Posts by Saved

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

Again, im more than happy to entertain an alternative reading..at this point your only accusing me of proof texting, claiming to have wrestled with this very passage with a pastor, knowing the text very well, and putting the burden of proof on me to defend an alternative reading which has not been disclosed. I don't think its a matter of you respecting me by assuming I should know what you are thinking, its a matter of dialogue.

Simply purpose what you are thinking, that way I can respond accordingly.

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

Ok, well I am more then happy to entertain another possible exposition of John 12:41 and other possible meanings of what John was trying to convey by quoting Isaiah, it would seem if you can offer a contextual alternative reading to that passage your point would be made. But if you don't want to get into it, I completely understand.

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

"In the year of King Uzziah's death I saw Yahweh sitting on a throne, lofty and exalted, with the train of His robe filling the temple. " Isaiah 6:1

Compare:

"These things Isaiah said because he (Isaiah) saw His (Christ's) glory, and he spoke of Him (Christ)." John 12:41

YHWH was well understood to mean the Most High... The attributes of YHWH were fully explained by PAUL in the very verse I quoted earlier in Colossians. [For which he ATTRIBUTES them to Jesus]

So here you have John the Apostle of Jesus explaining that the person Isaiah saw was Jesus, and you go to Isaiah and you see him refer to the person of YHWH.

Two conclusions here

1- John made a mistake and attributed Isaiahs vision to Jesus

2- John was making a case for Jesus being God by attributing Isaiahs vision to Jesus

These are the theological considerations which led to our understanding of Christs nature which was later called the Trinity.

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

Dude, every time you clarify your statement, you carry more unfounded assertions that I have to address, which makes it increasingly difficult to respond.

"Paul had no concept of the trinity"

what do you mean by that exactly? If you mean the specific word Trinity, I would agree..but that does not assume the CONCEPT underlying the word was not understood by Christians. In fact, I use Paul more then anybody else to help support the concept of the trinity

Colossians 1:15
"The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross."

"But I'm not talking about trained Pharisees like Paul I mean the thousands of the earliest illiterate Hebrew Christians."

Oh ok...because earlier you said:

"The earliest christians did not speak Greek let alone understand esoteric Greek theological terms."

Sounded like a broad brush statement, but the qualifier must be everybody except "Educated Pharisees"

What needs to be understood here is that Pauls main audience were GENTILES for which he wrote his letters in the greek language. Are we to assume that none of the GREEK church's he was writing to actually spoke greek or understood the theological concepts he was writing about?

"I'm talking about before the NT was written. The first generation of illiterate Hebrew christians did not speak Greek."

300 years before Jesus even arrived on the scene, you have the Selucid [Greek] Empire saturating its religion, language and culture in Palestine. Not only this but the entire ancient world. This was the entire basis of translating the Hebrew Bible into Greek [Septuagint or LXX] By the time jesus arrives on the scene, virtually all of Palestine is either utilizing greek as a primary language, or a fluent second language. It was necessary to learn to conduct business.

Why else would Jesus be quoting from the Greek Septuagint in a synagogue at Mark 7:6-7

All in all, the NT quotes and references the Septuagint in 340 instances, compared to 33 quotes from the Masoretic text.

The challenge you gave me is entirely based on your assumption that early Christians did not know greek so therefore could not have possibly understood the Trinity. I find that view wanting.

Based on that assumption, you setup a challenge robbing me of an explanation which makes use of words like "Essence" - Which is a biblical word by the way [words that actually have biblical theological concepts behind them]

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

"the earliest Christians did not speak greek let along understand esoteric Greek theological terms."

Acts 17:22 // Paul speaks at the aeropagus quoting from Greek philosophers to make a case for Christianity

-Greek/Aramaic were two very common languages in ancient Palestine, the basis for which the Septuagint was written [and utilized by Jesus when quoting the OT] not to mention the entire NT was written in Greek.

sorry, I don't buy that argument.

"Therefore by your own admission they did not understand the trinity."

what exactly did I admit to? The entire basis of your belief that the earliest Christians did not believe in the trinity is the ASSUMPTION they didn't understand greek?

"Therefore according to you the earliest Christians were not Christians"

Nope, the earliest Christians had a very high view of Jesus, this is not to say there were not different streams of belief about the ontology of Jesus [see Gnosticism] however, 1st John seem to combat and refute the spread of Gnostic philosophy very early on. This was also the basis for forming the Nicene creed in 325 to defend traditional views of Christs nature. Which they did by using the more specific Greek language to define terms.

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

"utter gibberish"

Nice to know you have not changed a bit Cofty..[since the last time I was here years ago]

"I challenge you to explain and illustrate the trinity without..

1-contradicting yourself

2-committing heresy

3-resorting to esoteric Greek terms like essence and substance"

Very nice...well played... So in order for me to explain a theological concept, I have to do so based on YOUR naturalistic/humanistic terms, a framework for which is impossible to do without the use of specific theological concepts encapsulated in the Greek language.

Sounds like your setting me up to fail in that question buddy. No thanks I wont take the bait.

76

The Trinity Easily Explained in 29 Words

by maccauk in

a man can be a father .

a man can be a son.

a man can be a husband.

Saved_JW

"A man can be a husband, a man can be a son, a man can be a father"

This illustration provided is NOT Trinitarian theology, it's modalism which is the stereotype used by the Watchtower in order to criticize it. The father is NOT the Son, and the Son is NOT the father, neither is the HS the Father or the Son. Instead, all 3 have the divine attributes which consist of being God. Three in Person, one in essence/nature.

48

God of the Old Testament

by unsure in

to those on these forums who are christian and or to those who believe in the god of the old testament; how does one overcome many of the questionable actions god took or allowed to happen in the old testament?.

many if not most of us have heard of criticisms of the god of the old testament.

you can find these criticisms on many websites.. how do you explain to an honest hearted person why god acted the way they did?.

Saved_JW

I don't know if the previous comments are directed at me specifically, but I am very well read on Jewish history and the current counter-missionary efforts of the Jewish community, specifically Rabbi Tovia Singer. So I am not ignorant of their position of God.

I am also not ignorant of the Christian evangelical mindset either. I actually agree that ideas about God can be imposed on the OT scripture. When Christians impose an Omni-benevolent teddy bear god into scripture, they actually do it a disservice and are not honest with the text. When Christians present God in this way, its easy for atheists to read scripture and disagree with that cultural mindset and dismiss it.

Notice that wasn't the presentation I gave. God is Love, but this is not to say he is Omni-benevolent or is "fair"

He is Good. That which emanates from his word is by definition Good/Just

48

God of the Old Testament

by unsure in

to those on these forums who are christian and or to those who believe in the god of the old testament; how does one overcome many of the questionable actions god took or allowed to happen in the old testament?.

many if not most of us have heard of criticisms of the god of the old testament.

you can find these criticisms on many websites.. how do you explain to an honest hearted person why god acted the way they did?.

Saved_JW

Ok I guess Ill step up and honestly answer the question

"To those on these forums who are Christian AND OR to those who believe in the God of the Old Testament; how does one overcome many of the questionable actions God took or allowed to happen in the Old Testament?"

At its core, this is a moral objection to the actions of God.

I understand the heart of your question, but before I answer, It might help to understand the doctrine of God.

1- God is the only eternal uncreated being in the universe

2- Ergo, God is the only one who has a divine right to dictate law [be that moral or otherwise]

3- Therefore, our understanding of God is that he has absolute right to determine what OUGHT to be in the realms of ethics. What God says/does is good

What are the implications of this? It means that God does not conform to an external standard of righteousness [good] God is the very definition of Good. The only way we [as people] can measure right and wrong is by an absolute measuring rod, which is God.

Your question assumes that there is a standard of right and wrong found outside of God, and using that standard [whatever it is] you have judged God as not conforming to that standard, which is why you ask the question: how does one overcome many of the questionable actions God took or allowed to happen in the Old Testament?"

I don't have to overcome anything. My mind is finite and limited in perspective, I do not know the complete circumstances surrounding any given judgment by God, but does it really matter anyways?

What right do I have to breathe if God is the one who created me in the first place? What right do we have to anything since everything we have and are is owed to God in the first place? Instead we see that God is merciful by giving us life...he is also perfectly Just in the execution of his judgments [of which he is the standard]

As for the question of Jesus being different then the God of the OT, this can easily be reconciled: Jesus came to bear witness of the Truth [Jn 18:37] To set the captives free [Luke 4:18] He came as a ministry of reconciliation [2 Cor 5:11] Jesus was prophesied to come on a donkey [in peace]...However this does not mean Jesus will not execute Justice. I appeal to the Book of Revelation for this one.

Jesus second coming is a judgment against the wicked [Matt 13:41;2 Peter 2:9; Rev 19:11-16]

This is what it all boils down to. If there is a moral objection against God, what moral LAW are you appealing to in order to make that judgement?

133

Why Are You Here?

by Believer in

i'm wondering why believers remain members of this forum which is clearly hostile to believers.

as one member said, nonbelievers pounce on any semblance of belief like piranhas on prey.

as former jws we should have had our fill of judgmental know-it-alls, but here we are.

Saved_JW

Hello Believer,

I consider myself a Christian Theist. I was a seminary student and a Pastor, former Jehovah's Witness as well.

You will find that the majority of people on this thread are Atheists or Agnostics, you will find that the majority of people who leave the watchtower go through various stages of emotional turmoil. This manifests itself in various different ways. But for the most part, Anger and resentment seem to be the most common. I find Atheism to be a perfect conduit for many leaving the Religion. I have various reasons why I believe this, but that's for a different thread.

Saved_JW

Posts by Saved_JW