Posts by Wonderment

49

What the Trinitarian perspective on John 8.28?

by slimboyfat in

this is not a verse that i’ve seen feature heavily in trinitarian debates but it seems to me it presents a problem for the trinity.

if there are any around i’d be interested to know your perspective, or anything you can find on the meaning and how it doesn’t contradict the trinity.

the verse says:.

Wonderment

acqwsed: There are quite a few things in the world that cannot be explained in two paragraphs; incidentally, this is what the Nicene Creed is for.

I believe that one can successfully, in two paragraphs, explain the relationship of the submissive Son to the Father as the One Supreme Being of the universe (Slim has done this) without resorting to ancient mangled statements common of post-Christ humans who deviated from the simple biblical statements found in the NT.

Your posts indicate that you have a hard time convincing yourself and others that the Trinity has biblical roots. Otherwise, why go repeatedly back to the Nicene and other ancient creeds which only prove that humans at that time were greatly confused about the identity of God?

The Nicene Creed is not biblical.

49

What the Trinitarian perspective on John 8.28?

by slimboyfat in

this is not a verse that i’ve seen feature heavily in trinitarian debates but it seems to me it presents a problem for the trinity.

if there are any around i’d be interested to know your perspective, or anything you can find on the meaning and how it doesn’t contradict the trinity.

the verse says:.

Wonderment

Slim: I am not here arguing that God is superior because he “sent” Jesus. I’m arguing that God is superior because he “taught” Jesus before he sent him. In order to teach somebody something you have to tell them something they don’t already know. Therefore God is superior to his Son in knowledge. This contradicts Trinitarian dogma that divine persons are equal in age, power, and knowledge.

How true! Even the Father sending the Son to earth is indicative that the Father is greater than the Son in power and knowledge. (Jn 13.16) The same with the Son being taught by the Father is evidence that the Son is lesser than the Father all-around. Even Jesus said so: The Father is greater than I am. (Jn 14.28)

Trinitarians want to have their cake and eat it too. They tell us that the Son is One and the same as the Father = all-mighty - even while on earth, but in his subordination state on earth he was not... a contradiction. The use of all authority given to the Son (Mt 28.18) is used as proof that Jesus is God. Again, whoever uses this argument has not apparently used a Bible concordance to grasp the fact that the original words for all in Scripture rarely means everything under the Sun. It has exceptions, such as in 1 Cor 15.27,28.

There were things Christ did not know about at the time he walked on earth (Mt 24.36; Acts 1.7), and once elevated to the right hand of God, he still had to receive a revelation from his God. (Rev 1.1; 3.12)

The Trinity dogma is irrational, and cannot be explained in a paragraph or two (acqwsed has tried, but failed). The Arian position on the other hand can be briefly explained.

16

Accepting blood transfusions. By which instrument it ceased to be a disfellowshipping offense to become cause for disassociation?

by EdenOne in

ok, i know the story of how it went, with the deal they reached with the bulgarian government, etc.

i know.. what i need to know is if there is an internal document that redefines willingly taking blood as a disfellowshipping offense into a cause for disassociation.

a letter from the branch?

Wonderment

SB,

Good observation!

15

Are JWs forgetting Jesus altogether?

by KerryKing in

a relative sent me yesterday's wt study article 46, how jehovah guarantees his promise of paradise.. it's been a long time since i read one of those articles but what really struck me about this one is that, considering it's discussing a fundamental jw belief, it only mentions jesus twice as an aside, and not at all as the central figure like the bible does.

it actually mentions satan far more in the same article!.

i don't remember this discrepancy from my time in the org 15 years ago.

Wonderment

TTWSYF: I always thought it quite odd that JWs promote themselves as [the only true] Christians but without Christ. Only a passing mention. Like HE'S not worthy of the attention and respect. Maybe I've got it wrong.

Your observation is proper. Although I don't believe in the Trinity doctrine per se, it is quite obvious that the WTS does not give Jesus the rightful place he deserves, as "Mediator" between God and men. (1 Tim 2.5)

Jesus, in effect, has taken a back seat within the WT organization, and replaced by the feeble, self-centric, and sinful Governing Body. This is one big reason I left the JW organization. Jesus deserves way more attention and respect than what he is getting there. (Heb 1.6) After all, it was the Father's will when he sent him to earth for all men to 'listen to him' in the main, not to have human followers supplant him by fanciful claims. (Mt 17.5; Lu 21.8)

176

No more REPORTING field service!!!!!!!!!

by BoogerMan in

this is going to break the hearts of a lot of uber-jw's!

reddit has now removed the video link of samuel herd telling jw's they will no longer have to report time or placements - just tick a box which says "active.".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=akdshyx79rm&t=13s.

Wonderment

The short time of implementation (of just 3 weeks) from this announcement to go into effect is indicative of an "urgent" matter. (Legal pressures at bay?)

Normally it takes the WBS months to implement monumental changes.

The short timeframe of application is reminiscent of what happened early in 1990 with the donation arrangement... weeks instead of many months.

In all, this is good news. No more judging people's spirituality based on hours reporting, a practice Jesus would surely condemn.

25

What is Self-deception?

by Kosonen in

jw
friends

i googles about self-deception and found many articles about it.

it is a thing reseachers in psychology have studied.. here is a quote from an article that describes it.

and it is interesting because of so many ideas about how to understand the bible.

Wonderment

AugustHest: But if we are talking about "self-deception," why are you folks quoting texts from the New World Translation of all places? [...] Why are you using that? Is this not an exJW site or did I miss something?

Because most of us are familiar with it, and some of us actually like this version, even though we may have left the org years ago.

AugustHest: "I went to Hebrew school since--not to mention learned Greek in college--and it's horrific."

Can you mention any specific examples either in the OT or NT where the NWT is "horrific" from the linguistic standpoint?

AugustHest: "But I am showing that at least I can provide answers and show I know what I am talking about." [...] "Anyone who shares their views and their Bible translation [NWT] are pathetic, filthy worms." [...] "I am not here to promote religion, but to tear down the Watchtower and its teachings."

These statements clearly show us where you are coming from, and where you are going with this. Why not try something more edifying?

AugustHest: "But the fact is that in many instances I can use the NWT to prove that the WT organization is wrong, with their own translation."

This reminds me how the Witnesses in the past used a similar method with the KJV to prove Christendom's failures.

28

Do we blame the Governing Body too much?

by no-zombie in

i'd like to start this post with a part from the movie 'v for vendetta'.

here in a dystopian state, the main character named v, explains why things have gone so bad ....

those who do not want us to speak.

Wonderment

SBF: I wonder whose idea it was on the Governing Body to change the “faithful slave” doctrine to include only GB members rather than the anointed as a whole. It’s a pretty bold step considering they all served in the organisation and rose through the ranks on the basis that all anointed make up the “faithful slave” [...] Since they claim sole ownership of the title “faithful slave” now, it seems only right that they bear sole responsibility when they make mistakes.

It seems like a self-appointed increase of power over the rank-and-file. On your last statement, I couldn't agree more.

28

Do we blame the Governing Body too much?

by no-zombie in

i'd like to start this post with a part from the movie 'v for vendetta'.

here in a dystopian state, the main character named v, explains why things have gone so bad ....

those who do not want us to speak.

Wonderment

Ding: "Imperfect humans run every religious organization on earth, but they don't all claim to be God's sole channel of communication.
Nor do they all insist on being believed and obeyed without question."

Agreed!

19

Why are aqwsed12345 post`s so long ?

by smiddy3 in

jw
friends

there is no way i will even try to read such long posts and i`m sure many others here would agree with me.. smiddy3.

Wonderment

aqwsed12345: Of course, I don't claim that I invented all this out of thin air, I am just a "dwarf standing on the shoulders of giants", as Bernard of Chartres said.

It has been said that "actions speaks louder than words." The impression that some of us may get from your posts is that they scream: "I know this subject better than anyone else here," even if this is not true. You have said (or implied) that others are being blind or retarded Watchtower advocates if they dare defend any WT doctrinal point or viewpoint.

I like that you go deep in your studies, and your messages may be well-intended, but at the end, it comes thru as condescending to others that can't keep up with your intensity -- not upbuilding at all.

I don't criticize you for defending the Trinity at will. Rather, it is the tone. For instance, another regular poster here by the name of "Vanderhoven7" is an avid Trinity defender no less, yet, he normally submit his posts with respect toward others. I admit I enjoy some of his posts, and I have learned quite a few things from him. I tend to read his posts because they are often informative. We can learn from him, or others who communicate with a calm tone.

If you allow me, can I suggest you tone down your messages a bit, provide briefer posts overall, and try to find some common ground with other posters that disagree with you. I will try myself to follow this advice. No one has complete knowledge. So as your quote indicated, we all learn from others before us. Keep up your solid studies!

2

John 1:1 - Koine & Modern Greek Comparison

by Wonderment in

have you ever wondered why john 1.1 reads somewhat differently in koine and modern greek?

i will briefly address this question for the curious ones.

below you will find three greek readings, one from the nt greek text, followed by two modern greek versions: the nwt-2017 edition, and the other by spyros filos (wikipedia: a revision of the vamvas translation of the bible into the modern vernacular (demotic greek) by spyros (spiros) filos (σπύρος φίλος) was first published in 1994. this translation is used in the greek evangelical church and is also recognized by the orthodox church.

Wonderment

Blooty: In modern Greek ... is there any difference in placing Theos [without the article] before or after the verb? since modern has a form of an indefinite article.

The differences in meaning are relatively subtle and context-driven. In this case, the essential meaning of the sentence remains the same.

Although Modern Greek has an indefinite article within its grammatical toolbox, its main usage is to indicate numerical sense, not to indicate nonspecificity. Ex., "Θέλω ένα καφέ." (Thélo éna kafé.) - "I want one coffee." In Modern Greek, the use of the indefinite article with a numerical sense is more prominent and distinct. In turn, the English indefinite article main function is to indicate nonspecificity., but it can be used numerically to specify "one."

When Greeks want to signal nonspecificity, they usually drop the article (the equivalent of "the") as is done with "theos" in the last part of this verse. Hence, Modern Greek versions do NOT add the article "the" before "theos" in John 1.1c in order to make it definite.