The Trinity

by meadow77 740 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Reborn2002
    Reborn2002

    Maybe to inject a little levity and humor into the middle of your paragraph after paragraph of contradicting nonsense.

    As long as it is done in a civil manner and does not promote racially-targeted hate propaganda, any person may comment on the thread you started.

    Some of you believe in a supreme being who is really 3 but/and 1 (yeah right)

    Some of you believe otherwise.

    I believe in no God at all.

    At least everyone's beliefs should be fairly represented.

    By the way, I would not go so far as to call all atheists to be walking down a hopeless road. On your deathbed (let us say for example you die of old age) when your body is deteriorated and rotten, your limbs are useless and arthritic, your hair has fallen out, and you cannot even control your own bodily functions, meanwhile your sons and daughters (if you have any kids) are crying and suffering because you are no longer going to be with them, you ask yourself then where your God of love is.

    You have a HOPE, but it is a hope unproven. Time and again people have shown facts which discredit your cause, and time and again you IGNORE them and DO NOT ADDRESS THEM, but continue spouting your pro-Trinitarian rhetoric.

    That about sums it up for now. So continue addressing the other people who bother to engage you in a 3 Gods vs 1 God debate. Your going to ignore everyone else and spew more crap anyway.

  • William Penwell
    William Penwell

    Reborn2002,

    No sense in trying to reason with these "tunnel" visioned people. They have no concept of reasoning power when it comes to something of faith. Logic and thinking is thrown out the window. The discussion is on the trinity but unless you buy into what an old book of myths and superstitions says you are wrong. I have started a post, "Is the Bible really the word of God???"

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=41390&site=3

    Will

  • herk
    herk

    SwedishChef and Undisfellowshipped,

    I've been pretty tough on you, Undisfellowshipped, perhaps more so than I should have been. I'll explain why. In another thread, you commended SwedishChef and gave him your blessing on this topic, urging him on. I probably shouldn't have taken from that the idea that you are two peas in a pod, but I did. Re-examining all your posts, I see I was mistaken. While I feel you both distort the Scriptures without realizing it, you yourself haven't been as sarcastic as SC. Still, you have suggested that those of us who don't believe in the Trinity are nothing more than confused ex-JWs and that we really don't understand what the Trinity is all about. Both Dakota and I are probably much older than you in age and in dealing with this topic. We've had our experiences with seminary professors and other scholars. We're not lacking in experience on this topic by any means. I appreciate that you expressed an apology on that matter.

    As for you SC, right from the beginning of your entry into this thread, you gave me the impression of being a smart alec wise guy. You frowned on reputable scholarship and sound reasoning with terms like bogus, corrupted, dorky, and narrow minded. You've pontificated that we non-Trinitarians are unsaved, that we don't trust the Bible and that we reject Jesus Christ, simply because we don't line up with your Fundamentalist mindset. You've stated that one or another of us has little regard for the Scriptures, that we view God as we wish, and that we are a law unto ourselves. You made other slams that were more subtle.

    I don't think either of you are bad persons. I think you need to bear in mind that we who use the Bible to show why we disagree with you are also not bad persons. We are Christians with strong beliefs just as you appear to be.

    I don't think the discussion has gotten out of hand. I'm making these comments simply to show where I've been coming from.

    Herk

  • gumby
    gumby

    I have seen so many trinity discussions here that I usually don't get involved anymore much.

    I for one am a person who believed in it for quite a while and it took me a long time to get there. I started a thread here once about "Did Jesus have a beggining"? You may want to look it up.

    Anyway, after the discussion I no longer believed in it. Why? Because my scriptures I was using to prove Jesus had no beggining were being wrongly understtod by me and it was PROVEN.

    Scriptures like Jesus is from everlasting to everlasting...didn't mean it was without beginning as other scriptures were used to prove that isn't what the context revealed. Am I saying the scriptures say Jesus had a beggining? No.....they do not. To me they show silence in this area. There is much evidence to show that the church imposed this doctrine that wasn't understood by early Christians.

    I an not going to get into this so don't bother throwing scriptures at me.....I've been there done that and read them all. Besides.....am at a point in life that I highly question the bible being from God so scripture at this point dosen't carry much weight with me.

    Alan F has written on this subject. If your truley intrested...look this subject up in the index from this board.

  • herk
    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

  • JosephMalik
    JosephMalik

    Is. 44:6-7 "Thus saith the Lord [Jehovah] the King of Israel, and his redeemer the Lord [Jehovah] of hosts; I am the first, and I am the last; and beside me there is no God. 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."

    This is just a cross reference: 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;"

    Remember, there is one independent creator.

    SwedishChef ,

    The verses are fine. Your little comment is the problem. There is one creator for the heavens and the earth alone. This much is true. But there is another literal creator for the world of mankind. When mankind is finally restored completely by means of a kingdom then they will be joined to the LORD as shown in Is 44:6-7 and not before. What you cannot do is patch the verses together the way you are doing in order to make this same Lord creator of the nations as well. This is another example of how Trinitarians distort scripture which also teaches how such nations will be joined to this LORD also called Father:

    1 Corinthians 15:24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. Joseph

  • gumby
    gumby

    What does it matter if there is a Trinity....remember...your both saved if you believe in Christ.

    Jesus didn't say you had to believe he was God to be saved.....just believe he came, died, was raised. Both of you guys believe that right? Why argue then?

  • The Firm
    The Firm

    I must admit that Reborn2002 has injected some very funny comic relief in this otherwise tense thread. However I have heard that "there is no such thing as an atheist in a foxhole".

    Perhaps I missed this one earlier, but does everyone know about Isaiah 9:6? It's about the coming Christ who will be "wonderful Counselor, Mighty God...". My JW friends have claimed something like "we believe Jesus is a mighty god, but not Almighty God". So I ask, "then the use of the Tetragrammaton wouldn't apply in this case?" Immediately they say "NO". Then I show them a copy of that verse from a hebrew/english interlinear which definitely has the Tetragrammaton ascribed to the coming Christ. The stunned look is priceless!

  • fjtoth
    fjtoth

    Firm,

    Would you mind telling the rest of us in which verse you found the Tetragrammaton? It isn't in any interlinear translation of Isaiah 9:6. You must be thinking of something else.

    fjtoth

    Edited by - fjtoth on 29 November 2002 19:3:8

  • William Penwell
    William Penwell

    Gumby said,

    What does it matter if there is a Trinity....remember...your both saved if you believe in Christ.

    Jesus didn't say you had to believe he was God to be saved.....just believe he came, died, was raised. Both of you guys believe that right? Why argue then?

    Amen,

    Will

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit