The Trinity

by meadow77 740 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • herk
    herk

    Joseph,

    Thanks for your kind words regarding the sources I listed for John 1:1. I really can't take full credit since the work of compiling them was done by someone else. I merely arranged them in date order.

    I read your book about a year ago, and I agree that Matthew 28:19 and 1 John 5:7 come nowhere near providing "proof" for the Trinity teaching.


    Lew W,

    Perhaps you are aware that Satan is called ho theos in 2 Corinthians 4:4. That, of course, does not mean that he is Almighty God. He is to the world, but not in the sight of the true God and those who worship him.

    So, Trinitarians have a very weak case when they teach that Jesus is Almighty God simply because Thomas exclaimed to him, "The Lord of me and The God of me!" As the Septuagint shows, even King David and his descendants upon the throne were addressed as ho theos. (Psalm 45:1, 6)

    The Hebrew also bears that out. It always amuses me to see Trinitarians reject their own scholars when they show David was called "God." The following is something, for example, that UnD and S-Chef both scoffed at in earlier posts, which is a footnote in the NIV Study Bible:

    "Ps 45 A song in praise of the king on his wedding day (see title). He undoubtedly belonged to David's dynasty, and the song was probably used at more than one royal wedding. Since the bride is a foreign princess (see vv. 10, 12), the wedding reflects the king's standing as a figure of international significance (see note on v. 9). Accordingly he is addressed as one whose reign is to be characterized by victories over the nations (vv. 3-5; cf. Ps 2; 110). As a royal son of David, he is a type (foreshadowing) of Christ."

    The footnote for verse 6 says:

    "45:6 O God. Possibly the king's throne is called God's throne because he is God's appointed regent. But it is also possible that the king himself is addressed as 'god.' The Davidic king (the 'L ORD 's anointed,' 2Sa 19:21), because of his special relationship with God was called at his enthronement the 'son' of God (see 2:7; 2Sa 7:14; 1Ch 28:6; cf. 89:27). In this psalm, which praises the king and especially extols his 'splendor and majesty' (v. 3), it is not unthinkable that he was called 'god' as a title of honor (cf. Isa 9:6). Such a description of the Davidic king attains its fullest meaning when applied to Christ, as the author of Hebrews does (Heb 1:8-9)."

    Thanks for your always good thoughts on this topic.

    Herk

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    Tell me, Dakota, how is it that in Zechariah 2:10 Jehovah himself says "they shall look upon me whom they have pierced"?

    I give up, how do you see it? Zechariah 2:10. Sing and rejoice, O daughter of Zion: for, lo, I come, and I will dwell in the midst of thee, saith the Lord.

    Okay, levity aside, I know you mean 12:10 and you are really grasping for straws. Isn't it a good thing you Born Agains have come along to tell the Jews what their ancient writings *really* mean?

    10. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn (KJV)

    10. "And I will pour on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they have pierced; they will mourn for Him as one mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn. (NKJV)

    10. ``Then I will pour out the spirit of grace and prayer on all the people of Jerusalem, and they will look on him they pierced, and mourn for him as for an only son, and grieve bitterly for him as for an oldest child who died. (LVB)

    10. "And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of compassion and supplication, so that, when they look on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as one weeps over a first-born. (RSV)

    10. But over the House of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem I shall pour out a spirit of grace and prayer, and they will look to me. They will mourn for the one whom they have pierced as though for an only child, and weep for him as people weep for a first-born child. (NJB)

    10. I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and petition; and they shall look on him whom they have thrust through, and they shall mourn for him as one mourns for an only son, and they shall grieve over him as one grieves over a first-born. (NAB)

    It would appear that even your scholars are once again in disagreement on proper translation. But, that is the problem relying on only one version, veen as perfect as you thnk the KJV is, that is, until it's wording goes agains the trinity, then it is not the perfect one you thought.

    But please note an inconsistency in your preferred version, the additional words, "and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son." Now think really hard about this, I realize it may be difficult for you, Swedie, but please try. If, as the KJV seems to say, it was really God saying he was to be pierced, why would he also say "they shall mourn for *him*?" Would it not be "they shall mourn *me*?"

    If God was to be the one pierced, why would he also say they will mourn another?

    I think your answer is summed up in later translations as to who Zechariah 12:10 actually says will be pierced.

    Like I said, you are really grasping at straws with this one. Running out of arguments, are you?

    Lew W

    Edited by - DakotaRed on 10 December 2002 15:11:19

  • herk
    herk

    More translations that say "the one" or "him" instead of "me" at Zechariah 12:10:

    • "They shall look at him whom they have stabbed." - American Translation
    • "They shall look on him whom they stabbed." - Moffatt
    • "They shall look unto him whom they have pierced." - American Standard Version, footnote
    • "They shall look upon Him who they have pierced." - Modern language Bible
    • "Their eyes will be turned to the one who was wounded." - Bible in Basic English
    • "They will look at the one they stabbed to death." - The Bible in Living English
    • "They will look at the one whom they have pierced." - The Jerusalem Bible
    • "They will look at the one whom they stabbed to death." - Today's English Version
    • "When they look on the one whom they have pierced." - New Revised Standard Version
    • "When they see the one they pierced with a spear." - Contemporary English Bible

    At John 10:37, even the KJV quotes Zechariah 12:10 with "him" instead of "me":

    • "They shall look on him whom they pierced."
  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed

    Hey Swedie, interesting quote I just ran across on the SBC website from A.T. Robertson, "World Reknowned Greek Scholar," as you claim.

    A.T. Robertson Professor of New Testament Interpretation
    Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (1895-1934)

    (God) gave a revelation to make it free from errors, I believe He first made it inerrant as He made nature so. Hence, I boldly hold that the analogy of nature is in favor of inerrancy of God's original scriptures. ...Why in the world is it that there is such a terrible contention by destructive higher critics? ...I think I can tell. The school wants to change the whole order... they wish to get an entering wedge by having it admit that there were inaccuracies... in order to shift and change the order of the Word to suit themselves.
    --"The Relative Authority of Scripture and Reason"

    http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/heritage/robertson.asp

    Please note, this was said long before the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, as Mr. Robertson passed away some 14 years prior to their discovery. Which do you think is more favorable to inerrancy, the King James, translated and translated and translated, until it was finally penned in the 1600s? Or, the oldest scriptures ever found? After all, did not the "World Reknowned Greek Scholar," A. T. Robertson say "ORIGINAL?" Or, is what was written some 1600 years *after* Christ considered as "ORIGINAL?"

    Herk: Thanks for the additional versions of Zechariah 12:10. You seem to have a few mre translations available than I do.

    Yes, I am fully aware of the the usuage of theos applied to Satan at 2 Cor. 4:4. That is why I personally have no problem with the NWT usage of "and the Word was a god" at John 1:1. It seems to be the conditioning of trinitarians that the term god always refers to YHWH that seems to give them problems with it, in my estimation.

    Thank you for all your good comments and even the cartoons, I am enjoying them.

    Lew W

  • DakotaRed
    DakotaRed
    He said that one of the main things the "spirits" had told him was that Jesus was "a god", not THE God, and that Jesus was the first created angel of God.
    Now, why would DEMONS tell someone that Jesus is actually "a god" and not The God?

    UnD, interesting that you should ask this about Gerbers claims.

    Luke 8:28. When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with thee, Jesus, thou Son of God most high? I beseech thee, torment me not. (KJV)

    Other versions state it as "Son of the Most High God."

    Here, Jesus is speaking to the demons, Legion, that had entered a man, prior to Jesus' casting them out and they entering a herd of pigs to run into a lake and choke. Please note, these deomns, who obviously knew Jesus in his prehuman existence, do not refer to him as God, but the Son of God most high? Does not that fit with what Gerber is discredited as saying? I don't need spirits talking to me to see it.

    All 34 of the other Translations I checked read the exact same as the King James Version of John 1:1.

    Yes, I readily agree that most do translate it that way. But, majority rule does not make it correct. Herk supplied quite a list of other versions that word it differently. Bear in mind, most translations are as biased towards the trinity as many claim the JWs NWT is against it. I seriously doubt there is a translation in existence that doesn't have some bias in it's translation. I see this as fueling the claim many who no longer believe in the Bible have as to it contradicting itself. That is why I seek what is beyond the words on the page and strive to get the essence of the writers intent, not make it fit what I believe today.

    Lew W

  • herk
    herk

    UnDisfellowshipped wrote:

    The Watchtower used Greber's Bible to try and support their Translation of John 1:1. Do you know who Greber was? He was a SPIRIT MEDIUM who contacted DEMONS!

    Why should that bother Trinitarians? The principle source of the Trinity doctrine is occultism. The pictures I presented several days ago are examples of how the Trinity concept was engrafted into the Catholic Church and, in turn, into Protestantism. Hindu symbolism is just one of many pagan idols these churches have used as they embraced the Triune-God concept. At the Roman Council of Nicea many of the bishops in attendance practiced paganism and eastern mysticism in their own states and provinces, which at the time were under Roman law. If we look deeper into this issue we will find many more symbols the pagan Trinity nations conceived, and we will clearly see how they were engrafted into the modern Trinity dogma, starting at Rome. Eastern mysticism, Hinduism, Kabbalism, Gnosticism, Talmudism -- all these practices and beliefs have made inroads into modern Trinitarian theology. It is this occult Trinity spirit and concept that promoted the Inquisition, anti-semitism, and the burning by both Catholics and Protestants of innocent people who would not accept the Trinity. The Trinity is an occult symbol of war with the truth of the Bible.

    The Roman Church and other denominations that uphold the Trinity will vehemently deny this. However, the study of many scholars, archeologists and historians confirms it. Many books have been published that trace Trinity worship, as it is known today, back to ancient Israel in Babylonian captivity. The apostate people adopted and observed the teachings and practices of Nimrod, thereby corrupting the true worship of the God of Israel. The Old Testament proves this time and time again. From these practices we find the birth of Kabbalism, then Mysticism, Hinduism, Egyptian Mysticism, and Gnosticism. Down it traveled from generation to generation until it reached Rome at the Nicene Council of 325 A.D. From that point in time, the Babylonian Trinity concept entered the New Testament age and has become the most cunning and divisive heresy in the churches that claim Jesus as Lord today. It is the primary reason why we have sectarian denominations in the church.

    So, it is ironic and hypocritical for Trinitarians to point the finger at one occultist who didn't believe in the Trinity when the very foundation of the entire Trinitarian system is rooted in occultism.

    Herk

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    I still see no point in discussing anything with Herk because what I say will probably just be twisted around and turned into something I didn't say.

    Herk never even did respond to my important question asking whether or not the Scriptures that say "Calling on the Lord" and "Calling on Yahweh" were talking about Prayer, and if they weren't talking about Prayer, what were they talking about?

    In fact, I don't think I have seen anyone comment on that question.

    I would have thought Herk would have commented on those Verses, after all, if Herk is correct about everyone who prays to Jesus is a false teacher, then those Verses would prove that the Apostle Paul and several other Christians were false teachers, and that would be a huge discovery!

    Obviously, there are some people here who have not read up on Johannes Greber, the spirit-medium, either that or they just don't care.

    So, one of Satan's demons comes to Johannes Greber and tells Greber how the Bible should REALLY be Translated, and some people on this Forum seem to think that the demon was telling Greber the truth about the Bible.

    Sure.

    Am I being "too hard" on Greber?

    What does the Bible say about contacting "spirits"?

    Deuteronomy 18:10: There shall not be found with you anyone who makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one who uses divination, one who practices sorcery, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer,
    Deuteronomy 18:11: or a charmer, or one who consults with a spirit, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
    Deuteronomy 18:12: For whoever does these things is an abomination to Yahweh: and because of these abominations Yahweh your God does drive them out from before you.

    Leviticus 19:31: "'Don't turn to those who are spirit mediums, nor to the wizards. Don't seek them out, to be defiled by them. I am Yahweh your God.

    Leviticus 20:6: "'The person that turns to those who are spirit mediums, and to the wizards, to play the prostitute after them, I will even set My face against that person, and will cut him off from among his people.

    1st Chronicles 10:13: So Saul died for his trespass which he committed against Yahweh, because of the Word of Yahweh, which he didn't keep; and also because he asked counsel of one who was a spirit medium, to inquire thereby,
    1st Chronicles 10:14: and didn't inquire of Yahweh: therefore He killed him, and turned the kingdom to David the son of Jesse.

    I will post some more things that Greber said the "spirits" told him about the Bible, in his book, Communication With the Spirit World, and then you can decide if the demons were giving Greber correct and truthful information or not:

    Page 6: "If, therefore, we, as faithful servants of God, or at any rate, as honest seekers after the truth, try to get into touch with the world of good spirits we are committing no sin, but rather, obeying one of God's commandments; an important commandment, for only through contact with the world of good spirits can we arrive at the truth. There is no other way."

    According to his book, the first question Greber asked the spirit was, "why is it that Christianity seems no longer to exert any influence upon the people of today?"

    The spirit told Greber that the teachings of Jesus can no longer be found in the New Testament documents as these have been tampered with, and on Page 19 of his book:

    Page 19: "What you now have are mutilated copies.... Those who were guilty of these mutilations have been punished by God."

    When someone present at the meeting asked specifically who did this supposed mutilating of the New Testament, the spirit didn't produce any historical evidence but simply said "that does not concern you" and that it was sufficient for them to know that God has punished the "culprits". The "culprits" started to change the texts of the New Testament as early as the first century according to the spirit (again, no evidence was offered to support this remarkable claim was given by the spirit, nor did Greber require any). Thus, the true teachings of Christ have been obscured for the past two thousand years. The spirit said the time would come when the teachings of Christ would be "restored" to mankind "in their full purity and truth." (p. 20) This spirit of course had arrived on the scene to help set the record straight after 2,000 years. Apparently, the gates of hell prevailed against the Church for 2,000 years more or less and Greber was privileged to receive the real truth from these "spirits from heaven."

    Greber asked the spirit for an example where the New Testament was changed to promote false doctrines and was told John 20:28. The spirit said it should record Thomas saying to Jesus, "My Lord and my Master" instead of "My Lord and my God" as it exists in all known Greek texts. (See Page 21 of Greber's Book) Thus the first supposed false doctrine corrected by this spirit, like the one who contacted John S. Thompson, was concerning the Deity of Christ.

    Greber got together weekly with a family who approached him and wanted someone to teach them the Scriptures. Spiritist manifestations resulted starting with their fourth meeting. (See Pages 31-32 of Greber's Book) What happened first was this: Greber began to expound upon a Scripture by teaching the usual interpretation given among "Christian authorities" when one of the boys present "became inexplicably excited" and said to Greber that his interpretation was incorrect and that he was "compelled" to give him the true one. Greber wrote:

    Page 33: "With that, he uttered the sentences which had been inspired in him for the elucidation of this passage of the Bible."

    The boy then said, "I must write". When asked what he wanted to write the boy said that he didn't know exactly what, but that he was being "compelled" to write by an "irresistible power". The boy wrote "rapidly" once given pencil and paper. At the end of the paper it was signed by the spirit that dictated it to him-- "Celsior". While the group was discussing this, the boy's brother said he could no longer attend the meetings as he could not keep his head still. It was being turned from side to side "against his will".

    Greber was informed later by the spirit at his other weekly meeting with the first boy in the city what these experiences at his parish meant. The spirit told him:

    Pages 36-37: "That which you saw in your parish confirms what you are learning from me here. You will witness more. Have no fear for the boy who cannot keep his head still; we are working on him and you will see how the different 'mediums' are prepared for their duties....

    You have there at present two kinds of mediums undergoing a course of preparation at the hands of the spirit-world. One is a so-called 'inspirational medium' into whom certain thoughts, determined by the spirit, are instilled with such force, that the medium's own thoughts are completely expelled from him, leaving him wholly within the spirit's power. The medium not only receives all the thoughts from the spirit, but is compelled to write them down or utter them, retaining the full use of his faculties meanwhile....

    The other medium who has not yet entered into activity is in the first stage of preparation. I mean the boy who could not keep his head still at your last meeting and who was frightened as a consequence. He will become a 'speaking medium'; his own spirit will be expelled from his body and the latter will be occupied by another spirit which will speak through it. This state is called a "trance".... The development of a 'full trance' or a 'deep trance' medium is not a pleasant sight, but it is necessary.... In order that the medium's mother may not be frightened unnecessarily by what takes place, it will be best for her to keep away from the meetings for the time being."

    What did the demon tell Greber about God?

    God is not Omnipresent as traditionally believed. (Page 261)

    God exists as a space bound entity. He has to travel through space to "visit" other parts of the universe. (Page 261)

    God is not Omniscient in the traditional sense either. God does not know the future. God apparently is not only space-bound in a body, but is time-bound as well. This would mean God did not create the space/time of this universe but is subject to it Himself. (Page 262)

    The demon tells Greber that spirits come in male and female. (Page 267)

    The demon then tells Greber that since there are males and females in the spirit-world, there is sex in the spirit-world! (Page 282)

    The demon also said that demons or fallen angels can and will be saved. This would occur after a process of spiritual evolution by reincarnation. Even Lucifer [Satan] will be saved and be like his "brother" Jesus. (Page 297) It was his brother Jesus who volunteered among God's angels to make the first attempt to save mankind. In fact, He "begged" God to be the first. If He failed, God would've sent other spirits until the mission was accomplished. (Pages 297-298)

    The demon said that angels came to earth in a materialized human form, impregnating women on earth prior to the Flood. (Page 302) Joseph was a deep trance medium that a holy spirit used to impregnate Mary. This is how Jesus was conceived! (Pages 311-312) Jesus Himself had mediumistic powers. (Page 320)

    On Matthew 27:52-53 that speaks of an apparent resurrection during an earthquake at Jesus' death the demon said that this was another example of the text of the New Testament being falsified. (Page 348) After His resurrection, Jesus materialized in human form.
    ----------------------------------------------------

    Also, Herk, your comments about the Trinity being Pagan are not a real good argument at all. I was dealt that lame argument for 18+ years in the Watchtower, so if you think I haven't had that beat into my brains, you're dead wrong.

    Let's see here...

    Satan knows the true nature of God.

    Satan tries to deceive everyone and makes counterfeits of everything that is Holy, so why wouldn't he make counterfeit "Trinities"?

    Otherwise, why would Satan and his Pagan followers be so fascinated with Trinities?

    Why isn't Satan fascinated with making false gods with two persons or four persons? Why is he so fascinated with making false gods into THREE persons?

    You might as well say that the Flood of Noah is Pagan too because several Pagans believed in a worldwide flood.

    Also, as other people have posted way back near the beginning of this Thread, there are Pagan beliefs that are very, very close to the Gospel of Jesus.

    So, I guess you would say that the Gospel of Jesus is false and Pagan too?

    And, once again, Herk completely adds words to my mouth that I never spoke, about 1 John 5:7.

    I will make this extremely clear, so clear that I don't even think Herk can twist it around:

    IF 1 John 5:7 was NOT written by the Apostle John, it SHOULD NOT be included in the Bible!

    IF someone added it later, God and the Bible CONDEMNS that person!

    Edited by - UnDisfellowshipped on 11 December 2002 6:43:16

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Three points (very Trinitarian, huh? )

    1. I see that noboby has tackled the issues I brought up about regarding "God" being a title or nature.

    I heard recently that 1 John 5:7 is regaining some credibility, due to some more ancient manuscript finds. Can anyone confirm that?

    2 .My question was on the side, in that I was asking for verification of what I had heard (hearsay), not that I was making this text a pillar for the debate.

    2Cor.4:4

    3. Whilst it is generally accepted that this text probably alludes to Satan, it is in no wise conclusive. Further, the title is qualified by "ho eon" - making the subject "the god of the ages", rather than specifically Almighty God. This was briefly discussed some months ago: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=34456&site=3

    On another side issue. UnD, any chance that you could change your Profile Pic, it's driving my Browser barmy .

  • LittleToe
    LittleToe

    Something else that hasn't been tackled, is this issue. Which Trinity came first? Was it truly the Hindu or Egyptian ones, when we know that Satan loves to counterfeit things?

    Why is there so much certainty that the Catholic religion emulated Pagan religions, rather than these religions springing up from an emulation of the reality of God?

    Taking that tack, could we not also suggest that the Unitarian concept also has pagan predecessors? After all, those who came to the table at Constantinople, would have been familiar with Zeus. Also, Akhenaton (Amenhotep IV) worshipped Aton (I have to add here, that I'm interested in the roots of the word Amen, too, but that's another subject entirely).

  • UnDisfellowshipped
    UnDisfellowshipped

    LittleToe said:

    On another side issue. UnD, any chance that you could change your Profile Pic, it's driving my Browser barmy

    LOL, sorry about that. I deleted the Profile Pic.

    It stopped working a few days ago, I'm not sure why.

    It used to be a picture of "The Tick" cartoon character (I loved that show!)

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit