Posts by JosephMalik

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

Also, just to clarify my beliefs about the Trinity:

I believe what the Bible says -- I do not follow the "Creeds" -- In fact, I don't even know what all the "Creeds" say about the Trinity.

I believe, based on what I have read in the Scriptures, that the Father and the Son and the Spirit all share the same Nature.

Undisfellowshipped,

Even if the Holy Spirit is a person (which it is not) and they share the same nature does that prove they are true God? What nature do you think the angels have? Something different? If so where is the proof and what is their nature? For example what is the nature of Michael or Gabriel?

Luke 1:19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am Gabriel, that stand in the presence of God; and am sent to speak unto thee, and to shew thee these glad tidings.

Revelation 12:7 And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

Undisfellowshipped said: This Nature is called "Godship" or "Godhead" or "Godhood" or "Deity".

The Scriptures talk about this Nature:

Acts 17:29: Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man's devising.

So Godhead or Deity is nothing like the artwork contrived to represent Him. Great so what? No trinity here not even close.

Undisfellowshipped said: Romans 1:20: For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

So Godhead or Deity can be clearly seen by the things made. Great but so what? No trinity here, not even close.

Undisfellowshipped said: Colossians 2:9: For in Him all the Fullness of the Godhead dwells bodily;

So in Him (Christ) the fullness of the Godhead or Deity dwell bodily. Great so what? The verse does not say that this Him is this same Godhead or Deity. Just what is the Fullness anyway? A literal existence making Him God or the qualities of this Godhead or Deity? No trinity here. Where is your proof?

Undisfellowshipped said:

Philippians 2:6: who, being in the Form [or Nature] of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God,

Why do you ignore the next verse and why not check other translations:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: 7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

NAS 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men.

Wow! The WORD while in the form of the God that He was with did not even consider equality with God. This WORD gave no thought to such robbery that Trinitarians teach as a fact. How about that. John knew this, and Paul knew this as well. The pre-human existence is proved but no Trinity. No not even close.

Undisfellowship said:

John 1:1: In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God, and the Word was Deity.

The terms Deity and Godhead mean what? They are only used a few times in scripture and we have discussed nearly all the texts already. They do not mean Trinity. They are terms that can be shared with our Lord but not with some Holy Spirit. The words Godhead or Deity are used by Trinitarians in ways never intended as if they prove something beyond what the scriptures have to say about them. A pre-human existence of Jesus is proved here by John just as it is in John 8:58 but no trinity. Now since you say this:

Undisfellowship said: I believe, based on what I have read in the Scriptures that this Nature of God ("Godhead") includes the following attributes:

* Eternal Existence

* Almighty (All-Powerful -- Omnipotent)

* Omniscient (All-Knowing)

* Omnipresent (Everywhere at Once)

* Perfect Love

* Perfect Justice

* Perfect Wisdom

* Perfect Power

Then prove that Deity means all this from the very texts in which Deity or Godhead appear. Will you do that? Saying what you think is not proof. Repeating what Trinitarians teach is not proof. Put those books down. Use the texts where Deity or Godhead are discussed to prove each statement made here. Will you do that please?

Joseph

Edited by - JosephMalik on 3 December 2002 13:44:23

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

Joseph,

Please enlighten me as to what Jesus meant (besides what He actually said) in John 5:23.

Undisfellowshipped,

This is meant and is contained in the discussion that surrounds the verse. Here it is in part:

21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will. 22 For the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son:

23 That all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father. He that honoureth not the Son honoureth not the Father which hath sent him. 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Resurrection and Judgment once the exclusive domain of the Father (as demonstrated in scripture) has been committed unto the Son. This is the answer to your question. It is for this reason that all men should honour the Son, even as they honor the Father. This is confirmed by the texts that follow. The expression Verily, verily is significant in that an absolute truth follows such expression which confirms that judgment and life are now entirely in our Lords hands now along with th authorization needed to use them at our Lords own discretion. No equality here, no Omni something or other that makes the Son equal to the Father and one Being with Him. Nothing like that. The Son was sent which makes this Son an Apostle of the Father to a higher or heavenly calling which replaced the Law that many were still practicing at the time.

Hebrews 3:1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;

Undisfellowshipped said:

Also, you said:

Sorry! You say that but the scriptures do not. All they say is that Jesus will raise His Body, not His life. A dead person can raise no one. Life must be restored first and who did that by your own admission?

The Scriptures don't say anything about Jesus taking His own Life back?

John 10:17: Therefore the Father loves Me, because I lay down My Life, that I may take it again.
John 10:18: No one takes it away from Me, but I lay it down by Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. I received this Commandment from My Father."

In those Verses, Jesus says that He has THE POWER to take His own Life back.

Those Verses do NOT say "I have the power to take My Body back".

The life Jesus was discussing here is His life and nature as a human being. That His life as a human is being discussed and not His life as the Word is confirmed by Jesus when He said He would raise His body thus providing precise detail as to what was meant. So we must pay careful attention to context and not carelessly match words. All this has already been discussed. Jesus did not restore His existence personally. You have already provided the texts that prove God did that. Dead persons can raise no one. Yes Jesus had the Power to take His own life back which is remarkable since it would add Human Nature to the non-human Life God already restored to life. Therefore Paul continued to call our Lord the Man Jesus Christ since Jesus was permitted to also retain the nature of a human being.

Undisfellowshipped said: Also, please provide the Scriptures that proves the Father raised Jesus as the Word.

I did this already as well.

John 17:5 And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory which I had with thee before the world was.

This is actually the theme of Johns Gospel since John established this truth as John 1:1.

Are you saying that the Father did not answer this prayer? John identified this glory with his introduction. Life can only be restored by a living being not a dead one. Jesus could not have raised himself while dead. God did not die for us and no scriptures can be found for such a thought.

Undisfellowshipped said: Well, you and I have different beliefs about the dead.

I will discuss this more as soon as I can.

Well we have a common text from which to teach. So prove your points from it.

Undisfellowshipped said: Also, you made a big point about "God" not being a Name. Check out this Verse:

Isaiah 9:6: For to us a Child is born, to us a Son is given: and the Government shall be upon His shoulder: and His Name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

All titles of identification prophecy in fact not personal names. Things the true God already has in fact. The Hebrew word means:

1) name

1a) name

1b) reputation, fame, glory

1c) the Name (as designation of God)

1d) memorial, monument

Memorials, reputation. Names in a sense other than a personal name. This is easy stuff. Such things can not only be shared by more than non Being, they become part of the Sons inheritance when this Child is born. No proof for a Trinity here. What is the literal name of this Son? Jesus. Even the term Christ is a title meaning Messiah and is not the personal name given this Child. Even so this Jesus was called Christ.

Matthew 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Joseph

Edited by - JosephMalik on 3 December 2002 16:43:6

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

JosephMalik asked:

Did Jesus have all authority as the Word or was He still under His Fathers authority?

The Father, Son, and Spirit are in Perfect Unity, however, the Son is in willing subjection to the Father.

Undisfellowshipped,

You see what I am saying? You can not have it both ways. How are you going to prove a statement like this? Oneness does not prove equality and common Being. You have no case or proof just words that cannot stand up to investigation.

Why is it necessary to give Jesus something or make him Lord and Christ if He is already God and the very same Being in fact?

Undisfellowshipped said: Hmmmm, good question. Perhaps because the Father could have decided to become the Christ and come to Earth Himself, but instead He appointed His Son as the Christ/Messiah.

Please provide the texts. Perhaps not is just as good an answer and proof has already been shown that the Father and Christ are separate Beings. In fact the Son still has His human nature which can be shown by many texts and will use it when He comes again to live here and administer His kingdom.

Did Jesus raise himself from death or did God do that?

Undisfellowshipped said: The Bible states that Jesus raised Himself from the dead:

John 2:19: Jesus answered them, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up."
John 2:20: The Jews therefore said, "Forty-six years was this Temple in building, and will You raise it up in three days?"
John 2:21: But He spoke of the Temple of His Body.
John 2:22: When therefore He was raised from the dead, His Disciples remembered that He said this, and they believed the Scripture, and the Word which Jesus had said.

John 10:17: Therefore the Father loves Me, because I lay down My Life, that I may take it again.
John 10:18: No one takes it away from Me, but I lay it down by Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. I received this Commandment from My Father."

Sorry! You say that but the scriptures do not. All they say is that Jesus will raise His Body, not His life. A dead person can raise no one. Life must be restored first and who did that by your own admission?

Undisfellowshipped said: The Bible states that God raised Jesus from the dead:

Acts 2:32: This Jesus God raised up, of which we all are witnesses.

Acts 2:23: Him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed;
Acts 2:24: whom God raised up, having freed Him from the agony of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it.

Acts 3:14: But you denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you,

Acts 3:15: and killed the Prince of Life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.

So, I would say, based on those Verses, that the Father and the Son worked together in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ in His Human Body.

Bingo! God raised Him from the dead. You missed the one where the Spirit raised Him up but no matter. This changes nothing. The Father was only concerned with the life of Jesus not His literal body which the resurrected Jesus could do all by Himself. In acquiring both natures, that of the Word and that of Man our Lord is now unique in this respect and can be addressed either way. This has also been demonstrated in this thread.

How is it that God needed to exalt Himself?

Undisfellowshipped said: So, yes, Jesus, after He had emptied Himself and had become "a little lower than the angels" and came to Earth as 100% Human (He still had the Nature of God, yet He had emptied Himself) to die, then needed to be exalted to His previous authority and power.

But the verses do not say that do they. No! In fact the verses you uses prove that this Son is not equal to the Father although this same Son did have a position far greater than man in the scheme of things. Where do they show only one Being is doing all this? Nowhere.

Are not Angels and authorities and powers always made subject to God?

Undisfellowshipped said: . . . And yet, the Bible says that the Word deserves equal honor with the Father:

John 5:23: that all may honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He who doesn't honor the Son doesn't honor the Father who sent Him.

Once again proof for separate Beings is shown by this text not proof for one Being as you insist. How is it that honor shown the Father would not be accepted as honor shown the Son? Are we instructed to honor each specifically by name then to fulfill this text? Why then is the Holy Spirit no included here in this context if the Holy Spirit also makes up this one Being? You have no case. In fact you must deny the reality that such texts demonstrate point blank.

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

Joseph, you are correct that Trinitarian Theology teaches that the Son is a separate Person from the Father, however, Trinitarian Theology DOES teach that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all known as YHWH (Yahweh/Jehovah/THE LORD/I AM).

Undisfellowshipped,

Once again so what? The only way that Trinitarians can function is by insisting on all this. They cannot provide scripture to support it. All this has been covered and shown to be false on a verse by verse basis. There is no basis for such thinking in scripture. Sure anyone can say anything they want. But that does not make it so.

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

I don't know what your reading, but it says that Jesus created everything. ,

SwedishChef ,

Well then exactly where does it say that? Nowhere! The word ALL does not mean everything. It simply refers back to the life under discussion. For example:

"Ye are of God, little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Does the whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" are used in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is very rarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words are generally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has not restricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile ... (C.H. Spurgeon from a sermon on Particular Redemption)

But if it says everything somewhere that I missed then provide the text and lets settle this right now. Changing words from all to everything makes you a translator. So if you are qualified to alter the text where is the proof for your statement?

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

Joseph,whether you'd like to admit or not, those verses you quoted in Isaiah refute your belief.

The fact is, from passages like these, we get a clear understanding the Jehovah is a jealous God who will not share His glory with another.

SwedishChef,

I covered all this at least once in this thread. All one has to do is go back and read them. You must prove your points not simply insist upon them. You must show context and all relevant facts. So lets look at one or two again and see how well you have done.

SwedishChef said: Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

This not talking about graven images only, the Lord Jehovah says He will not share glory with another; then he says neither to graven images. He speaks of graven images separatly. The fact is, a person reading this verse for what it says will come to the conclusion that Jehovah is the only God who is worthy of praise.

So you say but your interpretation is wrong. I showed you a verse where the LORD (YHWH) did share His glory with His Son. Even in Trinitarian theology the Son is another person and is not called LORD (YHWH) Failure to understand the text or your part does not make my comments wrong.

SwedishChef said: Exodus 34:14 For thou shalt worship no other god: for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God:

This verse reinforces it. There many other like it.

And do you still keep this Law? Do you offer sacrifices, kill Goats and Sheep, have Rabbis bless them and all that? If not then what makes you think that we are still under such Law then? I explained all this already several times. Laws change, this covenant has been replaced with a new one. Failure to understand the text and how the faith now functions does not refute my comments and make them wrong.

SwedishChef said: If I'm getting this right, you also believe that there are two creators. One who created the universe, and one who created mankind. I would just like you to find one verse which says that.

There are at least four. Once again I explained all this in this lengthy thread. For the universe you provided:

Isaiah 44:24 Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;

For the mankind you provided these two:

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

Only human life, no planets, stars or universe are being discussed in John.

Collossians 1:16 For by him [Jesus] were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Same here, only organized humanity is being discussed by Paul.

You have no case, none whatever for your views. None of this is in the least bit complex.

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

I have two questions for you:
(1) In these passages you quoted, was God sharing glory with Jesus?
(2) How many creators are there?

SwedishChef,

Barnes may have good information on other subjects and I use it if appropriate but I know that he had no idea of how to explain these since I am also familiar with this subject.

(1) Glory? Do you know what that means? Do have some specific text in mind? Well here is one:

Peter 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Glory was received by the Son from the Father. Is this sharing in the wrong direction? Does this clear up who is the greater and who is not? The Son also receives Glory in His own right. All this is part of Gods plan for the redemption of man. The Son in time returns all such mankind to God when the Kingdom has restored us to the status man should have attained before sin entered into the world.

Now if you think you can spring these texts on me then think again.

Isaiah 48:11 For mine own sake, even for mine own sake, will I do it: for how should my name be polluted? and I will not give my glory unto another.

Isaiah 42:8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

We are not discussing idolatry here such as graven images or someone polluting Gods name are we? We are discussing His Son and a divine arrangement under a covenant much better than the one in which such direction was given. So please answer and explain yourself and tell my why you asked this question and what were you trying to prove?

(2) How many creators are there?

I already answered this in this thread more than once. The Word did not create the universe or planet. He was only involved in the creation of mankind that makes up its foundation and given authority over it. This was done under the direction of the God that this Word was with.

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

"All authority has been given to me." (Mt 28:18)
"The Father ... has given all things into his hand." (Jn 3:35)
"God has made this Jesus ... both Lord and Christ." (Ac 2:36)
"Him God has exalted ... to be Prince and Savior." (Ac 5:31)
"He raised him ... far above all principality and power and might and dominion." (Eph 1:21)
"God also has highly exalted him." (Php 2:9)
"Angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to him." (1 Pe 3:22)

I believe each one of those Verses are describing what the Father did for Jesus after Jesus was Resurrected, which was in fulfillment of Jesus' Prayer for the Father to RESTORE the glory that Jesus had as The Word/Logos before the world began.

All of those things needed to be RESTORED to Jesus because when Jesus became a Human, Jesus became "a little lower than angels" and Jesus had "emptied

Undisfellowshipped,

Did Jesus have all authority as the Word or was He still under His Fathers authority?

Why is it necessary to give Jesus something or make him Lord and Christ if He is already God and the very same Being in fact?

Did Jesus raise himself from death or did God do that?

How is it that God needed to exalt Himself?

Are not Angels and authorities and powers always made subject to God?

The glory that needed to be restored to the executed Christ that once existed as the Word, was His very life. It was this life as the Word that our Lord needed to be raised. This life was all contained in the one Being that emptied himself and became human. That is really what our Lord prayed for. From that point on He could raise the human body offered in sacrifice Himself as this Word when restored had life in Him. This is the only example in scripture of any Being or life form legally acquiring and having two distinct natures. This required the Fathers permission as it was not something the Word could have done on His own.

The verses you show demonstrate clearly that this Word is not equal to the Father but has been appointed to serve in the capacities shown.

Joseph

Edited by - JosephMalik on 2 December 2002 11:17:14

Edited by - JosephMalik on 2 December 2002 11:24:21

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

In this passage the name God is expressly given to Christ,

Undisfellowshipped,

Albert Barnes does not even know that the term God is not a name. The rest of his comments are equally as bad.

I covered these texts in this thread a few pages ago and no one has been able to refute such comments yet. What I really liked about Barnes comments is that he believes that if his mis-guided reasoning is wrong then Thomas is to blame. Notice what he said:

If this was not the meaning of Thomas, then his exclamation was a mere act of profaneness,

This is what some may call full of it. Sounds like the WT's Govening Body.

Joseph

740

The Trinity

by meadow77 in

top reasons the wts is lying about the trinity.

their translation of john 1:1 is not only a complete farce but falls apart upon closer examination of their own beliefs.

the insertion of the phrase a god, instead of god is just a clear misinterpretation.

JosephMalik

JosephMalik said:

In fact our Lord never expected to be raised from death as a human.

Is that so?

John 2:19: Jesus answered them, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up."

Undisfellowshipped,

You must not have read what I posted. I already answered all this. Jesus could not have raised His body if He were not raised as the Word by God first in answer to His prayer. He expected to raise his body sure, but he could not do that while He was dead. With both natures now secured He can be addressed either way. Some verses simply provide more detail than others. Perhaps this is what confuses you?

Joseph