i will probably run out screaming 5 mins later but there you are...
Why would you do that? That is part of the JW brainwashing. Try listening to the sermons on the radio. Good stuff there even if you don't believe all of it.
jonathan dough
JoinedPosts by jonathan dough
-
34
would there be any reason for you to attend another church?
by highdose ini don't mean go back to a kingdom hall, i mean other religons any of them.
can anybody think of a reason that they might do this?.
i', begining to feel curious about the church up my road, just curious, thought about popping in there one sunday, i will probably run out screaming 5 mins later but there you are....
-
-
jonathan dough
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
Jonathan Dough, check your pm pls.
How do I do that?
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
Are the basic ideas of immanent Trinity and Economic Trinity too difficult for people to grasp? I routinely post information on that topic and not once in the last year has anyone mentioned these two concepts. This is fundamental to the Trinity doctrine, and explains SO MUCH. But most of you just spin around in circles and fall for that same old JW claptrap of "Jesus can't be (or is) God" without understanding what that Trinitarian phrase means.
I'll post an explanation again that should hopefully move this discussion where it belongs.
At the outset it is crucial to understand two key concepts. You must distinguish between immanent Trinity (theological Trinity) and economic trinity, and understand how they relate to each other. This is not difficult. The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to separate them and erroneously combine the two concepts. This error lies at the root of the Jehovah's Witnesses’ harsh attacks on the Trinity and allows them to get away with distorting Trinitarian teaching. It is the means by which they are able to convince many people, who otherwise would know better, that the Trinity is utterly illogical and false when it is true and reasonable, even if certain aspects are grounded upon a measure of faith.
Immanent (theological) Trinitarianism, refers to the essence of God the Almighty, his hypostatic three-fold nature and his absolute and perfect being, before creation. It deals with the “infinite, blessed communion of the divine Persons among themselves, without reference to creation,” (B. Brobrinskoy, The Mystery of the Trinity [New York, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1999], 2, 3) (Mystery). It is the triune God as he is in himself (J. Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God [Munich, Germany, SCM Press, Ltd., 1981], 151) (Trinity and the Kingdom).
This should not be confused with economic Trinitarianism (God for us), the concerted activity of the three Persons in creation as they “maintain and restore the created world to a state of well-being and communion with God” (ibid., 2). “Economic” refers to “divine management of earthly affairs” (The Encyclopedia of Religion [New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987], 54) (Encyclopedia of Religion). “It is oriented to the concrete history of creation and redemption: God initiates a covenant with Israel, God speaks through the prophets, God takes on flesh in Christ, God dwells within as Spirit” (ibid., 54). It is also called revelatory Trinity because the triune God reveals himself through his dispensation of salvation (Trinity and the Kingdom, 151).
Accordingly, much Trinitarian theological discussions about the “One God in three Persons” deals with immanent Trinity, not economic Trinity. The economic aspect of the Trinity includes the created humanity of Jesus, who was not God (The New Catholic Encyclopedia [Washington D.C., The Catholic University of America, 1967], 943) (Catholic Encyclopedia) and not part of the immanent Trinity. But that is precisely where the Jehovah's Witnesses mistakenly inject him resulting in a great deal of unnecessary confusion.
They argue, to take one illustration, that Jesus could not be God yet be with God; and he could not be the Father whom he prayed to (Should You Believe in the Trinity? [New York, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989; http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm], Chapter 7) (Should You Believe). But this is a classic example of the Jehovah’s Witnesses mixing apples and oranges. The man of the God-man Jesus, the created humanity who was not God (Catholic Encyclopedia, 943), could rightfully pray to God the Father and did regard himself as inferior; this He performed in the context of economic Trinity.
The idea that the preexistent Word (God the Son) was with God stems from John 1:1:
In the beginning was the Word,
And the Word was with God,
And the Word was God.Even though John 1:1 speaks in the context of pre-creation immanent Trinity, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have swapped out God the Son, the preexistent Word, with the created humanity of Jesus. This is not accurate Bible teaching nor does it properly reflect the doctrine of the Trinity. John 1:1 does not claim to say that the created humanity of Jesus was God or was with God in the beginning.
If you keep this distinction in mind you will be in a much better position to navigate the Jehovah's Witnesses’ maze of misleading tactics and come to a better understanding of what the Trinity doctrine actually means.
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
Wobble asked:
If the trinity is so plain, why only two thrones, God and Jesus side by side, as seen by Stephen and the writer of Revelation, why no throne for the H.S ?
Which two thrones is Wobble referring to? Can he cite chapter and verse? I thought they sat on one throne, not two.
This question illustrates a complete lack of undertanding of the God-man Jesus, and that the risen Christ did not cease being human in heaven. Basic Christian theology teaches that the creature Jesus, the created humanity, the man of the God-man equation, is not God Almighty. In that sense He is distinct visually, down here as well as up there. Therefore the Lamb can be seen as standing beside God. I think there is too much being read into the visions of Revelation. After all, God is spirit and invisible. You have a spirit, but just because you can't see it doesn't mean it does not exist. "Father" ususally is a synonym for the triune God, not the first Person of the Trinity. So the God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Trinity teaches that the Lord (Jehovah NWT) is the Spirit, so the Spirit is on the throne, even if you can't see it. Don't Read Revelations too literally. And don't wag the dog by the tail. There is a tremendous amount of proof supporting the Trinity. Read and study it ALL. Don't just stop at the first bump in the road because it seems difficult to understand.
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
I am not a Trinitarian, at least I don't believe that understanding or agreeing with the trinity doctrine is needed for salvation.
But can one gain salvation if one believes that Jesus was nothing more or less than a man, like the JWs teach?
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
That is why I studied the matter for myself. I posted this at: http://home.earthlink.net/~jmalik/beytrin.htm and while it is not a complete work it resolved many of the difficulties that I and others have found with such thinking.
I'm not sure I understand your point; I don't think we disagree, but one can't separate logic from Scripture. I also studied this issue exhaustively and compiled a 60,000 word treatise which you can find here:
http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html
The Trinity doctrine is logical, and scriptural, even if it requires some faith to believe. It is reasonable to believe in the Trinity.
-
160
Need help disproving 607BCE
by 2pink ini hope i am posting in the right board.. anyway, i am newly out of the org, and have a dear friend who i've been speaking to all along about my thought process/decisions.
she has been hesitantly receptive (how's that for confusing?!
lol) and when i brought up 607bce to her yesterday, she was truly intrigued and had not heard of this as a false date before.. she is still half in/half out, so i know she isn't going to do a lot of naughty independent research on her own.
-
-
jonathan dough
Babylon was the dominant power for 70 yrs- yes...609-539...at which poin tthe 70 yrs ended and they were called to account. It does not say Jeru will serve the King of babylon 70 yrs, its says these nations.
Yes, definately. Nail in the coffin.
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
The Trinity is an unfathomable, and yet unmistakable doctrine in Scripture.
I completey agree with you, except that it's very fathomable. It is very reasonable to have faith in the Trinity doctrine. It's logical though can be difficult to grasp in some respects, but it was figured out a long time ago. It all starts with proof texts that Jesus was, and is, God.
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
Questions of “otherness”: How can God be one, yet three? How can the Word be God yet be with that God?
Ancient, medieval and modern theologians grappled with the problem of unity and otherness. How can God be one and also three? How can the Word be God, yet also be with God? Or, as the Jehovah's Witnesses put it, “As the Son of God, he could not be God himself” (Should You Believe, Chapter 6). Or, “God could not be his own son” (ibid., Chapter 7).
Once again, the prologue to John’s gospel sums up the issue as it exemplifies this apparent contradiction:
In the beginning was the Word,
And the Word was with God,
And the Word was God.
(John 1:1 Green’s Literal Translation)First, John 1:1 pertains to divine Persons of the immanent Trinity, not the created humanity of Jesus, who was not God. Furthermore, the ancients were aware of conceptual difficulties with respect to God being one yet three, but they also understood that if John 1:1 is to be taken at face value, then God must be “one” in one sense, and “three” in a different sense (Catholic Encyclopedia, 296). With time it became apparent that the conceptual obstacles were not insurmountable once it became clear that the answer lies not in comparisons to the material, vegetable or sensory worlds, but in the intellectual and psychological.
For instance, “Justin pictures the preexistent Word as the Father’s rational consciousness (1 Apol. 46; 2 Apol. 13), as emerging, therefore, from the interiority of the Godhead while never-the-less remaining inseparable from the Godhead” (Catholic Encyclopedia, 296).
Tertullian (d. 230 A.D.) displayed a good sense of the manner in which God is one, and the way in which he is at the same time three:
God is indeed three: in grade or order, in appearance or aspect, but with a realist connotation, and in manifestation; but in substance (granting an indecisiveness in Tertullian’s use of the term), in power, God is perfectly one. (ibid., 297)
The Word stands forth and is other than the Father though still within the Godhead in the manner suggested by human reflection, as internal discourse is in some sense another, a second in addition to oneself, though yet within oneself. (ibid., 296)Irenaeus (d. 200 A.D.) saw the Son and Spirit’s roles as the two hands of the Father; and by the third century the three Persons were understood to be “distinct yet not divided, different yet not separate, and each with a particular yet complementary role to play in salvation” (Oxford, 1208).
Additionally, Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274 A.D.) elevated the psychological analogy to another level, drawing parallels with man’s understanding of self and the interior conceptualization of the intellect:
Men can and do think of their own minds; and when the human intellect reflects upon itself, understands itself, there comes forth within the intellect, in consequence of the act of understanding, the concept or interior conceptualization of the intellect itself so understood.
This, moreover, is the only type of generation or coming forth that is possible in the immaterial and infinite Godhead. As God understands Himself, there issues forth from God Understanding (the Father) God Understood (the Son).
In terms of this psychological analogy, then, the three Persons are both immanent to the undivided Godhead and yet distinct as Persons - as God understood in God Understanding, and as God Beloved (the Spirit, ch. 19) in God Loving (the Father and the Son as single source). (Catholic Encyclopedia, 303)
There are other ways to look at this. For example, you have a spirit within you; it is with you yet it is you. Or, in terms of one person being with another person, an individual with multiple personalities is one individual composed of multiple individuals in his mind, each of which is that person yet with him and each other. Or, Scripture states that husband and wife are one flesh, not two (Genesis 2:24), yet we accept this illogical unity on a spiritual, abstract level as perfectly acceptable.
Accordingly, the idea that the Word was God and was with God and that each of the three Persons of the Trinity dwell in each other is entirely within the realm of logical abstract possibilities. As a matter of fact it is perfectly reasonable. Bear in mind, we are dealing with spirit, and the immanent preincarnate Word at John 1:1, not the created humanity of Jesus.
Finally, the Word’s relation to the Godhead, in the sense of being “with” God does not mean “mere company, but the most intimate communion” (Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words Compilated and Expanded upon in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible [Nashville, Tennessee, Thomas Nelson Publishers, 2001], 152) (Strong and Vine’s). This intimacy of the Word with God is a product of their mutual indwelling, among other things, the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father (John 17:21 NAB). Furthermore, the Word (Logos) is the personal manifestation, “not of a part of the divine nature, but of the whole deity” (Strong and Vine’s, 152).
-
124
Lets Debate the Trinity
by UnDisfellowshipped income on everyone, let us reason on the trinity doctrine using the bible!.
you know there has to be at least 3 big long trinity threads on here per month... so i figured i'd go ahead and start one for november.. the bible says that there is only one true god who is god by nature, the only god who deserves our worship and prayer.
jesus taught that his father is god.
-
-
jonathan dough
Immanent Trinity versus economic Trinity; God in Himself and God for us.
At the outset it is crucial to understand two key concepts. You must distinguish between immanent Trinity (theological Trinity) and economic trinity, and understand how they relate to each other. This is not difficult. The Jehovah's Witnesses fail to separate them and erroneously combine the two concepts. This error lies at the root of the Jehovah's Witnesses’ harsh attacks on the Trinity and allows them to get away with distorting Trinitarian teaching. It is the means by which they are able to convince many people, who otherwise would know better, that the Trinity is utterly illogical and false when it is true and reasonable, even if certain aspects are grounded upon a measure of faith.
Immanent (theological) Trinitarianism, refers to the essence of God the Almighty, his hypostatic three-fold nature and his absolute and perfect being, before creation. It deals with the “infinite, blessed communion of the divine Persons among themselves, without reference to creation,” (B. Brobrinskoy, The Mystery of the Trinity [New York, St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1999], 2, 3) (Mystery). It is the triune God as he is in himself (J. Moltmann, The Trinity and the Kingdom of God [Munich, Germany, SCM Press, Ltd., 1981], 151) (Trinity and the Kingdom).
This should not be confused with economic Trinitarianism (God for us), the concerted activity of the three Persons in creation as they “maintain and restore the created world to a state of well-being and communion with God” (ibid., 2). “Economic” refers to “divine management of earthly affairs” (The Encyclopedia of Religion [New York, Macmillan Publishing Company, 1987], 54) (Encyclopedia of Religion). “It is oriented to the concrete history of creation and redemption: God initiates a covenant with Israel, God speaks through the prophets, God takes on flesh in Christ, God dwells within as Spirit” (ibid., 54). It is also called revelatory Trinity because the triune God reveals himself through his dispensation of salvation (Trinity and the Kingdom, 151).
Accordingly, much Trinitarian theological discussions about the “One God in three Persons” deals with immanent Trinity, not economic Trinity. The economic aspect of the Trinity includes the created humanity of Jesus, who was not God (The New Catholic Encyclopedia [Washington D.C., The Catholic University of America, 1967], 943) (Catholic Encyclopedia) and not part of the immanent Trinity. But that is precisely where the Jehovah's Witnesses mistakenly inject him resulting in a great deal of unnecessary confusion.
They argue, to take one illustration, that Jesus could not be God yet be with God; and he could not be the Father whom he prayed to (Should You Believe in the Trinity? [New York, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1989; http://www.watchtower.org/e/ti/index.htm], Chapter 7) (Should You Believe). But this is a classic example of the Jehovah’s Witnesses mixing apples and oranges. The man of the God-man Jesus, the created humanity who was not God (Catholic Encyclopedia, 943), could rightfully pray to God the Father and did regard himself as inferior; this He performed in the context of economic Trinity.
The idea that the preexistent Word (God the Son) was with God stems from John 1:1:
In the beginning was the Word,
And the Word was with God,
And the Word was God.Even though John 1:1 speaks in the context of pre-creation immanent Trinity, the Jehovah’s Witnesses have swapped out God the Son, the preexistent Word, with the created humanity of Jesus. This is not accurate Bible teaching nor does it properly reflect the doctrine of the Trinity. John 1:1 does not claim to say that the created humanity of Jesus was God or was with God in the beginning.
If you keep this distinction in mind you will be in a much better position to navigate the Jehovah's Witnesses’ maze of misleading tactics and come to a better understanding of what the Trinity doctrine actually means.