation is absurd.
I had said to you like this.
First, unless you understand correctly what kind of doctrine the Trinity is, you do not have the qualification for attacking that doctrine.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/beliefs/171230/2/Is-Jesus-Jehovah
i'm watching some youtube video's from newagegamer3018.
before in my research...i watched some of his video's when he was a jw apoligist.
now he has da'd himself and is defending the scriptures, not jw's.. this is the first time ever that i actually am starting to think/beleive that jesus and jehovah are the same thing.
Hi, reniaa.
Although I myself do not believe the Trinity, and I do not have the duty to defend that doctrine, I am explaining the accurate "Trinity theory" to you.
Probably, if you understand the Trinity correctly, you will notice that it is not so much different from your current belief.
Since I do not speak English at all, an accurate description is impossible, but I would like to try explanation.
““Listen, O Israel: Jehovah our God is one Jehovah.”
DEUTERONOMY 6:4 (NWT)
http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/de/chapter_006.htm#bk4
Although it seems that you stick in this Scripture, this Scripture is used as a proof of the Trinity.
Also in the Trinity doctrine, it is because God is one.
Jehovah is the name of "the Father" clearly.
http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/ps/chapter_110.htm#bk1
But the divine name called Jehovah means "I AM."
And Jesus is "I AM."
But it does not mean "The Father is the Son."
That is, it is not the meaning "Jehovah is Jesus."
i'm watching some youtube video's from newagegamer3018.
before in my research...i watched some of his video's when he was a jw apoligist.
now he has da'd himself and is defending the scriptures, not jw's.. this is the first time ever that i actually am starting to think/beleive that jesus and jehovah are the same thing.
reniaa. Since it is wrong in your knowledge about the Trinity, I think that you should become more modest. Your expression "trinity Must be teaching YHVH is Jesus" is fundamentally wrong. The Trinity doctrine is not teaching "Jehovah is Jesus." Although I know enough that there are much people who believe "Jehovah is Jesus", the accurate Trinity doctrine is not taught such. In the Old Testament, there is seldom a part which has made reference concretely about the Son (Jesus Christ). Therefore, if Jews say it "our God" in the Old Testament, it shows God Jehovah (the Father). Clearly, Jehovah is the Father's name and the Son's name is Jesus. http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/ps/chapter_110.htm#bk1 possible http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/ P.S. Now, this forum does my comment to a strange display.
i'm watching some youtube video's from newagegamer3018.
before in my research...i watched some of his video's when he was a jw apoligist.
now he has da'd himself and is defending the scriptures, not jw's.. this is the first time ever that i actually am starting to think/beleive that jesus and jehovah are the same thing.
Hi, reniaa. Since I myself do not believe the Trinity, I do not have the necessity of defending that doctrine, but the doctrine of the Trinity is different from what you are explaining.
Therefore, I explained repeatedly that the expression "Jehovah is Jesus" is not the Trinity. First, unless you understand correctly what kind of doctrine the Trinity is, you do not have the qualification for attacking that doctrine. Your way is the same as the way the Governing Body attacks the Trinity.
It is the way the Governing Body deceives people. possible
http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/
i'm watching some youtube video's from newagegamer3018.
before in my research...i watched some of his video's when he was a jw apoligist.
now he has da'd himself and is defending the scriptures, not jw's.. this is the first time ever that i actually am starting to think/beleive that jesus and jehovah are the same thing.
Please look at my remark in the following thread.
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/169136/1/Jesus-Is-Jehovah-Jehovah-Is-Jesus
The view "Jehovah is Jesus" is not true "Trinity."
Also in the Trinity theory, Jesus Christ (the Son) was praying to Jehovah (the Father).
i think one could view the "apostle" paul as a type of "jugde rutherford.".
both essentially took over an existing religion..
The Apostle Paul said like this.
“For such freedom Christ set us free. Therefore stand fast, and do not let yourselves be confined again in a yoke of slavery.”
GALATIANS 5:1 (NWT)
http://www.watchtower.org/e/bible/ga/chapter_005.htm#bk1
Rutherford does not resemble Paul at all.
i had a request for documentation of the watchtower societys statements regarding the year 1975. so, ive put these files up for downloading from a filesharing service.
the first file contains the complete text of 3 issues of awake!
26-35 (file is 12 mb):.
Thank you, cabasilas.
I downloaded it altogether.
Especially "1974 Kingdom Ministry" is valuable.
I think that "you must never sell your home and property" was sensible advice.
A cult drives people mad.
okay so today was my day to take three very sweet and lovable older sisters out in early morning fs.. our territory was to visit those in nursing homes who had showed interest or were in need of 'encouragement' (by request only of course).
it is here that an interesting conversation occurred between the sisters and a very old (nearly 100) oldtimer jw.. he was very discouraged but yet encouraged with the generations change but wanted to discuss covenants.. specifically the abrahamic coventant and how it was 2000 or so years from then to christ and how we should be encouraged to ponder the fulfillment of christ's return either in 2030-2033.......... he referenced da judges "jehovah" book as confirmation that the slave had once touched on the subject....... none of the sisters objected to his musings nor remarked deeper once we left.. this is the first i have heard such talk in the jw world....... is anyone else hearing this kinda rationale?.
opinions..... .
I think that the Watch Tower society's fault is fully proved in the following thread about 1975 (false prophecy).
http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/watchtower/bible/171166/1/PDF-documentation-regarding-1975-prediction-in-WT-publications
And the article of my website. (Please look at pictures especially.)
http://godpresencewithin.web.fc2.com/pages/jw/prophets.html
Temporarily, when they may say "in 2034", the evidence of it that they are "false prophets" only increases further.
I never forgive man and religion which make others' life spoil by doing such a "false prophecy" repeatedly.
thought some folks might appreciate this.
this is based on my tough question number 41:.
your interpretation states that jesus is not saying he is one with the father.
Hi, Tuesday.
I think that if you click "Shift + Enter" key when you quote someone's words, you can "start a new line" smoothly.
For example, as follows...
Oh yeah I can see that totally.
Whenever I try to do anything with either quotes or different types of fonts or whatever it always gets really messed up on here.
I'm trying to figure it out though.
If any of the moderators feel they could edit my post to make it more readable it would be greatly appreciated.
The italics is to show messages, I wanted to make them into quote boxes but every sentence was getting separated.
okay so today was my day to take three very sweet and lovable older sisters out in early morning fs.. our territory was to visit those in nursing homes who had showed interest or were in need of 'encouragement' (by request only of course).
it is here that an interesting conversation occurred between the sisters and a very old (nearly 100) oldtimer jw.. he was very discouraged but yet encouraged with the generations change but wanted to discuss covenants.. specifically the abrahamic coventant and how it was 2000 or so years from then to christ and how we should be encouraged to ponder the fulfillment of christ's return either in 2030-2033.......... he referenced da judges "jehovah" book as confirmation that the slave had once touched on the subject....... none of the sisters objected to his musings nor remarked deeper once we left.. this is the first i have heard such talk in the jw world....... is anyone else hearing this kinda rationale?.
opinions..... .
Hi, yknot.
It is written in a Protestant's magazine published in Japan, saying "The cycle of God is for 2,000 years."
According to that theory, from Adam to Abraham is for about 2,000 years.
And from Abraham to Jesus Christ is for about 2,000 years.
And the period of Christianity is for about 2,000 years.
It is said that such a view is described in the document "Letter of Barnabas" (possibly written around the 1st or 2nd century).
But I refuse this kind of fundamentalism view.
I think that people in the 21st century should refuse an old view like this.
