08 Aug 09
1 edit
Originally posted by duecerLogic would dictate that Jesus was God, only a warped logic would conclude that Christ was God, savior he was, Almighty God he was not, have a think about this
Titus 2:13while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, 14who gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.
2Peter !:1Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who through the righteous en a demi-god. there is no other savior apart from God. Logic would dictate that Jesus is God
That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the earth. - (Psalm 83:18),
oh and one of my favourites
Keep this mental attitude in you that was also in Christ Jesus, who, although he was existing in Gods form, gave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. - (Philippians 2:5-6)
08 Aug 09
Rev 22:12"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. 13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
These are the words of Jesus. If he is the begining and the end, then who could have possibly created him?
08 Aug 09
1 edit
Originally posted by dueceri thought that would be perfectly obvious, but hey its just like a trinitarian to pull a scripture from a book that is almost entirely illustrative to mould it to his purpose,
Rev 22:12"Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done. 13I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.
These are the words of Jesus. If he is the begining and the end, then who could have possibly created him?
(Colossians 1:15) . . .He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. . .
it is now quite apparent why you support the rendering of John 1:1 as reading the word was God, for it fits in with your pre Christian pagan doctrine of the trinity, why else!
08 Aug 09
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieJohn 20: 26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
Logic would dictate that Jesus was God, only a warped logic would conclude that Christ was God, savior he was, Almighty God he was not, have a think about this
The perponderance of evidence and 2000 years of church tradition side with trinitarians
That people may know that you, whose name is Jehovah, You alone are the Most High over all the ea ...[text shortened]... ave no consideration to a seizure, namely, that he should be equal to God. - (Philippians 2:5-6)
28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
the preponderance of evidence and 2000 years of church history side with the trinitarians
08 Aug 09
2 edits
Originally posted by duecerheard it a zillion times, if you are going to state that, then you will have to have a think about this,
John 20: 26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"
(John 20:17) . . .Jesus said to her: “Stop clinging to me. For I have not yet ascended to the Father. But be on your way to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and you Father and to my God and your God.. . .
actually this is the usual bumf that one gets when meeting a trinitarian, the forum will note the character of the discussion, not one verse is dwelt upon, not one question is answered, jumping from one scripture to the next, been there a zillion times and in each and every instance i have come away thinking, wow are those people for real!
08 Aug 09
1 edit
Originally posted by duecernope the trinity was obviously unknown to either Paul or the Christ, for they never mention it, not even once, so you had umm better cut off at least four hundred years from your rather generous estimation.
John 20: 26A week later his disciples were in the house again, and Thomas was with them. Though the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you!" 27Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side. Stop doubting and believe."
28Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my ...[text shortened]...
the preponderance of evidence and 2000 years of church history side with the trinitarians
08 Aug 09
1 edit
As for church tradition, i find these quotes quite telling
In the preface to Edward Gibbon's History of Christianity, we read: "If Paganism was conquered by Christianity, it is equally true that Christianity was corrupted by Paganism. The pure Deism of the first Christians . . . was changed, by the Church of Rome, into the incomprehensible dogma of the trinity. Many of the pagan tenets, invented by the Egyptians and idealized by Plato, were retained as being worthy of belief."
"Christendom has done away with Christianity without being quite aware of it" (Soren Kierkegaard, cited in Time magazine, Dec. 16, 1946, p. 64).
08 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobiekind of how you never answer direct questions about the legitamacy of C.T. Russell, or about the failed prophecies of the JW leadership?
actually this is the usual bumf that one gets when meeting a trinitarian, the forum will note the character of the discussion, not one verse is dwelt upon, not one question is answered, jumping from one scripture to the next, been there a zillion times and in each and every instance i have come away thinking, wow are those people for real![/b]
08 Aug 09
5 edits
Originally posted by dueceri do not discuss it, because if you really want to know what Jehovahs witnesses believe, why don't you write to the watchtower society. Here is the official web address, www.watchtower.org, but it is plainly obvious that these misjudgements are simply something for you to grasp at, because you cannot fault the work of Jehovah witnesses, you must either attack the character of individuals or his family or expose their flaws and mistakes, so be it, for it is incredible to think that they should not have made any mistakes, but nope, you people in your unreasonableness have tried to assign perfection to them, where none exists, you have placed the bar up here, where your own level is somewhat different, there is a very strong word for that, it is termed hypocrisy.
kind of how you never answer direct questions about the legitamacy of C.T. Russell, or about the failed prophecies of the JW leadership?
if i really wanted to, i could go to town on Christendom, why don't we talk about brother Calvin as he is commonly referred to, you know the man who burnt Michael Servetus at a stake for printing a document against the trinity, why don't we talk about him, a murderer, mmm, or Catholicism and their abysmal record of child abuse? why don't I harp on about them? or the gay issue in your American churches when you are prepared quite literally to marry persons of the same sex when it is clear as day that it is condemned in scripture, or your support of wars, in which millions of innocent people and soldiers have lost their lives? why don't i go to town?
actually I have consistently stated that Charles Russell, had never claimed that he was infallible, nor that he was divinely inspired, nor that he was a prophet, nor that the watchtower magazine was inspired. It is quite clear that he was a human being and prone to mistakes like the rest of us. The mere fact that the Watchtower society has consistently revised its teachings while the rest of Christendom have stuck to their traditions is telling enough.
we are discussing John 1;1 and your rather blatant acceptance of an erroneous rendering of the verse, in the face of unbelievable counter evidence to support a doctrine which Christ nor Paul ever mentioned, no not once, does that not strike you as strange, it does to me.
i come here to discuss my Biblical beliefs, which i have spent a considerable amount of time and effort on researching and confirming, if you want to know about the watchtower society, write to them.
08 Aug 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou "came here to discuss biblical beliefs", yet time and again you are shown the truth, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence you poo-poo the argument like a nanny talking to a six year old. The case for trinitarianism is strong, and stands the test. The case for JW beliefs and unitarianism is full of holes which are consistantly pointed out. time and time again your rebuttal is "nope, no siree! that's not true. sahidic coptic text, blah blah blah". If you are basing your belief system, and gambling your soul on a doubtful translation (as has been proven) then you are not nearly the scholar you claim to be.
i do not discuss it, because if you really want to know what Jehovahs witnesses believe, why don't you write to the watchtower society. Here is the official web address, www.watchtower.org, but it is plainly obvious that these misjudgements are simply something for you to grasp at, because you cannot fault the work of Jehovah witnesses, you must ei ...[text shortened]... esearching and confirming, if you want to know about the watchtower society, write to them.
08 Aug 09
3 edits
Originally posted by duecertruth and trinity should not be mentioned even in the same breath, it is pre Christian, pagan, unknown to Christ or Paul and elevates the Christ to a position that he never even considered, it is a complete and utter piece of dogma and nonsense, i never even believed it prior to accepting the Christ as my model.
you "came here to discuss biblical beliefs", yet time and again you are shown the truth, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence you poo-poo the argument like a nanny talking to a six year old. The case for trinitarianism is strong, and stands the test. The case for JW beliefs and unitarianism is full of holes which are consistantly pointed out. time and tim btful translation (as has been proven) then you are not nearly the scholar you claim to be.
You state that it has been proven, oh duecer, please, your evidence regarding the sahidic coptic text amounts to, 'it is not as reliable as the Greek text, for which your evidence remains, nil! i will read any translation of Scripture with the exception of the NIV, for it has removed the divine name almost completely, something for which the translators had no authority to do, no not one iota should they have removed. you cannot stomach that the New world translation has merit, that it has the backing of an ancient text, soundly based in scholarly work and accurate to a superlative degree, then so be it, believe what you will, it is but another reflection of your willingness to cling to your ancient dogma!
there is no such thing as a soul to be gambled away, which somehow departs from the body after death. if you read the text you will see that Adam became a living soul, he was not given a soul, the phrase simply means a living breathing creature, animals are also considered souls, and i have nothing to fear from your hell fire teaching and eternal torment, it to is a fallacy.
08 Aug 09
Originally posted by duecerThis verse seems to suggest that Paul thought that Christ and God were distinct and separate entities, and not one and the same:
you "came here to discuss biblical beliefs", yet time and again you are shown the truth, yet in the face of overwhelming evidence you poo-poo the argument like a nanny talking to a six year old. The case for trinitarianism is strong, and stands the test. The case for JW beliefs and unitarianism is full of holes which are consistantly pointed out. time and tim ...[text shortened]... btful translation (as has been proven) then you are not nearly the scholar you claim to be.
1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
08 Aug 09
Originally posted by Rajk999Just take off "and the head of", and you have "Christ is God".
This verse seems to suggest that Paul thought that Christ and God were distinct and separate entities, and not one and the same:
1 Cor 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.