Post 10323 of 10329 Since 6/19/2004 | Jesus had a Father who was God true, he was truely God a Mother who was human True, he was truly human he himself had supernatural powers. Changed water to wine, walked on water, raised the dead WHAT WAS JESUS IN THE ANCIENT WORLD? the savior, God. |
Posts by TTWSYF
-
96One thing the WT got right was the Trinity being false.
by miseryloveselders ini swear only a fool would believe in such a ludicrous doctrine that all three are one.
ridiculous..
-
-
TTWSYF
-
96
One thing the WT got right was the Trinity being false.
by miseryloveselders ini swear only a fool would believe in such a ludicrous doctrine that all three are one.
ridiculous..
-
-
TTWSYF
More messed up scriptures that lead people to think that there is a Trinity Godhead. It's just stupid,isn't it?
The father dwells in believers 1 Corinthians 3;16-17
The son Jesus dwells in believers 1John 3;24
The Holy spirit dwells in believers Romans 8;9
no wonder these people think there's a Trinity.....must be a 3 headed monster God like I've been told.
dc
-
96
One thing the WT got right was the Trinity being false.
by miseryloveselders ini swear only a fool would believe in such a ludicrous doctrine that all three are one.
ridiculous..
-
-
TTWSYF
It's the stupid bible that makes people think there's a 'Trinity'
Who raised Jesus from the dead? Well, Galations 1;1 and Thessolonians 1;10 says the Father. Romans 8:11 says the Holy Spirit. John 10;17-18 say Jesus Christ.....
...stupid bible...
then it says to baptize in the name of the father, the son and holy ghost.....Why does it say one name for three? It couldn't mean that!
stupid, stupid, stupid bible!
-
96
One thing the WT got right was the Trinity being false.
by miseryloveselders ini swear only a fool would believe in such a ludicrous doctrine that all three are one.
ridiculous..
-
-
TTWSYF
They may have gotton more than one thing right, even a broken clock is right twice a day.
I always hear mentioned [from JWs] Deut.6;4 'Hear, O Israel ; The Lord our God is one Lord'
What is also interesting to note is that in Hebrew there are two words for one. There is yachid- meaning one singular. And there is 'echad which can suggest a unity of other things. ei - evening and morning became one ['echad] day, husband and wife became one ['echad] flesh. This is how this passage is written in reference to being one ['echad] God.
So, it is possible to see how people would believe that God is more than one being or thing. Couple that with the numerous passages that equate Jesus to God, add that to the passages that equate the Holy Spirit to God and one can see how people could possibly believe that.
Now add those facts to the church fathers listed in the booklet 'Should you believe in the trinity' Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and Origin. Each one of those men listed have writings available that assert that Jesus was God [the son].
respectfully,
DC
-
123
Translating the NWT in the Shadows
by JuanMiguel innote: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.
for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.
i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.
-
-
TTWSYF
Still thinking wrote - From my understanding of Trinitarian belief, some believe that the three are one. Some believe that the three are seperate and yet equal forming one God head. So you still need to have a belief that the Holy Spirit or (holy Spirit) is a seperate being all together. I cannot see this anywhere. Nowhere can I see Jesus claiming to be equal to the father or the Holy Spirit being equal or indeed seperate being.
Your questions about the Trinity should be addressed on another thread. Believe me, people [for and against] will reply. As far as not seeing were Jesus claimed divinity, to me the latest example of John 8 :58 is proof, obviously not to you.
It would have been against Mosiac law to stone Jesus for saying 'I have been' Stoning offenses [under Mosian law] include blasphemy, fortune telling, false prophesy, leading others to idolatry, offering children to Molech, being a pervert [or certain sexual immoralitys] and being a rebellious son. If blasphemy wasn't the insinuation, then what was? Poor translation amongst them?
Some one wrote [Wonderment?] I agree with scholar Jason BeDuhn when he says that 'the NWT is in some ways better than the standard translations.
Which ways? The new testament has been revamped into something that it never was. That is probably the reason that those who agreed with the John 1;1 rendering of the 'the word was a god' all came from the 19th century. Any scholars back that rendering in the 21st century?
The Watchtower position is quite clear in Reasoning from the scriptures [1985, pgs 276-277] The NWT was prepared by anointed witnesses of Jehovah, who transmitted his thoughts and declarations as accurately as possible. These men have chosen to remain anonymous, since they did not seek prominence, and God's word should stand on it's merits. The NWT is an accurate, largely literal translation from the original languages. It is not a loose paraphrase in which the authors add ideas that they believe will be helpful.
I disagree with the Watchtower position because the examples that rebut their assertions are so overwhelming. Another example is
Heb 1;8 'Thy throne o God is for ever and ever' [speaking of Jesus]
NWT Heb 1;8 'God is your throne for ever and ever [speaking of Jesus]
Which one is correct? Bring it to the interliniar.
respectfully,
dc
-
123
Translating the NWT in the Shadows
by JuanMiguel innote: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.
for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.
i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.
-
-
TTWSYF
Does anyone know if there is another bible that translates John 8:58 as "I have been' as opposed to 'I am"? I cannot see how 'I have been', could be accurate in keeping with the chapter.
Please let me know so I can bash that one too......joking , of course.
I do not hate the NWT or JWs, but I do hate the lies that the WTS promote. They promote it in all of their literature so it stands to reason that they would put it in the NWT and there is definitive proof of it aside from what has been debated to this point. I think definitive anyway.
When one translates anything, they may be limited by their knowledge of the giving language, but adding or subtracting ideas/words is just plain wrong, isn't it?
Colossians 1 :16-17 [refering to Jesus] 'by him all things were made...he is before all things'
The NWT takes the same verses and makes them 'by him all [other] things were made....he is before all [other] things. Translated accurately in Greek it states [a few times] that Jesus created all things.
compare that with Heb 3;4 'he that constructed all things is God'
Mind you, I do not give that as an example trying to convince anyone of my beliefs, but that seems to be the reason that words were added.
Respectfully,
dc
-
123
Translating the NWT in the Shadows
by JuanMiguel innote: the following is not meant to be construed as a recommendation but to demonstrate the sharp contrast between any authentic bible translation and the new world translation.
for those of us who participate and or read the threads on this board, i understand and appreciate that all here have different views on religion, the existence of god, and of the catholic church.
i believe each individuals convictions should be treated with the utmost respect and dignity.
-
-
TTWSYF
Good rebutal to you Wonderment. I stand corrected on other instances when ego eimi is translated differently than "I am' and I buy it in the logic of those translations in those other verses.
What is fact of the scripture in question is that Jesus said 'I am' with the authority that put his life in instant danger. They were to stone him for blasphemy. For the blasphemy of saying that he was the Great eternal Presence. They saw him claiming to be God and it was nothing short of that. The NWT specifically renders that differently to remove scriptural proof that Jesus did claim divinity for himself. All the effort put forth suggesting an alternative translation doesn't work with the reality of the chapter.
respectfully,
dc
-
29
am i wrong?
by lenahmata ini know a regular pioneer, she's 18 years old.
i just knew that she had a relationship with a politician and a vicepresident of a certain parish church.
i told the elders about it.
-
-
TTWSYF
Scripture says that you should have taken her aside and talked to her 1st to see if you could correct her. If that didn;t work, then you go with others to witness to her.
You basically stabbed her in the back, so I agree....
walk away and never return, unless it's to apologize.
dc
-
-
-
TTWSYF
I'm ashamed to admit that I used to kiss the TV screen when Ginger was on. I was 5 years old......So Ginger, but now I saw Mary Ann on TV a few years back and she was hot, very hot.
dc
-
16
Should Youths Get Baptized?
by xcellxior inhave a look at the pictures of this youth.
doesn't look like his voice has even broken.. first article in the "study" edition.. http://download.jw.org/files/media_magazines/w_e_20110615.pdf.
"does reading the bible and studying the.
-
-
TTWSYF
The WTS go on about how they don't do infant baptisms like other Christians, but really what is the difference?
The difference is that baptizing children is 100% scriptural. Studying for a baptism is unscriptural. That's a big difference, isn't it?
Although Jesus was a grown up when John baptised him, the apsotles in the book of acts indicates that all from a household can [and maybe should] be baptised.
See Acts 16;15 'She was baptised, with her household'
Acts 16;33 He was baptised at once, with all his family'
1 Corinthians 1;16 'I did baptze also the house of Stephanas'
respectfully,
dc