Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 2,527,345 members, 5,787,422 topics. Date: Thursday, 13 August 2020 at 12:45 PM

I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity - Religion (4) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity (30682 Views)

Jehovah's Witness Refused Blood Transfusion For His Pregnant Wife Till She Died / "How Can One Witness To A Jehovah's Witness?" / If logic is "the how to reason" inbuilt in men how come atheists contradict (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (191) (Reply) (Go Down)

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by shadeyinka(m): 9:47am On May 29
Rozz:
When it comes to religious matters we have to use our heads sometimes.Trinity, in Christian doctrine is the unity of the father ,son and holy spirit as three persons in one Godhead. The doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be one of central christian affirmations about God. It is rooted in the fact that God came to meet christians in a threefold figure as (1) There creator,Lord,Father and judge as revealed in the old testament (2)as the lord who incarnated in figure of Jesus Christ who lived among human beings (3)As the holy spirit whom they experienced as the helper or intercessor in the power of new life.But neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament.Did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew scriptures(Deutronomy 6:4).I have started asking my pastors some questions regarding that,but he only warned me to be very careful of JW. lol
The Jehovah's Witness group actually has two separate Gods
1. God Almighty (Jehovah)
2. Mighty god( Jesus/Angel Michael)
Exo 20:3:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."


I think you agree with them.

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by shadeyinka(m): 9:48am On May 29
Rozz:
Im not a JW but this Trinity stuff is somehow.You can never win an argument on Trinity with a JW,they seems to have alot to back up their argument.
Can you win a athiest in an argument? Same thing

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Nobody: 9:49am On May 29
shadeyinka:

The Jehovah's Witness group actually has two separate Gods
1. God Almighty (Jehovah)
2. Mighty god( Jesus/Angel Michael)
Exo 20:3:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."


I think you agree with them.
This is my first time seeing this about them,it may not be true though.
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Nobody: 9:50am On May 29
shadeyinka:

Can you win a athiest in an argument? Same thing
They are not in anyway linked with atheists
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Timalt: 10:19am On May 29
Rozz:
When it comes to religious matters we have to use our heads sometimes.Trinity, in Christian doctrine is the unity of the father ,son and holy spirit as three persons in one Godhead. The doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be one of central christian affirmations about God. It is rooted in the fact that God came to meet christians in a threefold figure as (1) There creator,Lord,Father and judge as revealed in the old testament (2)as the lord who incarnated in figure of Jesus Christ who lived among human beings (3)As the holy spirit whom they experienced as the helper or intercessor in the power of new life.But neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament.Did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew scriptures(Deutronomy 6:4).I have started asking my pastors some questions regarding that,but he only warned me to be very careful of JW. lol
My dear, I would say you did well. Questioning what you believe is the first step towards intellectual integrity. For you to question what you believe shows that you are sincere and not afraid to be proved wrong.

The Trinity doctrine is one that after personal research, I do not believe it. Because I can't find sufficient evidence to support that claim. Infact history shows that it was in the 2nd/3rd century that the teaching was introduced to replace the teaching of modalism.

Now let this be very Clear. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not the only Unitarians. There are some other groups that do not believe in Trinity. Google is your friend. Infact the concept of unitarianism is as old as time because many who believed in unitarianism were persecuted in the Roman empire. The teaching of unitarianism was resurrected sometimes in the 16th century and since then it has gained some popularity again.

Now, let it be clear to you that if you were a Jehovah's witness, you can't question the doctrines. If you have questions and they give you answers that are unsatisfactory, "you are told to wait on Jehovah". And Jehovah for them is essentially 8 men in America that tell them what to believe. They revere these men and they call them their Governing body. Now if you dare disagree after they tell you to wait on Jehovah, you would be excommunicated, ostracized, shunned for life and labeled an Apostate. Which in the Jehovah witness world is worse than death itself. Careful about this group. I mean it. I agree with some of their teachings just like I agree with some teachings of some other churches. Before you become their member, please research about them carefully. Research their founder, their history, their doctrines. For example they teach that unless you are a member, God will kill you at armageddon. It does not matter if you are a good Christian or not. They teach that only those in their organization will survive their so called armageddon.
They have a very false doctrine on blood transfusion. They say the Bible condemns blood transfusion, whereas all the Bible talks about is eating blood. There was no transfusion in the first century. Yet they hypocritically accept blood fractions that is gotten from blood itself.
They baptize children as young as 7 years, and if the child ever decides to leave their church, they are shunned by their family and friends for life. In fact they become dead to their families.
Once you baptize and enter that religion, there's no honorable way of ever leaving. Just know that.
They have made many false prophecies 1874, 1878, 1914, 1920, 1925, 1942, 1975, they also predicted the end of the 20th century. All these dates are dates the end was supposed to come.

They discourage University education.

They say birthdays are pagan, but they wear wedding rings and cut wedding cakes which are also pagan.

They have have an issue with child abuse in their midst. And they have something they call the two witness rule. Where if a child is abused, unless another witness corroborates the story or the accused confesses, they will say the leave the matter in God's hand. Their religious leaders do not report child sexual abuse which is a crime under the law to the authorities. Research all I have said.

They believe in a strange doctrine that you are not in the new covenant. That only 144,000 are in the new covenant. And they believe that the remaining ones of the 144,000 are all Jehovahs witnesses. Every other person out there is not part of that their exclusive club.

They teach that Jesus is not your mediator. That Jesus is the mediator of only the 144,000. And only by association with the 144,000 of which the foremost are the 8 men in America, only through them can you get to God.

They teach a false doctrine started by William Miller who was an Adventist in the 1800s that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914. They believe Jesus is "present" but that he is invisible to others. And only them who are discerning know of his coming and presence. William Miller who started the nonsense predicted 1874, and when it failed, he dropped it. It was many splinter groups that modified the nonsense. Infact it was another Adventist not a Jehovah's witness or Bible student as they were then called, the man was Named Nelson Barbour. He was the one that came up with the ridiculous acrobatics of doctrine of 1914. Even he left the nonsense.

They say Jesus returned invisibly in October 1914 and that is when the last days started. They point to world War 1 as proof. But that is lie from the pit of hell because world War 1 started on July 28, 1914. So evidently that their doctrine is false.

They also falsely claim Jerusalem was destroyed by babylon in 607bce. When all Cuneiform tablets and overwhelming evidence proves it to be 586/586bce. Please Google it.

They teach another false doctrine that the great crowd in revelation will be on earth when Revelation 19:1 says they are in heaven.

They believe that salvation is gotten by works not grace. Even though they claim to believe in undeserved kindness, their own description for grace. Yet believe that you must go around sharing their pamphlets or stand with their carts distributing their pamphlets, and then you must record the hours you spent and send it to them every month before you can be saved.

Once you join them, you are pressured to convert your family, and if they don't convert, you are to limit your association with them because they are worldly association who would be destroyed at armageddon.

All the books printed by their founder, Charles Russell is out of print. They are hidden from their members. Thank God you can see them on the internet now. The electronic copies. Or if you want the hard copies, you can get it from eBay.

See! All I am saying is get to know them very very very well before you even step into their church or hall. Immediately you enter, they love bomb you.

Once you are their member you can't research anything that criticizes them, their leaders or their teachings.

Use www.jwfacts.com
to see things they printed in their own publications old and new.

Now watch how their members will want to attack my post. Just watch.

www.Jwfacts.com

3 Likes 1 Share

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Nobody: 10:29am On May 29
Timalt:

My dear, I would say you did well. Questioning what you believe is the first step towards intellectual integrity. For you to question what you believe shows that you are sincere and not afraid to be proved wrong.

The Trinity doctrine is one that after personal research, I do not believe it. Because I can't find sufficient evidence to support that claim. Infact history shows that it was in the 2nd/3rd century that the teaching was introduced to replace the teaching of modalism.

Now let this be very Clear. Jehovah’s Witnesses are not the only Unitarians. There are some other groups that do not believe in Trinity. Google is your friend. Infact the concept of unitarianism is as old as time because many who believed in unitarianism were persecuted in the Roman empire. The teaching of unitarianism was resurrected sometimes in the 16th century and since then it has gained some popularity again.

Now, let it be clear to you that if you were a Jehovah's witness, you can't question the doctrines. If you have questions and they give you answers that are unsatisfactory, "you are told to wait on Jehovah". And Jehovah for them is essentially 8 men in America that tell them what to believe. They revere these men and they call them their Governing body. Now if you dare disagree after they tell you to wait on Jehovah, you would be excommunicated, ostracized, shunned for life and labeled an Apostate. Which in the Jehovah witness world is worse than death itself. Careful about this group. I mean it. I agree with some of their teachings just like I agree with some teachings of some other churches. Before you become their member, please research about them carefully. Research their founder, their history, their doctrines. For example they teach that unless you are a member, God will kill you at armageddon. It does not matter if you are a good Christian or not. They teach that only those in their organization will survive their so called armageddon.
They have a very false doctrine on blood transfusion. They say the Bible condemns blood transfusion, whereas all the Bible talks about is eating blood. There was no transfusion in the first century. Yet they hypocritically accept blood fractions that is gotten from blood itself.
They baptize children as young as 7 years, and if the child ever decides to leave their church, they are shunned by their family and friends for life. In fact they become dead to their families.
Once you baptize and enter that religion, there's no honorable way of ever leaving. Just know that.
They have made many false prophecies 1874, 1878, 1914, 1920, 1925, 1942, 1975, they also predicted the end of the 20th century. All these dates are dates the end was supposed to come.

They discourage University education.

They say birthdays are pagan, but they wear wedding rings and cut wedding cakes which are also pagan.

They have have an issue with child abuse in their midst. And they have something they call the two witness rule. Where if a child is abused, unless another witness corroborates the story or the accused confesses, they will say the leave the matter in God's hand. Their religious leaders do not report child sexual abuse which is a crime under the law to the authorities. Research all I have said.

They believe in a strange doctrine that you are not in the new covenant. That only 144,000 are in the new covenant. And they believe that the remaining ones of the 144,000 are all Jehovahs witnesses. Every other person out there is not part of that their exclusive club.

They teach that Jesus is not your mediator. That Jesus is the mediator of only the 144,000. And only by association with the 144,000 of which the foremost are the 8 men in America, only through them can you get to God.

They teach a false doctrine started by William Miller who was an Adventist in the 1800s that Jesus returned invisibly in 1914. They believe Jesus is "present" but that he is invisible to others. And only them who are discerning know of his coming and presence. William Miller who started the nonsense predicted 1874, and when it failed, he dropped it. It was many splinter groups that modified the nonsense. Infact it was another Adventist not a Jehovah's witness or Bible student as they were then called, the man was Named Nelson Barbour. He was the one that came up with the ridiculous acrobatics of doctrine of 1914. Even he left the nonsense.

They say Jesus returned invisibly in October 1914 and that is when the last days started. They point to world War 1 as proof. But that is lie from the pit of hell because world War 1 started on July 28, 1914. So evidently that their doctrine is false.

They also falsely claim Jerusalem was destroyed by babylon in 607bce. When all Cuneiform tablets and overwhelming evidence proves it to be 586/586bce. Please Google it.

They teach another false doctrine that the great crowd in revelation will be on earth when Revelation 19:1 says they are in heaven.

They believe that salvation is gotten by works not grace. Even though they claim to believe in undeserved kindness, their own description for grace. Yet believe that you must go around sharing their pamphlets or stand with their carts distributing their pamphlets, and then you must record the hours you spent and send it to them every month before you can be saved.

Once you join them, you are pressured to convert your family, and if they don't convert, you are to limit your association with them because they are worldly association who would be destroyed at armageddon.

All the books printed by their founder, Charles Russell is out of print. They are hidden from the public. Thank God you can see them on the internet now. The electronic copies. Or if you want the hard copies, you can get it from eBay.

See! All I am saying is get to know them very very very well before you even step into their church or hall. Immediately you enter, they love bomb you.

Once you are their member you can't research anything that criticizes them, their leaders or their teachings.

Use www.jwfacts.com
to see things they printed in their own publications old and new.

Now watch how their members will want to attack my post. Just watch.

www.Jwfacts.com
wao thanks for this
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Timalt: 10:51am On May 29
Rozz:
wao thanks for this
You are welcome my dear.

Please if you want to talk more about them privately, send me a PM, I'll be glad to reply you with any more questions about them.

See what even their former Hospital Liason Committee Chairmen (those responsible for monitoring jehovah's witnesses in the hospital to make sure they don't take blood) have to say about the organization and their unbiblical stand on blood.
Here: www.ajwrb.org

I would never tell anyone to join or not to join any religion, my own is that you should hear both sides of evidence before you enter what you don't know.

Have yourself a wonderful day.

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 11:57am On May 29
Myer:


My friend, trying to impose your own interpretation as always.

You can share your opinion/assertion but try not to impose it. You've made your point.

I do enjoy reading your views even though we hardly agree. lol

Baba o. I not posing views o. I am not even concerned about his view based on that post. I am very much concerned about his usage of words. Greek lexicon and history are all around you to check. This is not a bible issue now but a grammar issue. And I have shown him many times and also showed him that his view misaligned from his organisation view. But he hasn't still correct that.

Theos is not a basis for arguing God or god, he should put forward a better one.

And by the way, my view on the topic has been well documented with the same fellow you referred to. Also with his colleagues. They are owing me a review of their doctrine on the same topic. And they haven't done that. They may need to refresh their memory on my discussion with them on the OP if need be.

The concept of trinity are well documented all through the scriptures and also taught among the early church fathers. What you will never see taught whether in scripture or among post apostolic Christians is calling Jesus "Angel Micheal". And those who hold such views either lack history or read the scriptures to their own desires.

When you see such man asking you to show him where the word "[b]trinity" is in the scriptures, ask him to show you where Jesus was called or called himself "Angel Micheal" in the scriptures[/b].

By and large, the reason I referred to the correction of words and right usage first is that the lack of basic understanding of words and it's application is what I have seen in display from both divide when discussing the issue of trinity.

1 Like 1 Share

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 12:00pm On May 29
Peacefullove:


Theos can be translated as " a god", Yes ?

And also as God, Yes. Theos represent any supreme being. And was used for God over 100 times in the scriptures.
So in that context, the usage of Theos won't be an issue of God or god, so it can't be used as basis of his discussion.
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 12:08pm On May 29
Myer:


@bolded You know that gets my attention.

There was a time I believed this too. Until I realized that there is so much confusion in the boby of Christ, all from the same bible.

Notice how the Spirit of Truth seems to have revealed conflicting revelations to you all even on this topic on this thread?

Truly, there are portions of the bible to support the concept of Trinity.

Conversely, there are portions of the bible against the concept of Trinity.

Ergo, who is responsible for this confusion?

The men who translated it or the author, God who inspired it?

On some issues, the scriptures must be read together, I mean all together to decipher the true meaning. This case is one of it.

The body of scriptures is what points us to who God is. A part, a verse, an event, a statement, a book in the scriptures will reveal PARTS of God's revelation of who he is. The whole Bible will reveal the whole true God.

Hence interpretation must be done firstly from the point of the singular, holistic message of the scriptures, the whole Bible.
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by achorladey: 12:12pm On May 29
shadeyinka:

The Jehovah's Witness group actually has two separate Gods
1. God Almighty (Jehovah)
2. Mighty god( Jesus/Angel Michael)
Exo 20:3:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."


I think you agree with them.

Shadeyinka why you write the god in Mighty god in small letter? New World Translation go follow you fight oooo. In Isaiah 9:6 na capital letter oooo. It is written as Mighty God.

: grin grin grin cheesy
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 12:33pm On May 29
shadeyinka:
The Jehovah's Witness group actually has two separate Gods
1. God Almighty (Jehovah)
2. Mighty god( Jesus/Angel Michael)
Exo 20:3:
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

I think you agree with them.

achorladey:
Shadeyinka why you write the god in Mighty god in small letter?
New World Translation go follow you fight oooo.
In Isaiah 9:6 na capital letter oooo. It is written as Mighty God.

: grin grin grin cheesy

MuttleyLaff:


Janosky, why did you not attempt to try and answer each one and all of those my previous up there above six questions erhn? You let six dead easy, peasy, lemon, squeasy, harmless simple questions seem like too hard for you to answer, lol.

If you had attempted to answer the six dead easy, peasy, lemon, squeasy, harmless simple questions, you wouldnt be making a right prat of yourself asking where is the Greek 3588 TÓV (ton), why is the word for word omitted there. you wouldnt be asking for an explanation for why the omission of word for word Greek 3588 TÓV (ton) in the Greek interlinear screenshot, lol.

Its beggars belief that Jehovah's Witnesses and of course you inclusive Janosky, could have the fearlessness, rude and disrespectful behaviour towards the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ to have Him described as a god, smh. That New World Translation forced upon you Janosky should be torn up into shreds, burned and/or flushed down the toilet. Mtcheew angry angry angry

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god."
- According to John 1:1 New World Translation (NWT)

What kind of expensive joke, according to the Jehovah's Witnesses, is this, they are playing at with this their above New World Translation bible version rendition of John 1:1, hmm? Wonders never cease to happen, smh.

Janosky, let's find out how honest, sincere and truthful, if at all, you are or can be erhn?. Here is how it goes, Janosky please according to your full knowledge and/or your understanding, give an exhaustive list of what the translation and/or meaning of this your much beloved Greek word "TÓV" is, lol.

Putting it candidly, this way, we are going to start with finding out your full knowledge and/or understanding of the translation and/or meaning of that your much beloved Greek word "TÓV" first, before next, then be looking into the other two or three ones you too, are grappling with, lol (i.e. Theon and Theos)

MuttleyLaff:
Mister man, will you please stay in your hypocritical, sanctimonious, self lane. Afterall you did say, you are done with me, Mister Forgetful-Promise-Breaker angry angry angry

GRIMM/JOE, ask him, Maximus69, to paste out here what Matthew 18:11 says in or from the New World Translation (i.e. NWT, that is the Jehovah's Witnesses' official bible) and whats the reason for it, if he is unable to do so grin grin grin

"Wọn pi irẹsi, oun na yọ sibi" loosely translates as "rice is served, he too is pulling out his cutlery"
"For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder.
And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace
"
- Isaiah 9:6 - New World Translation

New World Translation won't follow him fight because as you can see from my two above mentions, that is how JW's indoctrination wants it. As for the contradiction and inconsistency in Isaiah 9:6, well that JW going confused dot com there, lmao.

2 Likes

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Peacefullove: 12:38pm On May 29
hoopernikao:


And also as God, Yes. Theos represent any supreme being. And was used for God over 100 times in the scriptures.
So in that context, the usage of Theos won't be an issue of God or god, so it can't be used as basis of his discussion.

It can actually, let me ask: Is Jesus a supreme being?
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Myer: 12:48pm On May 29
shadeyinka:

Can you win a athiest in an argument? Same thing

It was biblically possible though.
Jesus did, Paul did, etc.
Guess how?
With signs and wonders.
Is that not all an atheist demands?

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 1:00pm On May 29
shadeyinka:
Can you win a athiest in an argument? Same thing
It is not about winning anything, but it is all about opening ajar a door of truth and beam light in so to have it illuminated up, now its up to the other person to exercise his/her freewill whether to be curiously moved enough and be stirred up to want to step through the door. There is no forcing involved, no pushing, no shoving inside, the decision to go in is entirely in the hands and legs of the person.

When Apostle Paul met with King Agrippa, he didnt with an argument with his majesty.

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 1:07pm On May 29
Myer:
It was biblically possible though.
Jesus did, Paul did, etc.
Guess how?
With signs and wonders.
Is that not all an atheist demands?
It wasn't a 100% success rate.
Guess what, even with the signs and wonder, people only followed Jesus because they could take advantage of His generosity and be guaranteed a free lunch, lmao.

Atheists, will any time, t, misuse and abuse the gift of freewill. What a self assured God will serve. This display of trusting in one's abilities and judgement speaks volume. If I were to be atheist, this would have me rattled up in my cage
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Maximus69(m): 1:09pm On May 29
Myer:


That was fast.

She's not even agreed to be a Jehovah's Witness and you're already attacking her dressing even though you've never even met her

You see why I keep saying JW is more of a Jewish organization than a Christian organization. Don't do this, Don't eat that, etc.

I actually tried to join JW once cos I was intrigued by your publications and had one of you as a colleague.
I was shocked by the observations I made. I went for one of your gatherings a couple of times and they mentioned that men aren't even allowed to wear jeans. I was like how now
And please why is it that no one even drinks the Holy Communion?

The book (Bible) is contradictory nah! cheesy

Why asking questions from adherents of a book that's contradictory as if everything in it should be comprehensible? cheesy
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 1:09pm On May 29
Peacefullove:
It can actually, let me ask: Is Jesus a supreme being?
Yes, of course, Jesus is a supreme being. Jesus, actually, is the supreme being, God, incarnate.

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 1:14pm On May 29
Peacefullove:


It can actually, let me ask: Is Jesus a supreme being?

You are already doing interpretation. And I don't think that is the view of my post. And if your word application is wrong your basis of interpretation is flawed already.

And the question you asked is a theological question that can't be boxed in Jon 1:1. My post refer to grammatical and language usage. I will stay on that.

Theos is the only name recognized in Greek as God. Every other derivatives are inflexions which includes Theon. So if God can be called Theos and Jesus can or any god can be called Theos, same as its derivative, then it is not sufficient to say because John 1:1 used Theos then he is referring to a lesser god. No such thing exist in Greek lexicon.

That is my basis. So whether Jesus is supreme being is another discussion entirely.
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Maximus69(m): 1:20pm On May 29
Rozz:
They are not in anyway linked with atheists

Paradise is not that far my young lady but

THERE ARE MANY AS IN SO MANY RIVERS TO CROSS! smiley

If Jesus didn't condemn anyone then how come he referred to Jews like himself as children of the devil? John 8:44

If John didn't condemn anyone then why did he refer to Jews like himself as broods of serpents? Matthew 3:7

For a certainty there can never be friendship between light and darkness { 2Corinthians 6:14} so you will meet many confusionists on your way to salvation if you're not focused they will hand over what is of no benefit to you! Matthew 13: 3-9, 18-23

THERE ARE MANY SO MANY RIVERS TO CROSS! smiley

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Peacefullove: 1:20pm On May 29
hoopernikao:


You are already doing interpretation. And I don't think that is the view of my post. And if your word application is wrong your basis of interpretation is flawed already.

And the question you asked is a theological question that can't be boxed in Jon 1:1. My post refer to grammatical and language usage. I will stay on that.

Theos is the only name recognized in Greek as God. Every other derivatives are inflexions which includes Theon. So if God can be called Theos and Jesus can or any god can be called Theos, same as its derivative, then it is not sufficient to say because John 1:1 used Theos then he is referring to a lesser god. No such thing exist in Greek lexicon.


You are bias, would you say the above when Theo's is used for HUMAN BEINGS? Would you agree they get a Letter G , God ?


That is my basis. So whether Jesus is supreme being is another discussion entirely.

The reason humans and others Re termed gods, is because they are not supreme. Record also has it that Jesus too isn't the supreme being . Paul was called Theo's, but many translation says " a god " simply because he isn't the supreme bein .
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Peacefullove: 1:21pm On May 29
MuttleyLaff:
Yes, of course, Jesus is a supreme being. Jesus, actually, is the supreme being, God, incarnate.
Understand the meaning of supreme.
Can a Supreme being Have a God ?

Cc: Rozz
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 1:27pm On May 29
Peacefullove:
Understand the meaning of supreme.
Can a Supreme being Have a God?

Cc: Rozz
Understand the meaning God first, even better still, after that do similar with god.

Give an inexhaustible definition, meaning, explanation, description of what God is and what god is, then I'll humbly and kindly answer whether or whether not, a Supreme being can have a God
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Maximus69(m): 1:32pm On May 29
Peacefullove:

Understand the meaning of supreme.
Can a Supreme being Have a God ?

Cc: Rozz

Instead of accepting correction, they will turn their backs on counsels that supposed to help them.
And later they will come and say
"We are all believers in Christ"
Further effort to make them see clearly the contradictions, they'll say you're judging them! cheesy
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 1:33pm On May 29
Peacefullove:


You are bias, would you say the above when Theo's is used for HUMAN BEINGS? Would you agree they get a Letter G , God ?



The reason humans and others Re termed gods, is because they are not supreme. Record also has it that Jesus too isn't the supreme being . Paul was called Theo's, but many translation says " a god " simply because he isn't the supreme bein .

I am sure you can read well, but you need to read carefully and patiently as I don't think you are responding to my post.

Let me give you again in a simpler way.

Whether God, god, or man or any thing. The moment you refer such to Theos it refers to a supreme being, that is Greek meaning of Theos. That means the speaker is seeing such as one but interpretation is what will clear the issue whether it is God almighty or whether the person is just ecstatic.

So, read my correction again gently,

you cant say because John 1:1 used Theos then he meant lesser god, you cant likewise say it means God almighty. You have no basis. Context and interpretation is what will determine that the application

The person I quoted used the usage of Theos as his basis that it can't be God but a lesser god, that is not the meaning of Theos and that is misleading as he is already inserting his own meaning into the text yet hiding behind the true meaning of the word. That is the correction.

I hope this is clearer.

2 Likes

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Peacefullove: 1:38pm On May 29
hoopernikao:


I am sure you can read well, but you need to read carefully and patiently as I don't think you are responding to my post.

Let me give you again in a simpler way.

Whether God, god, or man or any thing. The moment you refer such to Theos it refers to a supreme being, that is Greek meaning of Theos. That means the speaker is seeing such as one but interpretation is what will clear the issue whether it is God almighty or whether the person is just ecstatic.

So, read my correction again gently,

you cant say because John 1:1 used Theos then he meant lesser god, you cant likewise say it means God almighty. You have no basis. Context and interpretation is what will determine that the application

The person I quoted used the usage of Theos as his basis that it can't be God but a lesser god, that is not the meaning of Theos and that is misleading as he is already inserting his own meaning into the text yet hiding behind the true meaning of the word. That is the correction.

I hope this is clearer.

I get you very well , I dont just want you to be speaking from both sides of the mouth. *Theo's was applied to humans as well, Do you admit we are supreme beings ?*

If no, on what basis do you reject it ?
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by MuttleyLaff: 1:46pm On May 29
Peacefullove:
I get you very well, I dont just want you to be speaking from both sides of the mouth.
*Theo's was applied to humans as well,
You are just a hair's breadth away from saying Jesus, à la John 10:34 when referencing Psalm 82:6, is speaking from both sides of the mouth.

Peacefullove:
Do you admit we are supreme beings ?*

If no, on what basis do you reject it ?
Supreme is relative.

Depending on the context then followed up with correct interpretation, just as hoopernikao has advanced, human beings can be and cannot be supreme
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by hoopernikao: 1:47pm On May 29
Peacefullove:


I get you very well , I dont just want you to be speaking from both sides of the mouth. *Theo's was applied to humans as well, Do you admit we are supreme beings ?*

If no, on what basis do you reject it ?

I think now, that it's either you aren't reading well to understand or you just want to create arguments from no where.

Was John 1:1 referring to "human being" been with God from beginning?

Sometimes when someone decides to leave you guys and be watching you have a way of just looking for arguments.

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Nobody: 1:50pm On May 29
Peacefullove:
Understand the meaning of supreme. Can a Supreme being Have a God ?
Cc: Rozz
exactly
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Maximus69(m): 2:25pm On May 29
Rozz:
exactly

False religions and their adherents are like fast moving waters on the way to Paradise (Salvation).
If we know the qualities of pure worship, we will see the rivers carrying so many things but since we just want to cross and continue our journey, we can only ask one question

"is this river moving towards the same direction i'm heading to?"

if not then

"why am i distracted by this river?"

All these Churchgoers and their Churches are like the rivers, there is no need crossing them if you're not convinced about Jehovah's Witnesses Organization as the one and only TRUE Christian.

So forget about Jehovah's Witnesses and follow any of them, but let me assure you that none of them is heading towards the same direction as Jehovah's Organization! smiley

1 Like

Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Myer: 2:41pm On May 29
MuttleyLaff:
It wasn't a 100% success rate.
Guess what, even with the signs and wonder, people only followed Jesus because they could take advantage of His generosity and be guaranteed a free lunch, lmao.

Atheists, will any time, t, misuse and abuse the gift of freewill. What a self assured God will serve. This display of trusting in one's abilities and judgement speaks volume. If I were to be atheist, this would have me rattled up in my cage

Not all would still believe, true. But a sizeable number would.

If God felt it was necessary then, how much more now?

Faith is important yes, but so is evidence.
Re: I'm Beginning To Reason With Jehovah Witness On Their Stand Concerning Trinity by Maximus69(m): 3:13pm On May 29
hoopernikao:


I think now, that it's either you aren't reading well to understand or you just want to create arguments from no where.

Was John 1:1 referring to "human being" been with God from beginning?

Sometimes when someone decides to leave you guys and be watching you have a way of just looking for arguments.

The way we separated ourselves from other religious groups is enough reason for people to ask questions.
We won't
~pray with you.
~worship with you.
~sing praises along with you.
~marry you.
~join you in racism.
~politics with you.
~bear religious titles as you do.
~practice same rule of conduct with you.
~accept the same entertainment with you.

Yet we are the world's most organized and orderly religious groups!

Of course any honest hearted person will feel disturbed asking

"why are they not accepting the rest of us as fellow believers?"

All these arguments are just like cover-up for many to pour their anger or animosity against us, so we fully understand what is going on! smiley

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) ... (191) (Reply)

Praying Loudly Vs Praying Quietly: What Do You Guys Think. / Cardinal Okogie To Buhari: "You Must Be A Joker For Thinking Of 2019 Now" / Nkechi Bianze: COZA Agent Offered Me Money To Defend Pastor Biodun

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2020 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 350
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.