Search results

I've listened to the first one, but didn't really hear anything I haven't heard before. I was speaking to those who may read and not know, thought that would be obvious.

I watched both videos, JW's do not deny the divinity of Christ. Both the caller and host/participant had it wrong. I'm a JW

My brother NWL has asked me to write a message on this board on his behalf to any members who may be awaiting his response. Last week NWL broke his arm in three places while he was at work. This has left him unable to respond to any messages or queries directed to him. He gives the reassurance...

Does the Trinity teach there are three persons who are one being who are the Father, Son and HS? Is God three persons who is one being, namely the Father, Son and HS? Is the explanation of who the 'one God' is that God is the Father, Son and HS, or is the explanation of who God is that God is...

Apart from bringing in John 10:30, almost nothing you said in your reply was a scriptural reply but rather personal opinions and comments about trivial matters. Let's bring things back down to basic, let's try and speak only about the scriptural and theological arguments (I have added this...

What point have I not listened to? I've clearly understood your position, I simply brought in a point I believed you ignored, namely, that to a trinitarian, "the God", when understood in a definite sense, relates to 'identity'. The 'identity' of God isn't Jesus, it isn't the Father, and it isn't...

To a trinitarian: The trinity = three persons who are one being, namely, the Father/Son/HS. God = three persons who are one being, namely, the Father/Son/HS. There is no difference in the above defintion, the terms are synonymous to a trinitarian, denying it doesn't make it untrue.

As I said to you in a previous post it is extremely tedious replying to some of your points along with the way your reply to my post, please be kinder in the way you layout your replies and try not to be so sporadic in the layout of your responses, it becomes burdensome. Please just accept the...

If you do enough digging you will find plenty of information regarding the origin of the name and JW writers highlighting it is not the correct pronunciation. The very bible JW's use, in the appendix A4, expresses the origin of the name Jehovah and why we/they use it, this can be seen by...

Lon as stated he believes John 1:1c is definite, so whilst I agree with you that the Greek states what you suggested it stated, understanding it in the definite sense infers the Word was God in relation to identity, thus 'the word was THE GOD'. I think I did miss that, perhaps you'll be so kind...

The fault was not with the translation but human error, I mis-referenced v10 with v12. John 12:49 "For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken." John 14:10 "Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that...

Loool! Its keeps getting better and better. What you seemed to ignore is that according to your definite understanding of the text the "Word was THE GOD", thus if the Word was THE GOD and THE GOD is synonymous with the word TRINITY then the Word was the Trinity according to the text. We must...

You said above "For ANY created being to utter those things in the same contexts of the verses they are found in, it would be blasphemy", says who, you? If the one God, namely the Father, ordained that all things are to go through his Son Jesus, then it is hardly blasphemy as it was God himself...

It is painfully hard and awkward to read and respond to your post JR due to misquotations and the sporadicness of your post. Over and over you make a series of pointless comments because you've either misread or misinterpreted my previous posts. For example, you say "I hope this isn't an...

Ad hominem: To attack an opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument Comments you made in your third paragraph: "Did you do this well in school?", "if Unitarians simply knew how to read contextually", "many of you take ownership for your poorer school...

It's utterly pathetic you claim to have a PhD in the ancient languages, attended seminary, and allude to yourself being scholarly, yet, you can't even refute my point, or, not use use ad hominem in your responses simply to try and bolster your position. You at no point explained where I...

I am one of Jehovah's witnesses. When I referred to "them" I was speaking about the publishers of books and literature made by the Watchtower and Bible tract Society (JW's). Did you ever make a reply to my post direct at you? Why move on when you've given no reply? You've directed me to post...

Many would agree with me that Jehovah is not the correct pronunciation. As stated it is highlighted throughout our literature and mentioned from time to time at our meetings, I've personally spoken to many witnesses about this, it is common knowledge. Some witnesses who are ignorant will no...

Regarding your first point, I have nowhere made the argument the "Word" is not an actual person. I believe the Word to be the pre-incarnate Jesus as most Trinitarians believe; this changes nothing about what I've argued. Regarding your second point: You are making the mistake of having tunnel...

I never understand when I trinitarian tries to use the plurality argument with the word "elohim". You are trinitarian, you only believe in ONE GOD, if the Elohim in reference to the one God should be understood in the plural sense then it implies not one God but GODS; "in the beginning, GODS...