Posts by Sulla

95

Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time

by AllTimeJeff in

this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.

because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.

awesome!

Sulla

AllTimeJeff: Sulla, JW's as you may or may not know won't discuss certain aspects of their theology until a person is sufficiently indoctrinated and accepting of other basic teachings first.

It has been my experience that some (not all) Trinitarians are similar.

You state that there are better intellectual arguments. I am sure there are.

You put it on me to find them? No, that isn't a fair premise. You are the believer. Defend your faith!

Sorry, Jeff, this thread is about whether it makes sense to argue the Trinity. I think you are mostly correct to say that there is no point to it, though for different reasons. You think it's pointless because those who accept the Trinity are, basically, stupid. I think it is because those who reject the Trinity are ignorant and proud. Seems like we two would be the last to get into a discussion about the Trinity itself.

I am a non believer, willing to believe what the evidence shows. If as a sincere non believer, I call you out, it is your choice to either be condescending, or you can actually engage in a conversation. Whatever. My life goes on. Your arrogance will too.

You are pretty much the one who called believers stupid, Jeff. And you are the one who seems not to be familiar with the arguments in support of the Trinity -- I mean the good arguments -- and who seems not to care. One of us is arrogant, that's for sure.

But as my first statement in this thread suggests, these debates go no where.

Regardless of how superior your view of the Trinity may be, it is still just words. Just a concept.

There still is no Triune god around, outside of the concept you have of the Trinity in your head.

So you say, Jeff. I trust it wouldn't lower the level of this debate to say: IS TOO A TRINITY!

95

Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time

by AllTimeJeff in

this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.

because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.

awesome!

Sulla

While I certainly sympathize with those poor souls who drank so deeply of JW theology that they actually agreed to be missionaries for the cause, and understand striking a pose against Christian orthodoxy as a self-potecting act, I have to point out that AllTimeJeff has spectacularly missed the point.

For example, while I cleary said that the hoary metaphor likening the Trinity to water was empty, Jeff can't be bothered to grasp that and clearly prefers listening to himself point out how weak the metaphor is. Or, I point out that the question depends on whether we can suppose nature and person are really separable concepts and Jeff gets all geeked out by the idea that, in humans, they are not.

Finally, Jeff swings for the fences and, no doubt typing with authority, insists that the Trinity is too, illogical!

While I wouldn't say that there is no such thing as a poor argument for the Trinity, or suggest that some dumb people believe it, I think we can see an interesting inversion of the original post in Jeff's follow-ups. Fact it, Jeff really doesn't know what he is talking about, but is happy in his ignorance to mock the worst arguments of the other side and to congratulate himself on his sophistication. In this, there isn't a bit of difference between Jeff now and Gilead Jeff: both were willing to attack the orthodox Christian belief without bothering to understand it.

In this way, poor Jeff has failed to progress since leaving the JWs. He is, in his heart and mind, really still a dumb JW: triumphant in his ignorance, sure of his intellectual superiority, completely uninterested in the facts. It's no wonder he was such a great JW, hell, he still is!

96

The New World Translation Quote from an Elder

by howdidtihappen in

you've probably heard this before, but at a meeting last night the elder called the nwt the "rolls royce" of bibles.

i'm new to the jw bs (and as soon as i can break away, will do so.

) but do they also believe they have a superior bible to anyone elses outside the religion?

Sulla

I see your point! However, although the main existing LXX Text lacks the Name throughout, the Hebrew Text as we have it today does contains the Name thousands of times. Removing the Tetragramatton from our English bibles in the OT is just as bad as introducing it in the NT. Should we follow the tradition of those Jews who removed it from LXX copies, or should we not rather stick to the Hebrew Text that does contain the Name thousands of times?

I'm going to push on this idea that it's "just as bad" because you seem to take it seriously. The Jewish scholars had decided, after centuries of reflection, that the Name ought not be uttered. We may ultimately accept or reject their reasons (but owe it to ourselves to investigate those reasons prior to forming an opinion), and we note that several translations use the Name everywhere in the OT (the New Jerusalem Bible, for example). The NJB includes various features of the LXX throughout, also, like the numbering in the Psalms and various passages in the Prophets. It's tough to say what ought or ought not be included and, ultimately, we find ourselves in an argument about the formation of the canon.

However, the decision to follow the Jewish theologians or not is hardly similar to the JW's decision to follow no manuscripts at all and invent scripture for nakedly doctrinal motives. There simply is no possible justification for that practice in the NWT. It stands entirely alone in its badness and dishonesty.

95

Why Arguments and Debates on the Trinity are a Waste of Time

by AllTimeJeff in

this isn't meant to be a shit stirring topic, just a thought or two, a memory really, from my jw days.

because i know i have more experience then most on debating the veracity of the trinity..... there are two camps, people of faith, and people of math.. people of faith will always be more convinced of the trinity every day, because for the most part, the teachers of the trinity are very up front about the fact that it is a mystery.. so the more you point out how illogical it is, the more a mystery the trinity becomes, and thus, it also becomes more real.

awesome!

Sulla

It may be that debates on the Trinity in online forums are a waste of time, but, if so, not for the reasons you say.

AllTimeJeff confuses the observation that the Trinity is a mystery with the idea that it is illogical and then sweeps everything up with the simpleminded mathematical observation that three is not equal to one. Honestly, the temptation is to use the equally empty comparison of water to the Trinity (liquid, solid, gas, yet still h2o!) in reply. Let's take a step back.

First, that the Trinity is a mystery doesn't have anything to do with its logical basis. It is a comment on our inability to completely grasp the meaning and cause of the thing. That is, the Trinity is a mystery the way love is a mystery: you don't explain love as much as you experience it. That doesn't mean love is illogical or doesn't exist, but it does mean that love is not like anything else and can only be understood as it is experienced.

That said, there is quite a lot of theological reflection on the meaning of the Trinity, focusing in various ways on, for example, a person and a nature might not be the same thing. It's all interesting and difficult, of course, and not the sort of thing that lends itself to online debate easily.

So, the idea that debates on the Trinity are pointless because those who accept the Trinity are illogical is really nothing more than self-flattery. Mental masturbation, I guess.

19

WT message about Apostates

by mankkeli in

jw
friends

because of listening to the devil and not rejecting his lies, the first human pair apostatized.

so, then, should we listen to apostates, read their literature, or examine their web sites on the internet?

if we love god and the truth, we will not do so.

Sulla

When I was learning about Catholicism, the priest in charge of the thing observed that there were lots of things written about the Church: some true, some not true. He suggested we read whatever we thought was interesting and then discuss it. What he said was, "I'm not afraid of anything you read."

If you really think you are right, you aren't afraid to engage the other side honestly. Simple as that.

62

"Every Knee" ??

by Perry in

isaiah 45:23 i have sworn by myself ... that unto me every knee shall bow.

philippians 2:10 that at the name of jesus every knee should bow.

in all my days of regular pioneering, i never made this connection.

Sulla

When I was near death, who created the crocodile is good poetry but not relief. The tears I shed. My pain brought me further from God, not closer. It did not leave me a miracle worker. I was not able to better witness to God's grace. Something monstrous is going on. Ah the free will glib answer. Be in excruciating pain and see what you think of the merits of free will. Why aren't the painful consequences of free will shared equally among humans. A loving creator allows droughts, famines, earthquakes, child abuse, rape, murder, cancer, parkinson's etc.

Let the free will proponents spend time as a hospice patient as I did. The free will as cause for my pain can go to hell.

You think you're the first person to die? You think you are the last?

96

The New World Translation Quote from an Elder

by howdidtihappen in

you've probably heard this before, but at a meeting last night the elder called the nwt the "rolls royce" of bibles.

i'm new to the jw bs (and as soon as i can break away, will do so.

) but do they also believe they have a superior bible to anyone elses outside the religion?

Sulla

Wonderment: I have never stated that Jehovah in the NT is permissible. I do not support introducing the divine name in the main text. I do support footnote or marginal material indicating when the divine name appears in quoted Scriptures where the name is present in the OT. That the NWT translators manifested bias in the NT by insisting on the name, yes, I agree with you. But I am of the opinion that removing it from the OT is just as bad. Sadly, people do not seem to care for the intended replacements of the name in the OT.

My point is that it is the product of a profound bias and not merely some sort of mistake or error in judgment. And it is a bias that goes directly to the central question of the entire Christian claim: who do you say I am? Thus, the NWT should be a translation that is clearly the most deliberately biased of all. Further, its removal from the OT can hardly be considerd to be "just as bad," since it was the Jews themselves who went and removed it (from the LXX). If it had been a problem for the early Christians, well, I suppose they could have made a point to use YHWH in their letters and Gospels. That they did not should be instructive (and normative).

62

"Every Knee" ??

by Perry in

isaiah 45:23 i have sworn by myself ... that unto me every knee shall bow.

philippians 2:10 that at the name of jesus every knee should bow.

in all my days of regular pioneering, i never made this connection.

Sulla

Keep reading, Perry, it gets worse. The NT made something of a habit of applying OT passages to Jesus, when the referent in the OT was YHWH. Pioneering didn't prepare you for that? Shocking!

13

Will mankind ever be united?

by jam in

jw
friends

this morning reading the paper, latinos target.

of more hate crimes.

while hate crimes against.

Sulla

On that, we agree. One version of this idyllic past is the idea of the corrupting influence of civilization -- the old idea of the "noble savage." This is at the heart of comments like Aussie OZ's that religion is a negative and divisive force; as if to say that we are not naturally violent and murderous, but religion makes us so.

I would disagree that this age is the first to champion human rights. I think we can find lots of cases where limitations on government and various rights were considered and instituted. The old Roman constitution, for example, forbade the execution of any citizen without a trial. Dare I say, the Law of the Jews had a similar set of limitations and protections for the poor and weak. So, I question whether we should be so quick to pat ourselves on the back: Liberty, Fraternity, Equality went sideways pretty quick, after all.

96

The New World Translation Quote from an Elder

by howdidtihappen in

you've probably heard this before, but at a meeting last night the elder called the nwt the "rolls royce" of bibles.

i'm new to the jw bs (and as soon as i can break away, will do so.

) but do they also believe they have a superior bible to anyone elses outside the religion?

Sulla

In the majority of cases, including with the NWT, the biases reflected in translation are more an indication of human limitations, than it is of dishonesty.

Sorry, Wonderment, I can't follow you here. The usage of "Jehovah" in the NT is a) entirely unsupported by any text whatever, making this a whole-cloth invention, and b) inserted into the NWT because is conveys the JWs Arian theology more effectively than a straight-up translation would. This is not a limitation, this is blatant dishonesty. The NWT is blatantly dishonest.