Posts by jonathan dough

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

Can Jesus be a spirit creature called a god/divine have access to god's power and not be the One true God? just be God's Actual "firstborn of creation" son?

REPLY: If I understand your English, of course, some of the power. Peter raised the dead. What is your point? Can you reword your question? It doesn't really make sense.

Reniaa wrote: this allows for Jesus to die when God can't die

REPLY: Except that redemption is impossible unless Jesus is divine in the Trinitarian sense. The reward is higher and requires more than an equivalent fleshly ransom.

Reniaa wrote: this allows for God to know things Jesus doesn't

Reniaa wrote: this also allows for the multiple birth/creation references to Jesus in regards the start of his prehuman existence inc proverbs 8.

Reniaa wrote: The bible sets the precedent that things other than the One True God can be called gods without being the One true God why does this have to be different for Jesus?

REPLY: I'm not sure I follow you. If you are saying that if Jesus was just a man then God would know things Jesus didn't, I can't argue with that but that doesn't really prove anything. Jesus had limited knowledge of some things as explained here at http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-3.html#13

It has to be different for Jesus (he was not just a god) because if it was not then there would be no salvation for mankind. But again, you are begininning your analysis with a "misunderstanding" a "why not" statement when you should begin with the fact that the Bible proves that Jesus was, and is, God. Everything else falls into place.

Proverbs 8 is weak at best and the interpretation given it by the JWs has been refuted my numerous scholars, like Bruce Metzger:

7. The passage in the Old Testament to which Jehovah's Witnesses
(and Arians of every age) appeal most frequently is Proverbs
8: 22 f.'O The translation usually given is the following, or something
similar to it: "Jehovah made me [that is, Wisdom, interpreted
as the Son] in the beginning of his way, before his works of old."
This rendering understands the verb ;lJa to be used here with the
meaning "to create." The true translation of this passage, however,
accorcling to a learnecl study by the eminent Semitic scholar, F. C.
Burney, must be, "The LORD begat me as the beginning of his
way. . . ." The context favors this rendering, for the growth
of the embryo is described in the following verse (verse 23, where
the verb appears, as a footnote in Kittel's Hebrew Bible suggests,
to be from the root T=)P "knit together," as in Job 10: 11 and Psalm
139: 13), and the birth of Wisdom is described in the two following
verses (24 and 25). Thus, in the context, the verb ;?Jp in verse 22
appears with certainty to mean "got" or "begot."
111 m y case, however, irrespective of the meaning of the Hebrew
verb in Prov. 8: 22, it is clearly an instance of strabismic exegesis, if
one may coin the phrase, to abandon the consistent New Testament
representation of Jesus Christ as untreated and to seize upon a disputed
interpretation of a irerse in the Old Testament as the only satisfactory
description of him. The proper methodoloby, of course,
is to begin with the Keiv Testament, and then to search in the Old
Testament for foregleams, types, and prophecies which found their
fulfillment in him. By Bruce M. Metzger published in Theology Today (1955).

Or, as I wrote at http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-6.html#33 :

The Messiah of the Old Testament stems from eternity - (Micah 5:2; Proverbs 8:22) [ Top ]

The Messiah is described at Micah 5:2 as being from eternity (Hebrew olam), hence without beginning. Green’s Literal Translation of Micah 5:2 states:

And you, Bethlehem Ephratah, being least among the thousands of Judah, out of you he shall come forth to Me, to become ruler in Israel; and His goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity.

“Olam” means “eternity; remotest time; perpetuity, i.e., the vanishing point; gen, time out of mind (past or future), always, ever, everlasting, perpetual” (Strong and Vine’s, 205).

Reference to Christ’s prior eternal existence is also found at Proverbs 8:22 where many commentators equate Wisdom with Christ.

Jehovah possessed me in the beginning of His way, from then, before His works I was set up from everlasting (Hebrew olam), from the beginning, before the earth ever was (Proverbs 8:22 Green’s Literal Translation).

“Wisdom is of divine origin. It is here represented as a being which existed before all things (22-26) and concurred with God when he planned and executed the creation of the universe, …” (NAB notes 8,22-31).

The Jehovah's Witnesses’ New World Translation, and a few other Bibles, translate “possessed” as “created,” implying that Christ (Wisdom) had a beginning. But this misinterpretation ignores the middle of the sentence which states that Wisdom existed from everlasting (olam), that is, eternity. Christ (if indeed Wisdom) is eternal, from the beginning, of eternity, before God’s work, not as the first product of God’s works, just as Paul says at Col 1:17: “He is before all things.” He was not created but rather “set up” or “poured out” (Hebrew Nacak) as one pours out an existing libation, or casts existing metal or anoints an existing king (Strong and Vine’s, 188).

The Jehovah's Witnesses attempt to minimize these verses with Revelation 3:14 which they interpret to mean that Christ was the “beginning” (Greek arkhe) of all creation, the first thing created.

And to the angel of the congregation in Laodicea write: These are the things that the Amen says, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation by God,… (NWT)

Trinitarians believe arkhe is properly interpreted as “source” or “active cause,” that the Word is the source of all creation.

Here, the Jehovah's Witnesses’ interpretation relies to a great extent on the fact that “Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon lists “beginning” as its first meaning of arkhe (Oxford, 1968, p. 252) (Reasoning, 409). Be that as it may, whereas “arkhe” can mean “a beginning” it also can mean “source” (NAB) or “active cause” (Strong and Vine’s, 43). This harmonizes with John 1:3, that all things were created by Christ (“and without Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being” (Green’s Literal Translation). As he could not have created Himself, and existed before He would have been created, He must be the source by and through which all things were created as the eternal Second Person of the Holy Trinity.

Because the Word was before all things (Colossians 1:17) and he created all things (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16), it excludes His being created. He is the source of all creation, the active force.

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

The whole hypostatic point is to have two usable parts of Jesus. One that can be in heaven and going back again undying (Son of God) and another that can die and be resurrected (son the flesh creature) but once you show scripturally that it is the son of God that dies then the need for a fleshly Jesus is gone as well as the hypostatic union. but also trying to get divinity of Jesus to make him the One true God is also lost.

Are we not really only debating here about divine?

REPLY: Yes, that is exactly what we are talking about. And it is in light of this inescapable Biblical truth, that Jesus was, and is, God, that you should analyze 1 John 4:10 (New International Version) " This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for [a] our sins." Since the God-man of the hypostatic union cannot die, then 1 John 4:10 must be meant to refer to the creature Jesus who bled on the cross, the divine person who was sent and who assumed a human nature.I think you are reading too much into 1 John 4:10, reading it too literally.

I don't understand why you are so confused over this. As Paul said, to be absent in the body is to be with the Lord. What is with the Lord? the Spirit, some call it a soul. This is an apt analogy with the hypostatic union - humans are material beings endowed with a spirit. It does not just vanish at death as the JWs falsly teach. Jesus the creature tendered his spirit to God and Stephen tendered his Spirit to Jesus.

You should always begin your analysis with the fact that Jesus was, and is, God. The rest falls into place by logical necessity.

JD II

http://www.144000.110mb.com/

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

"I'm glad you allow that human oneness between a man and a woman cannot be used to substantiate the trinity one doctrine but now you have to show a biblical scripture that allows for that in itself."

REPLY: Gladly. You might go back and read my post because I made the opposite point. It CAN be used to substantiate the Trinity in principle because the point was that we are dealing with spirit, not the physical. And it is in this abstract sense that two can be one. or 3 or 5. The 3 persons of the Trinity are not material, but spritual. In the same sense that the body of Christ is one body (Eph 4:4-6). Whether we are dealing with 3 or two or 144,000 is immaterial to make the point.

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

hi booby

... but there was only one "God of gods" and jesus himself pointed that this was his father "You the only true God".

REPLY: But that interpretation of John 17:3 ignores the mountain of Biblical evidence proving that Jesus was, and is, God. Accordingly, it was Jesus the man in the God-man equation that was uttering those words. Especially given 1 John 5:20 where Jesus is also referred to the True God. And as there can only be one True God, Jesus must be God.

"And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given to us an understanding that we might know the true One, and we are in the true One, in His son, Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and the life everlasting. (1 John 5:20 Green’s Literal Translation)"

This ridiculous heretical JW notion that Jesus Christ was nothing more than a man completely contradicts the New Testament. They have yet to be able to reconcile the many contradictions it poses.

http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-7.html

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa said:

Nark the bible wasn't written for intellectuals it was written for the average person with average understanding to understand.

REPLY:

The Jehovah’s Witnesses insist that the Trinity is a work of Satan the Devil (Should You Believe, Chapter 10) and is invalid because it is a mystery (ibid., Chapter 1). And, as God is not a God of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33; ibid.) He would not permit such a confusing doctrine because it would prohibit the true worship of Him (ibid.)

First, their reliance on 1 Corinthians 14:33 is misplaced because the “confusion” there was in reference to order during church meetings, those speaking out of turn, and those speaking in tongues. Secondly, the mere fact that the Trinity doctrine is mysterious in some ways, as is God Himself for that matter, doesn’t invalidate the doctrine. After all, Paul is one of the “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4:1). He speaks to Timothy of the “mystery of the faith” (1 Timothy 3:9), and the “mystery of our religion” (1 Timothy 3:16). Even Peter referred to some of Paul’s writings as difficult to understand (2 Peter 3:16) but that didn’t make Paul wrong.

As difficult as the Trinity might appear to some, remember that certain aspects like the hypostatic union are taken on faith grounded in reason, but faith is not a bad thing, it is a good thing, “For by grace you were saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God - not because of works, lest any man should boast” (2 Ephesians 2:9). If faith has no role in the Christian world, belief in the resurrection of Christ would be nonexistent and salvation impossible to achieve.

It is reasonable to have faith in the Trinity doctrine.

This inability to “know God entirely” (presumptuous in itself) did not hinder the ancients like Noah, Job, Abraham, Isaac and Moses from worshiping Him before the Mosaic Law was handed down. The triune nature of God wasn’t more fully explained until Christ arrived, so even the Old Testament Jews didn’t “know God” as Christ revealed Him, but that did not prevent the Israelites from worshiping God. And just because wrapping your mind around the doctrine of the Trinity might challenge you, that in itself doesn’t mean it is a false teaching, because it’s not.

If you’re still convinced that the Jehovah’s Witnesses are God’s one and only true organization and that they disseminate the truth, please read the two accompanying papers entitled 1) Why the Jehovah’s Witnesses are wrong in teaching that Jerusalem was destroyed in 607 B.C. and that Jesus’ Second Coming occurred in 1914, and 2) Why the Jehovah's Witnesses are wrong in teaching that only 144,000 go to heaven to rule over humans on earth.

Finally, whether the Jehovah’s Witnesses (those who devise their religious teachings) are genuinely confused or simply lack the ability to understand the Trinity doctrine, or whether something far more dark and sinister is at work here, is ultimately for the reader to determine.

Jesus is Lord!

JD II

http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html#trinity-home

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

but this is denying the sheer wait of scripture that never hint that any part of jesus son of God lived from the roman centurian at his death.

Mark 15:39 (New International Version)

39 And when the centurion, who stood there in front of Jesus, heard his cry and [a] saw how he died, he said, "Surely this man was the Son [b] of God!"

REPLY: You have it backwards. The sheer, profound and undeniable Biblical facts support that Jesus was, and is, God. This is an unmistakeable Biblical conclusion. Truth. Go here for the proof: http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-5.html#20

Accordingly, since Christians believe Jesus was, and is, God in the Trinitarian fashion, and because as I believe Habakkuk 1:12 says (according to which Bible used) that God never dies, then the God of the God-man Jesus did not die, and could not have died.

Reniaa wrote: to revelation Revelation 2:8
"To the angel of the church in Smyrna write:These are the words of him who is the First and the Last, who died and came to life again. REPLY: The problem is that you are not distinguishing the God from the Man. Sometimes it refers to God the Son, and sometimes to God the man. If Jesus died and came to life, it is God the man who speaks, naturally. "The practical implications of the union is that “Jesus sometimes spoke as man, sometimes as God; sometimes as Godman” (M. O’Carroll, Trinitas: A Theological Encyclopedia of the Holy Trinity [Wilmington, Delaware, Michael Glazier, Inc., 1987], 186) (Trinitas)."

Reniaa wrote:

we are already having to ignore scriptures.

John 1:14 (New American Standard Bible)

14 And (A) the Word (B) became flesh, and (C) dwelt among us, and (D) we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of (E) grace and (F) truth.

according to hypostatic doctrine this is an impossible scripture because the word is the god bit that doesn't die it just gets another fleshly will added to it.

REPLY: Not at all. The human will is not added to the divine. Jesus was a divine person who assumed a human nature. The JW problem stems from their unbelief that Jesus was, and is, God. It all starts there. Once you understand this, and accept it, then all of the other pieces fall into place. He HAD to be God and he HAD to be human. That is what scripture teaches. I explain this on my website http://144000.110mb.com/trinity/index.html

"Fifth, with the above in mind, and considering the many proofs that follow, John 1:14 was not meant to be read literally. It states, “And the Word became flesh,” but this does not mean that the Word made a complete transformation from a spirit angel to only flesh, which is a type of heretical modalism condemned by the church in the first centuries. Rather, the divine Person of Christ assumed a human nature. Jesus was a divine Person with a human nature. That is the only acceptable interpretation of John 1:14 because the divinity of Christ - that he was and is God - in an undeniable Biblical truth, and without His divinity redemption is not possible. It was necessary for Jesus to be a God-man for the sake of mankind’s salvation. Therefore He could not be “mere flesh” under any circumstances.

Besides, since “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever” (Hebrews 13:8 NWT) He cannot have been a preexistent angel who changed completely into mere flesh, and then reverted back to heaven as an angel. There is no such radical change in the Trinitarian Christian world where the Word was God the Son, remained God the Son during His sojourn, and continued as God the Son after His resurrection and ascension."

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

"by the time we get to this point we are creating serious contradictions with scripture. God cannot die, he is eternal so jesus isn't an equal sacrifice because he doesn't die only a part of him dies the human creature. but this is denying the sheer wait of scripture that never hint that any part of jesus son of God lived from the roman centurian at his death."

REPLY: First, the notion that Jesus had to be an equal sacrifice, equal to Adam, is completely false but off topic for now. With respect to your question, it was the creature who bled on the cross. “In Jesus humanity does not exist in itself, but it is the Son who exists as man through his human nature. Jesus gives back his whole divine self to the Father on the cross in and through his humanity (Fundamentals of Christology, 320). He consummates his human experience in all these dimensions only in dying and rising to a new, definitive form of human existence (ibid., 317).

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

"What happens to Jesus the human creature? according to hypostatic union only Jesus the human creature dies and the God bit goes to heaven joins with the father and then raises himself as god the father with the help of the holy spirit person."

REPLY: Christians do not believe that God the Son raised himself as "god the father" as you claim. Where do you come up with this distortion?

As to what happens to Jesus the human creature, Christians believe the heavenly resurrected Jesus does not cease being human.

Regarding the humanity of Christ, although this humanity can never be viewed in isolation because, “In Jesus humanity does not exist in itself, but it is the Son who exists as man through his human nature. Jesus gives back his whole divine self to the Father on the cross in and through his humanity (Fundamentals of Christology, 320). He consummates his human experience in all these dimensions only in dying and rising to a new, definitive form of human existence (ibid., 317).

Fifth, the exaltation refers to the resurrected heavenly Jesus that died on the cross, who does not cease to be human (ibid., 318), a glorified human yet still God the Son to whom every knee shall bow. And any exaltation that God the Son might have enjoyed was with respect to His grade, order, appearance, aspect or manifestation (Tertullian). It would be a change in order of precedence in operation, a change in the relationship, but it would not alter in any way the essential being, nature and power of God; that which defines the triune God as one.

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

Reniaa wrote:

"they is the only biblical comparison trinitarians can use but they have to insist Jesus, God and HS are not 3 Gods but One God but still 3 separate persons."

REPLY: The 3 persons of the Trinity do not refer to humans like you or I, but spirit. This is a fundamental flaw in JW understanding, a tactic used to mislead the public into believing the Trinity is something it is not.

The three spiritual Persons or hypostases of the triune God are not to be confused with material human beings, persons like you or I. [Top]

The Jehovah’s Witnesses erroneously think of “Person” as an individual self-conscious human person (Encyclopedia of Religion, 57), and we humans don’t engage in the kind of conduct the three Persons of the Trinity do, such as inner dialogue where people combined within a human person speak to each other. Or, they argue that the Holy Spirit cannot be a person because it appeared as a dove or flames of fire, never in the form of a human. And, it seems irrational to them that one such person can inhabit another person, so the Holy Person cannot be a person (Should You Believe, Chapter 6). They write:

On one occasion the holy spirit appeared as a dove. On another occasion it appeared as tongues of fire - never as a person. (Should You Believe, Chapter 8).
[R]egarding Samson, Judges 14:6 relates: “The spirit of Yahweh seized on him and though he had no weapon in his hand he tore the lion in pieces.” (JB) Did a divine person actually enter or seize Samson, manipulating his body to do what he did? No, it was really “the power of the LORD [that] made Samson strong. (TEV) (Should You Believe, Chapter 6) (emphasis added).
A comparison of Bible texts that refer to the holy spirit shows that it is spoken of as ‘filling’ people; they can be ‘baptized’ with it; and they can be “anointed” with it … None of these expressions would be appropriate if the holy spirit were a person. (Reasoning from the Scriptures [New York, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 1985], 380) (Reasoning)

First, the Jehovah's Witnesses fail to recognize that we are dealing with spirit, not flesh (the Holy Spirit is, after all, spirit), and the Bible is replete with examples of spirit persons entering individuals such as the spirit person Satan who entered Judas (Luke 22:3), and spirit demons who routinely inhabit people (Matthew 8:29-31). Furthermore, Jehovah is a spirit person and is the Holy Spirit who dwells in the Christian believer (2 Corinthians 3:17, 18 NWT), as does Christ (Romans 8:9-11; see also John 4:24). The Jehovah’s Witnesses’ objections in this regard are groundless.

And simply because the Holy Spirit took the form of a dove or tongues of fire and not a human person does not mean He is not a spirit person. After all, the Almighty is a spirit person though invisible (Colossians 1:15). Angels are spirit persons who took human form, but their mere appearance as humans does not mean they are angels, or that angels who never took human form are not spirit (Genesis 18).

Second, “Person” should be regarded as a contemporary misnomer, an imperfect expression because it connotes a separate rational and moral individual. It is a word erroneously derived from the Latin persona and misapplied in the English modern era, as the Jehovah's Witnesses have done.

Persona: A Latin word regularly used to refer to the three ‘persons’ of the Trinity and to the one ‘person’ of Christ. It therefore fulfills the role in Latin theology performed by hypostasis in Greek. The natural translation into ‘person’ in English is misleading. Persona originally meant a ‘mask’ and then a ‘role.’ It is used to indicate an individual in his or her external presentation, and does not convey the idea of self-consciousness or the internal psychological content suggested by the English word ‘person’ with its close link to the word ‘personality.’ (Oxford, 1210)

Third, as mentioned above, the hypostatic “Person” refers to a form in which the divine essence exists, not a created human, but three personal self-distinctions (The New Bible Dictionary [Grand Rapids, Michigan, W. M. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962], 1300) (New Bible Dictionary).

In most formularies the doctrine is stated by saying that God is one in His essential being, but that in this being there are three Persons, yet so as not to form separate and distinct individuals. They are three modes or forms in which the divine essence exists. ‘Person’ is, however, an imperfect expression of the truth in as much as the term denotes to us a separate rational and moral individual. But in the being of God there are not three individuals, but only three personal self-distinctions within the one divine essence. (New Bible Dictionary, 1299, 1300)

Fourth, while each Person is self-conscious, He never acts independently.

[P]ersonality in man implies independence of will, actions, and feelings, leading to behavior peculiar to the person. This cannot be thought of in connection with the Trinity; each Person is self-conscious and self-directing, yet never acting independently or in opposition. (ibid.)

Fifth, The Jehovah’s Witnesses argue,“ Thousands of times throughout the Bible, God is spoken of as one person. When he speaks, it is as one undivided individual…. Why would all the God-inspired Bible writers speak of God as one person if he were actually three persons? … What purpose would that serve except to mislead people?” (Should You Believe, Chapter 6).

This line of argument illustrates their confusion. The triune God is not split into three. He is one undivided individual as just mentioned. His diversity manifests itself in operations and characteristics:

When we say that God is a unity we mean that though God is in Himself a threefold centre of life, His life is not split into three. He is one in essence, in personality, and in will. When we say that God is a Trinity in unity we mean that there is unity in diversity, and that diversity manifests itself in Persons, in characteristics, and in operations. (New Bible Dictionary, 1299, 1300)
We do not confess three Gods, but one God in three persons, the “consubstantial Trinity,” (Catholic Catechism, 75). “[T]he Godhead of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is one, their glory equal, their majesty coeternal.” Athanasian Creed; DS 75; ND16)” (Catholic Catechism, 79).

Sixth, there is subordination of relation and order among the three Persons, but not in nature:

Moreover, the subsistence and operations of the three Persons are marked by a certain order involving a certain subordination in relation, though not in nature. The Father as the fount of deity is First: He is said to originate. The Son, eternally begotten of the Father, is Second: he is said to reveal. The Spirit, eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son, is Third: He is said to execute.
While this does not suggest priority in time or in dignity, since all three Persons are divine and eternal, it does suggest an order of precedence in operation and revelation. Thus we can say that creation is from the Father, through the Son, by the Holy Spirit. (New Bible Dictionary, 1299, 1300)

Seventh, the three Persons are permanent features of God’s three distinct manners of His activity:

Trinitarian theology is par excellence the theology of relationship. Its fundamental principle is that God, who is self-communication and self-giving love for us, is from all eternity love perfectly given and received. The traditional formula “God is three persons in one nature” compactly expresses that there are permanent features of God’s eternal being (the three persons) that are the ontological precondition for the three distinct manners of God’s tripersonal activity in the world (as Father, Son and Spirit). (Encyclopedia of Religion, 55)

Eighth, each Person has the divine nature, but each has it differently:

Whatever is other, distinct, plural, personal, and proper in the Godhead is exclusively a matter of relationship. Father, Son and Spirit do not differ as God, but in the way each is God with respect to the others. Each has and is the divine nature, but each has it differently: the Father from Himself, the Son from the Father, the Spirit from both the Father and the Son. God, then, is one in substance, three in Person, and what is significant about this distinction, what makes it non-contradictory, is that what is personal in the Godhead is not something absolute, but something purely relative, (Council of Florence, 1442). (Catholic Encyclopedia, 303)

Ninth, the doctrine also holds that the divine Persons exist in their relationships to one another:

The three divine Persons exist in their particular, unique natures as Father, Son and Spirit in their relationships to one another, and are determined through these relationships. It is in these relationships that they are Persons. Being a person in this respect means existing-in-relationship. (Trinity and the Kingdom, 172)
[T]he three divine Persons possess the same individual, indivisible and one divine nature, but they possess it in varying ways. The Father possesses it of himself; the Son and the Spirit have it from the Father (ibid., 172). The Trinitarian Persons subsist in the common divine nature; they exist in their relations to one another. (ibid., 173)

“A divine Person is a non-interchangeable existence of the divine nature.” By the word ‘existence’ - existential - [he] meant: existence, in the light of another” (ibid., 173).

JD II

332

The Son in two persons

by Deputy Dog in

the wt and jws around the world have made the evil "trinity" their reason for existence.

when in fact they have quite a mystery of their own.

one son in two separate an distinct persons with two separate an distinct natures archangel michael/human jesus.. on another thread spike tassel tried to explain this by saying: .

jonathan dough

LD wrote:

Does it really matter how we view God, as Christians?

REPLY: I think it does matter. Salvation is to know God, and if Jesus was and is God, and JWs say he was only a man and nothing more, I think God would be offended and not pleased. How does that line in John go? Jesus said "If you do not believe that I AM you will die in your sins?" Or John 17:3, "And this is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

Knowing God, to the extent that we can, matters.