Posts by herk

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.

herk

Edited by - herk on 5 December 2002 8:6:59

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.

herk

UnDisfellowshipped,

the Cartoon you posted:

As I said, I have NO idea what your question means. If you care to explain it, I might be able to give you an answer.

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.

herk

UnDisfellowshipped,

It seems like you're as happy as a little child who found a new toy to play with. But please learn to spell it correctly. The phrase is Latin and contains no capital letters.

I find it hard to believe that you couldn't understand my obvious and simple question about your Cartoon.

You make statements like that only because you have an overly-inflated opinion of your ability to use the English language.

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.

herk

UnDisfellowshipped,

You are wrong in several of your views about unitarians. By the way, Unitarian with a capital "U" is only one segment of the unitarian community. Most unitarians do not belong to that denomination.

The Word is God, but actually The Word is "a god".

That is a JW teaching, but it isn't the belief of most biblical unitarians.

The Word is not the True God, and yet, the Word is not a False God either.

That is a ridiculous statement, on the face of it. George Washington was also not the True God nor the False God, for example, but so what?

The Word is the Mighty God, but not the Almighty God, but even if the Word is the Almighty God, the Word is not the Supreme Being.

Are you for real? Do you really believe you're being totally sincere with a statement like that? You seem to thrive on deliberately and dishonestly twisting the facts.

The Father commands that all angels WORSHIP the Word.

The "worship" (proskuneo) given to Christ is the same as that which is given to humans. (Hebrews 1:6; Matthew 18:26; Revelation 3:9) C hrist is never given the "worship" (latreuo) that only God receives. (Matthew 4:10)

The Word says that everyone should honor the Word just the same as they honor the Father.

Jesus said, "all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father." That does not mean that the Son is to be honoured EQUALLY as the Father is honoured. You completely disregard the way "even as" is used in other passages. For example, "My own know me, even as the Father knows me and I know the Father." (John 10:14) To be consistent, you would have to say that Christians know Christ no less than the Father does. According to your definition of "even as," Christians know everything about Christ just as much as the infinite mind of the Father knows Christ. You also ignore Jesus' prayer to the Father that his disciples "may be one even as we are." (John 17:11) He also asked "that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us." To be "in" God and to be "one" in the Trinitarian sense, Christians would necessarily have to be part of God. But, blindly, Trinitarians insist that being "one" means one thing in John 10 and something else in John 17.

But yet, whenever the Word is worshiped, it's not the same worship that the Father gets (even though the Greek word is the same).

As shown above, this is a deliberate and deceptive lie, nothing less.

Even though it says in Revelation Chapter 5, that the Father and the Word are receiving the exact same praise, honor, and glory, it's still only the Father being worshiped.

"Praise, honor, and glory" are not the same as "worship." Men, especially in the age to come, receive praise, honor and glory, but that does not make them Almighty God. And, of course, you know that here, too, you are deliberately lying and attempting to deceive. We've already discussed Revelation 5 together, but you reject the context in preference to your own personal opinion.

And, if the Word is supposed to be worshiped, that means you are worshiping a created being, which is blatent idolatry, but it's okay, because the Word is a "Special Created Being".

This is another gross distortion of what the Bible says, as shown above. You invented the phrase "Special Created Being," but by using quotation marks and capital letters, you seek deceptively to make it appear that this is unitarian terminology.

The Word was created by the Father, even though John 1:3 says that there has never been one thing that was not created by the Word, so the obvious answer is that the Word created Himself! Now it all makes sense!

Here is another gross distortion of what most biblical unitarians believe. You appear clever in your own mind, but only an outlandish fool would dare to so distort the facts and at the same time think that he is wise.

The Bible says the Word created all things, but He actually only created people.

Most biblical unitarians would deny such a teaching, showing that you have no idea what unitarian beliefs really are.

The Father made a big point of calling the Word "Immanuel" which means "GOD WITH US", but that has no significance.

The angel did not say Jesus would be God with us. He said Jesus would be NAMED "God with us." There is a big difference. Sadly, to that fact you are also totally blind because you feel the need for every little piece of evidence that might vindicate your pagan philosophy.

The Apostle Thomas declared that the Word is The God, but since the Apostle Peter was not the one who said it, it's not true.

This is another example of dishonesty and insincerity, a deliberate effort to distort the true picture of what unitarians in this thread have actually said.

But, that is not true, because the Father actually used the Word to create other things for Him, even though the Word is a creature.

That is a teaching of JWs, but it is not what all unitarians believe, by a long shot.

When the Pharisees accused the Word of Blasphemy, it was because they thought He was lying about being the Christ. It was NOT because they thought He was lying about being God (even though "Blasphemy" is either Speaking Against GOD, or Making yourself EQUAL to GOD).

Here again, you ignore the Bible definition, and invent one of your own.

The Father calls the Word God in Hebrews Chapter 1, but that doesn't mean that the Word is God, just because it doesn't!

Your error here is again due to totally disregarding what the Scriptures say by way of explanation. You don't have to be a unitarian to realize that Jesus was God in the same sense that the kings of Israel were God. Angels were also called Jehovah very often. Using your false logic, each angel would also have to be Almighty God.

Also, the entire Bible is written about a CREATED BEING!

UnDisfellowshipped, pardon me for saying so, but the truth is, you don't know how to be truthful. There's no point in my continuing to go through this ridiculour post. To say such stupid things about unitarians is a clear illustration that you have no love for truth at all. You simply seek to distort, lie, and deceive. The more you write, the more you continue to expose for all to see how dishonest and corrupt Trinitarians really are.

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.

herk

UnDisfellowshipped,

Whether you realize it or not, you Trinitarians do almost as much talking about yourselves as you do about your pagan theory. It's an awful lot of "me, me, me and I, I, I" You don't mind being arbitrary, arrogant, silly, nonsensical and foolish in your reasoning, so don't quibble when it's pointed out to you. You will find there will be less exposure of your personality weak points when you finally start to discuss the Bible as reasonable and intelligent persons. Your methods of argumentation would be ridiculous in any courtroom, and you would appear guilty simply because you keep avoiding facts and instead place a great amount of weight on personal opinion.

As for your question about the cartoon, I never answered it because your question made no sense. I have no idea what you had in mind.

I'm a unitarian due to my personal Bible reading and study, not because of belonging to some denomination. There are no typical unitarians. I know Protestant pastors and Catholic priests who are unitarian, even though their churches are Trinitarian. I really doubt there are any denominations besides the JWs and Christadelphians who teach you will be punished for believing in the Trinity. Possibly the Oneness Pentecostals also, but I don't know.

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.

herk

SOME VARIATIONS ON JOHN 1 :1

"God was the Truth".....Swann,G. N.T. 1947

"That personal expression ... was God"
.....Phillips, J.B. N.T. 1972 rev. ed.

"the Divine Reason was God"
.....Wade, G.W. Documents of the N.T. 1934

"the God-Idea was God-manifest"
.....Overbury, A.E. N.T. 1932

"the Logos was Divine"
.....Moffatt, J. The Bible 1950

"The Message was deity."
.....International Bible Translators N.T. 1981

"the Wisdom was God's Wisdom"
.....ymond, E.C. N.T. 1962 (original manuscript)

"the Word was a god".....Newcome, Archbishop N.T. 1808
.....Kneeland, A. N.T. 1823
.....Tomanek, J.L. N.T. 1958
.....Belsham N.T. 1809

"the Word was Divine"
.....Goodspeed, E.J. An American Translation N.T. 1923
.....Schonfield, H.L. Authentic N.T. 1956

"the Word was god"
.....Torrey, C.C. The Four Gospels 1947

"was with God and shared his nature"
.....Translator's N.T. 1973

"what God was, the Word was"
.....New English Bible 1961

"Wisdom was God"
.....Wakefield, G. N.T. 1795

"Finally John says that 'The Word was God.' There is no doubt that this is a difficult saying for us to understand, and it is difficult because Greek, in which John wrote, had a different way of saying things from the way in which English speaks. When the Greek uses a noun it almost always uses the definite article with it. The Greek for God is theos, and the definite article is ho. When Greek speaks about God it does not simply say theos; it says ho theos. Now, when Greek does not use the definite article with a noun that noun becomes much more like an adjective; it describes the character, the quality of the person. John did not say that the Word was ho theos; that would have been to say that the Word was identical with God; he says that the Word was theos - without the definite article - which means that the Word was, as we might say, of the very same charactor and quality and essence and being as God. When John said 'The Word was God' he was not saying that Jesus is identical with God, he was saying that Jesus is so perfectly the same as God in mind, in heart, in being that in Jesus we perfectly see what God is like" - Barclay, W. The Icily Study Bible - The Gospel of John, vol.1, page iii.

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.

herk

SwedishChef,

Is there some reason why you keep avoiding this one? This is the third time I'm posting it.

Herk

SwedishChef,

There is no evidence of a Trinity in Isaiah 44. The rendering you supplied is from the KJV. It should be obvious to the casual reader that something doesn't look right in the phrase "Thus saith the L ORD the King of Israel, and his redeemer the L ORD of hosts." The natural inclination of a sincere Bible student is to try to make sense of this. First, he notes that the L ORD is the true King of Israel. But the redeemer - whose redeemer is he? Is he Israel's redeemer or the L ORD 's redeemer? He cannot be the L ORD 's redeemer since he is the L ORD himself. Thus we naturally conclude that he is Israel's redeemer. This makes sense, since Isaiah often in other places identifies the L ORD of Hosts as Israel's Redeemer. (41:14; 43:14; 44:24; 47:4; 48:17; 49:7, 26; 54:5, 8; 60:16; 63:16)

In fact, this phrase or something similar is very common in Isaiah:

"I will help thee, saith the L ORD , and thy redeemer, the Holy One of Israel." (41:14)
"Thus saith the L ORD , your redeemer, the Holy One of Israel." (43:14)
"As for our redeemer, the L ORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel." (47:4)
"Thus saith the L ORD , thy Redeemer, the Holy One of Israel." (48:17)
"Thus saith the L ORD , the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One." (49:7)
"The L ORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel." (54:5)

So, Trinitarians are in error when they try to make the case that Jehovah the King of Israel is a person different from Jehovah of hosts, Israel's Redeemer. Checking other translations, we get a better rendering. For example, the NASB says at Isaiah 44:6, "Thus says the L ORD , the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the L ORD of hosts."

If they are two separate persons, why are both named Jehovah when the name of the Son of God is Jesus, not Jehovah which is the name of the Father? Furthermore, where is the Holy Spirit in this picture? If there were a suggestion of two different persons, the most this text would indicate is that God is a binitary, not a Trinity.

This One Person who is the God of Israel then proceeds to say, "I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God." In other words, Jehovah the Father is the first God; before him there was no Almighty God. And there will be none after him. He will bring to a successful conclusion the issue over Godship, forever vindicated as the one and only Almighty God.

Somehow, SC, you jumped from Isaiah to Zechariah 2:11 with the rest of your text in quotes:

"And many nations shall be joined to the Lord [Jehovah] in that day, and shall be my people: and I will dwell in the midst of thee, and thou shalt know that the Lord [Jehovah] of hosts hath sent me unto thee."

I suppose you intended to show that Jehovah is Jesus since Jehovah says to Israel "I will dwell in the midst of thee" and that they would know Jehovah "hath sent" him.

Here, again, a serious Bible student is puzzled at first due to the language. There is no problem in understanding how God would "dwell in the midst of thee," for he often said that in connection with the tabernacle and the temple. (Leviticus 26:2; Deuteronomy 23:14; Psalms 46:5; Isaiah 12:6) But, how could "the L ORD " be "sent" by "the L ORD "? Our understanding opens up when we discover who is actually speaking, as the following breakdown will show.

Verse 1: Zechariah ["I lifted up mine eyes"]
Verse 2: Zechariah and "a man" ["Then said I ... and he said unto me"]
Verse 3: Zechariah ["behold, the angel that talked with me"]
Verse 4: Zechariah and an angel ["said unto him ... speak to this young man"]
Verse 5: An angel quoting Jehovah ["For I, saith the L ORD "]
Verse 6-8: An angel quoting Jehovah ["saith the L ORD "]
Verse 9: An angel who says "ye shall know that the L ORD of hosts hath sent me."
Verse 10: And angel quoting Jehovah ["saith the L ORD "]
Verse 11-13: An angel ["and thou shalt know that the L ORD of hosts hath sent me unto thee"]

So, it is an angel, not Jehovah himself, who says "ye shall know that the L ORD of hosts hath sent me." Seven times in Zechariah, an angel says something like that. (1:10; 2:8, 9, 11; 4:9; 6:15; 7:12) This should also be noted: The angel was not predicting a future time when God would send someone. He was referring to a future realization that God had already sent his angels to Israel:

"Then said I, O my lord, what are these? And the angel that talked with me said unto me, I will shew thee what these be. And the man that stood among the myrtle trees answered and said, These are they whom the L ORD hath sent to walk to and fro through the earth. And they answered the angel of the L ORD that stood among the myrtle trees, and said, We have walked to and fro through the earth, and, behold, all the earth sitteth still, and is at rest." (1:9-11)

Isaiah 44:24 is self-explanatory. Yes, "there is one independant creator," and he is Israel's L ORD and Redeemer.

I hope this is helpful.

Herk

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.

herk

Meadow77,

Have you forgotten this one? I haven't seen your reply yet, using the Bible.

Herk

Meadow77 wrote:

John 10:35-36 -God refers to those as heirs in eternal life as gods.

WRONG! It refers to ancient judges in Israel as "gods." This is an example of how poorly Meadow77 reads what the Bible actually says.

In this same passage is where Christ A. states that he and the father are one.

Yes, and it is also where the Jews asked him if he was the Christ. They did not ask if he was God. Jesus answered: "I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in my Father's name, these testify of me." (John 10:24, 25) He performed miracles in his Father's name, not in his own name. Any government agent who represents a king is not the king himself. He is ONE with the king and does the king's bidding, but he is not the king. Meadow77 is totally blind to what Jesus is really saying. Nothing will open her blind eyes, even what Jesus said later by explanation: "Holy Father, keep them in your name, the name which you have given me, that they may be one even as we are." (John 17:11)

John 5: 18 Jews accuse Christ of blasphemy

Yes, they did, but they were wrong. Jesus healed on the Sabbath and claimed to be the "Son" of God. Like Trinitarians today, the Jews back then misunderstood Jesus. In their minds, he was claiming to be God, even though he never said he was God. Meadow77 won't admit that. She blindly reads into everything, just as the hypocritical Pharisees did, that Jesus claimed to be God despite his not having done so even once.

John 5:23-Jesus again makes himself equal with God

Why does Meadow77 say this? Because she accurately understands what Jesus meant? Far from it! Jesus said, "all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father." In Meadow77's mind, that means the Son is to be honoured EQUALLY as the Father is honoured. She completely disregards the way "even as" is used in other passages. For example, "My own know me, even as the Father knows me and I know the Father." (John 10:14) To be consistent, Meadow77 would have to say that Christians know Christ no less than the Father does. According to her definition of "even as," Christians know everything about Christ just as much as the infinite mind of the Father knows Christ. She also ignores Jesus' prayer to the Father that his disciples "may be one even as we are." (John 17:11) He also asked "that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us." To be "in" God and to be "one" in the Trinitarian sense, Christians would necessarily have to be part of God. But, blindly, Meadow77 insists that being "one" means one thing in John 10 and something else in John 17.

Blasphemy to the Jews was making oneself equal with God. They state this everytime they refer to Christ and his blasphemy.

FALSE! Blasphemy was making the claim to be equal to God. Jesus never claimed that. He claimed to be the Christ or Messiah and the Son of God, nothing more. Just as the Jews lied about him, Trinitarians like Meadow77 still do today.

She also lies about the "worship" of Jesus. She rejects the knowledge that the Greek word for "worship" (proskuneo) at Matthew 28:9 is the word always used with reference to honouring men and angels. Christ is never given the "worship" (latreuo) that only God receives.

She lies too about the name Emmanuel. It simply means "God with us," a name similar to many other names that indicate something special about the relationship between God and the one so named. In Genesis 28:19 we read "And he called the name of that place Bethel." Bethel means "house of God." Since the place was named "house of God," does this mean that God lived inside this house? According to the Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, "The name Immanuel could mean 'God be with us' in the sense 'God help us!'" (Vol. 2, page 686) Meadow77 is a prime example of how the Trinitarians constantly base their arguments on catch words or phrases and then quickly gloss over the details. The angel did not say concerning Jesus that "HE shall be Emmanuel." He said that "his NAME shall be Emmanuel." There is a big difference between saying "His name shall be 'God is with us'" and saying "He shall be God with us."

Pretending to know Bible terms in their original languages, Meadow77 wrote:

A man and his wife become one in spirit but this does not mean they become the same person. The word for one in Hebrew used in this passage is echod. The term echod in Hebrew does not denote absolute unity but rather composite unity.

First of all, the comparison of a husband and wife with the Trinitarian God is so ridiculous that one wonders how people can say it with a straight face. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. They are two separate entities. But the Trinity is ONE entity composed of three persons. Even after marriage a man and woman are still what they were before. They are separable while the members of the Trinity are inseparable. Anyone who claims to see a resemblance is either just plain stupid or is out to deceive and mislead.

Secondly, in most instances the Hebrew word echod does indeed denote a solitary or "absolute unity." It is a bold-faced lie to deny that fact. Abraham is called echod in Isaiah 51:2. Does that make him a trinity? Many other examples could be given.

For another example we could use Numbers 13. Here echod is used when referring to a cluster of grapes. Only one stem of grapes is represented, but we know that there are many grapes on one cluster. Hence the use of echod. Where else do we see echod? Deut 6:4 The Lord our God is one(echod) Lord. HHMMMMM

The text actually states: "Then they came to the valley of Eshcol and from there cut down a branch with a single cluster of grapes; and they carried it on a pole between two men, with some of the pomegranates and the figs." Which is the echod, Meadow77? Is it the grapes or the cluster? The CLUSTER is obviously meant, but as the saying goes, "You can't see the forest for the trees."

Regardless of interpretation the fact that Jesus was the word is not disputable. Your attempt to change Jesus from the word to words is weak.

Why is it weak? Simply because you say so? John 1:14 says the word "was made" or "became" flesh. Just as the same word of God became a book that we know as the Bible, God could just as easily have made that same word into a flesh and blood person. That is what the "word" became, something it was not before it became "flesh."

John 1:1 states, according to the popular NASB: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Now give that the Trinitarian twist: "In the beginning was Christ, and Christ was with God, and Christ was God." If Christ was with God (the Trinity), he could not have been God (the Trinity). There might be some evidence for the pagan doctrine if John had said something like "the Word was with the Father, and the Word was God." But John doesn't say anything like that.

We are not to limit Gods existence to our human reasoning powers.

The answer from Jesus and all other biblical non-Trinitarians: "You worship what you do not know; we worship what we KNOW." (John 4:22) "This is eternal life, that they may KNOW you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." (John 17:3)

Jehovah gives his glory to no-one Isaiah 42:8, 48:11. Now read John 17:5. Does God contradict himself?

The Bible DOES contradict itself when it's read as Meadow77 reads it. She should read the context in Isaiah, and note that Jehovah is making a contrast between himself and all FALSE gods and idols. Jesus RECEIVES glory from God. He is EXALTED in order to receive it. But this is something temporary. Jesus will someday hand back to God some of what has been GIVEN to him "when he hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when he has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death. For he has put all things in subjection under his feet. But when he says, 'All things are put in subjection,' it is evident that he is excepted who put all things in subjection to him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to him, so that God may be all in all." (1 Corinthians 15:24-28)

While on earth he did not give up his deity.

Where is the text that says he had deity while on the earth?

When Jesus says that the Father is greater than him, he is correct.

Yes, he was correct. He was not God. He was a man. If he was God in any way or fashion, he would not have been lesser than the Father in any way, according to the requirements of the false, pagan Trinity doctrine.

The angels are never said to have been created in Gods image, only man.

Then how did angels make their appearance - as women, as animals, as UFO aliens? Be sensible!

We are told that He created man in his image. The only sense this passage makes is if he is speaking to someone who is already co-eternal with him.

Meaning what? That each of us is a trinity? If that makes sense to Meadow77, little wonder she doesn't understand the Bible and has accepted a pagan deity that was invented and created by men.

It is odd that you would admit that the Holy Spirit is an extension of himself, but God. Are you a completely separate person from your spirit?

Does Meadow77 have any idea what "extension" means? Her arm is an extension of herself. Does that mean her arm is "completely separate" from her as a person? In the same way, the Bible clearly shows that the Holy Spirit is an extension of God. It is called his hands and his fingers, for example, when we compare texts like Psalms 33:6 and 104:30 with texts like Psalms 8:3, 6; 19:1; 102:25; Romans 1:20 and Hebrews 1:10.

Clearly the Spirit has a personality, you can deny this but the scriptures make it plain. Acts 5:3-4 Acts 13:2-4 Acts 21:10-11

It isn't unusual in the Scriptures for something to be personified. Wisdom is said to have "children." (Luke 7:35) Sin and death are spoken of as being kings. (Romans 5:14, 21) While some texts say that the spirit "spoke," other passages make clear that this was done through angels or humans. (Acts 4:24, 25; 28:25; Matthew 10:19, 20). Compare Acts 20:23 with 21:10, 11. At 1 John 5:6-8, not only the spirit but also "the water and the blood" are said to bear witness.

Meadow77 would like to teach others what the Bible says about God. She should first learn to read the Bible correctly and not lie about what she has read.

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.

herk

Edited by - herk on 4 December 2002 22:26:59

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.