Standing Up To Jehovah's Witnesses

[KingdomRose]

No verse contradicts the Trinity....as the Trinity already comprehends the sum total of ALL Biblical scripture.






Show us scriptural examples to the contrary, then...





The Trinity is one Yahweh, not three.

3 Persons; 1 Being.

What part of this escapes your intellect...?







Each Person receives praise.

Simple.





No.

Every scripture in the Bible contradicts the Trinity. Even the Catholic Church has said that there is no scriptural backing for a belief in the Trinity. It is suggested, perhaps, by Matthew 28:19. When we look at the verse, though, it does not indicate that the three mentioned are all God or are all equal or even that they are all persons. It leaves a lot of room for wiggling. That is the only verse the New Catholic Encyclopedia mentions that might suggest a Trinity. So you are overstepping even the insititution that came up with the Trinity in the first place.

Let's see some verses that knock the Trinity on its face.

(1) Psalm 83:18 in the KJV: "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth." Jehovah is none other than the Father of Jesus Christ, to whom Jesus prayed before his betrayal:

(2) "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3, KJV)

(3) "The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord [Jesus]: Sit at My right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Psalm 110:1. Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible." The Father, Jehovah, is the one giving the orders, so to speak. No indication of a Trinity, or even that the Father and Son are equal.

(4) Jesus applied this scripture to himself (Luke 4:18-21), and he is obviously the one who is anointed BY Jehovah: "The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is on me, because Jehovah did anoint me to proclaim tidings to the humble, He sent me to bind the broken of heart, to proclaim to captives liberty...(etc.)." (Isaiah 61:1, Young's) Jehovah anointed Jesus and Jehovah SENT Jesus. If they were equal, no one would be sending Jesus or anointing him.

(5) "Then answered Jesus and said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do: for what things soever he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise." (John 5:19, KJV) Quite plain, I would say. The Father obviously has more power and more knowledge. Jesus learned from the Father.

(6) "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." (John 6:38, KJV)

(7) "My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me." (John 7:16, KJV)

(8) "Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things." (John 8:28, KJV)

(9) "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." (John 12:49, KJV)

(10) "...My Father is greater than I." (John 14:28, KJV)

(11) "...I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." (John 20:17b, KJV)


That should suffice for now, though there are many more scriptures that attest to the fact of Jesus' consistent subjection to the Father. It's up to you if you want to ignore them and toss them out the window. The Trinity and these verses do not harmonize. Choose what you will....these verses cannot be erased.


(And I am wondering why you spent such a long time showing that Jesus is the Truth. I believe that as well!)

 

[Apple7]

Every scripture in the Bible contradicts the Trinity.

You would have to posit your definition of what you think The Trinity even is, before you can attempt to thwart it.

Witnesses have been shown to be severely deficient in their understanding of The Trinity, as they always posit it incorrectly, then proceed to knock-down a straw-man.

Btw....no scripture thwarts The Trinity.

Even the Catholic Church has said that there is no scriptural backing for a belief in the Trinity.

I'm protestant.

It is suggested, perhaps, by Matthew 28:19. When we look at the verse, though, it does not indicate that the three mentioned are all God or are all equal or even that they are all persons. It leaves a lot of room for wiggling. That is the only verse the New Catholic Encyclopedia mentions that might suggest a Trinity. So you are overstepping even the insititution that came up with the Trinity in the first place.

Let's review your face-to-the-pavement ignorance...


Mat 28.19

πορευθεντες ουν μαθητευσατε παντα τα εθνη βαπτιζοντες αυτους εις το ονομα του πατρος και του υιου και του αγιου πνευματος

Then having gone, disciple all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,



This passage contains arthrous substantives connected via kai which indicates distinction and separate referents.

However, while distinction is made between the referents, each has the same singular name.

Three Persons in one Being.

This same singular name of three persons’ baptism is the same as the Aaronic blessing in which the singular name of Yahweh is repeated three times (Num 6.22 – 27).

Separate and yet the same, The Trinity.

Just like NWT, if you only took the time to study the original languages, you could save yourself.


How in the world do you people expect to witness to someone like myself, who rips your canned-responses to shreds?!

 

[Apple7]

Let's see some verses that knock the Trinity on its face.


(2) "And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." (John 17:3, KJV)

In John 17.3, if you were even remotely familiar with Greek, then you would already be cognizant that there are absolutely no grammatical reasons at all for denying that αληθινον θεον refers to Jesus Christ.

This can be deduced from a study of the article with multiple substantives connected via kai.


αυτη δε εστιν η αιωνιος ζωη ινα γινωσκωσιν σε τον μονον αληθινον θεον και ον απεστειλας ιησουν χριστον

hautē de estin hē aiōnios zōē hina ginōskōsin se ton monon alēthinon theon kai hon apesteilas Iēsoun christon

And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom You have sent. (John 17.3)


Thus…it is only out of your sheer ignorance of NT Greek that you have chosen to follow a cult which denies Jesus’ deity.

Most assuredly you cannot even begin to exegetically prove your lame position….nor do you even attempt to.


As a further compare, we have a similar structure, here...


Of the seventy times in which the demonstrative pronoun ουτος has a personal referent in the Gospel of John and his Epistles, the Father is never the referent! This fact, along with proximity, significantly increases the likelihood that Jesus Christ is the antecedent in the case of 1 John 5.20, as thus…


οιδαμεν δε οτι ο υιος του θεου ηκει και δεδωκεν ημιν διανοιαν ινα γινωσκομεν τον αληθινον και εσμεν εν τω αληθινω εν τω υιω αυτου ιησου χριστω ουτος εστιν ο αληθινος θεος και ζωη αιωνιος

oidamen de hoti ho huios tou theou hēkei kai dedōken hēmin dianoian hina ginōskōmen ton alēthinon kai esmen en tō huiō autou Iēsou Christō houtos estin ho alēthinos theos kai zōē aiōnios

And we know that the Son of God has come, and He has given to us an understanding that we may know the true One, and we are in the true One, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and the life eternal. (1 John 5.20)


The Son is The True God.

Period.


So...

Again...how are you going to witness over the facts of the Greek language?

Answer: You will ignore it and run away...

 

[Apple7]

More clinic time for you...

More clinic time for you...

(3) "The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord [Jesus]: Sit at My right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool." (Psalm 110:1. Young's Literal Translation of the Holy Bible." The Father, Jehovah, is the one giving the orders, so to speak. No indication of a Trinity, or even that the Father and Son are equal.

For starters, why not show context?

Afraid that you might take it on the chin?


A declaration of Yahweh to my Master: Sit at My right hand, until I place Your enemies as Your footstool. Yahweh shall send the rod of Your strength out of Zion to rule in the midst of Your enemies. Your people shall have willingness in the day of Your might; in the majesties of holiness; from the womb of the dawn, to You is the dew of Your youth. Yahweh has sworn and will not repent: You are a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek. The Master at Your right hand shatters kings in the day of His anger. He shall judge among the nations; He shall fill with dead bodies; He shall shatter heads over much land. He shall drink out of the torrent on the way; therefore, He shall lift up the head. (Psalm 110.1 - 7)


Psalm 110 distinguishes between God The Father and God The Son, who was David’s Master (Adonee). That ‘Adonee’ is divine is provided by the fact that The Son will be a priest forever.

Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 further distinguishes God The Spirit from God The Father and God The Son.


But the Pharisees having been gathered, Jesus questioned them, saying, What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is He? They say to Him, David's. He said to them, Then how does David in Spirit call Him Lord, saying, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit off My right until I should put Your hostile ones as a footstool for Your feet?’ Then if David calls Him Lord, how is He his son? And no one was able to answer Him a word, nor did anyone dare from that day to question Him anymore. (Matt 22.41 – 46)


And teaching in the temple, answering, Jesus said, How do the scribes say that Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Spirit, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, Sit off My right until I place Your enemies as a footstool for Your feet.’ Then David himself calls Him Lord. And from where is He his son? And the large crowd heard Him gladly. (Mark 12.35 – 37)

 

[Apple7]

grand slam...

grand slam...

(1) Psalm 83:18 in the KJV: "That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the Most High over all the earth." Jehovah is none other than the Father of Jesus Christ, to whom Jesus prayed before his betrayal:

I already showed you where each Person of The Trinity has the same singular Name.

What you did was prove The Trinity for us...again.

As an added bonus, now you MUST deal with this verse...

For a Child is born; to us a Son is given; and the government is on His shoulder; and His name is called Wonderful Counselor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Isa 9.6)

Ouch!!!

 

[Apple7]

(10) "...My Father is greater than I." (John 14:28, KJV)

And I will petition the Father, and He will give you another Comforter, that He may remain with you to the age, the Spirit of Truth, whom the world cannot receive because it does not see Him nor know Him. But you know Him, for He abides with you and shall be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I am coming to you. Yet a little while and the world no longer sees Me, but you see Me. Because I live, you also shall live. In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you are in Me, and I am in you. He that has My commandments and keeps them, it is that one who loves Me; and the one that loves Me shall be loved by My Father, and I shall love him and will reveal Myself to him. Judas said to Him, not the Iscariot, Lord, what has happened that You are about to reveal Yourself to us and not at all to the world? Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My Word, and My Father shall love him. And We will come to him and will make a dwelling place with him. The one who does not love Me does not keep My Words. And the Word which you hear is not Mine but of the Father who sent Me. I have spoken these things to you, abiding with you; but the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things and shall remind you of all things that I said to you. I leave peace to you; My peace I give to you. Not as the world gives I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, nor let it be timid. You heard that I said to you, I am going away, and I am coming again to you. If you loved Me, you would have rejoiced that I said, I am going to the Father; for My Father is greater than I. And now I have told you before it occurs, that when it shall occur you may believe. I shall no longer speak many things with you, for the ruler of this world is coming, and he has nothing in Me. But that the world may know that I love the Father, even as the Father commanded Me, so I do. Rise up, let us go from here. (John 14.16 – 31)


You just hamstrung yourself as context shows that Father, Son and Spirit are present with the believers.

This is The Trinity!

 

[Apple7]

(4) Jesus applied this scripture to himself (Luke 4:18-21), and he is obviously the one who is anointed BY Jehovah: "The Spirit of the Lord Jehovah is on me, because Jehovah did anoint me to proclaim tidings to the humble, He sent me to bind the broken of heart, to proclaim to captives liberty...(etc.)." (Isaiah 61:1, Young's) Jehovah anointed Jesus and Jehovah SENT Jesus. If they were equal, no one would be sending Jesus or anointing him.

These Passages do not diminish Jesus' deity...they proclaim that The Son is NOT The Father nor The Holy Spirit.

You just scored another victory verse for The Trinity.



You can't possibly be a witness....

 

[WeberHome]

-
Were you to ask door-to-door Watchtower Society missionaries if they
believe that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, I can assure you they would
answer in the affirmative. However, what you may not know is that you and
they would not be on the same page as the conversation would be talking
about two very different processes that go by the same name. In other
words: you would find yourself thrown off by semantic double speak.

The standard Christian understanding of Christ's resurrection is common
throughout the gospels; viz: Jesus Christ died as a physical human being
and he came back as a physical human being.

Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha) didn't believe in that kind of return to life.
He taught reincarnation; which is very different because it doesn't eo ipso
indicate people coming back as human beings, nor as even as themselves;
but rather, as rearranged karma; which means Buddhists could conceivably
come back as someone else, and even a different gender: or a sea urchin, or
a termite, or a fruit bat.

The Watchtower Society's resurrection theory is just as loopy as
Siddhartha's. According to its proprietary way of seeing things; Christ didn't
physically rise from the dead at all; and here's why.

In Watch Tower Society theology, an angel named Michael volunteered to
come to the earth to die for humanity's sins. But in order to do so; he had to
relinquish his angel existence to become a human being seeing as how in
Society theology it is impossible for someone to exist as a spirit being and a
human being simultaneously. Thus when Michael's so-called "life force" was
transferred to flesh and given the name Jesus; he became not only a
different species of life, but a whole other person too; viz: except for his so
called "life force" Michael the angel went completely out of existence.

But Michael's existence as a human being was only temporary. When God
"raised" Jesus from the dead, it was not Jesus who got raised from the dead;
it was Michael. Seeing as how Michael the angel had gone completely out of
existence when he became Jesus the human being; God had to re-create
Michael the angel from memory; in other words: in Society theology, there
has actually been two Michaels.

There is a really, really big hole in the Society's theology; and that's the
dead man's corpse. In order to confirm that Jesus stayed dead, the Society
is going to have produce his remains. A piece of evidence of that significance
can't be allowed to just slip through a crack unnoticed as if it makes no
difference

†. Acts 1:1-3 . .The first account, O Theophilus, I composed about all the
things Jesus started both to do and to teach, until the day that he was taken
up, after he had given commandment through holy spirit to the apostles
whom he chose. To these also by many positive proofs he showed himself
alive after he had suffered.

Did the human Jesus really show himself alive by many positive proofs after
he had suffered? Not according to the Watch Tower Society. In their
theology, Michael the angel showed himself alive by means of a materialized
body that resembled the human Jesus in every way-- nail prints and spear
wound to boot --because the human Jesus had to stay dead in order for
Michael to regain his angel existence.

There are some seriously fatal flaws in that theory.

1• The New Testament never even one time, on any occasion, nor under any
circumstances, nor in any situation, either attests, alleges, alludes, or states
that an angel named Michael appeared in Christ's human form cloaked in a
materialized body.

2• Michael the angel never once identities himself as Michael the angel when
allegedly appearing in a materialized body.

3• Passing one's self off in the guise of a dead man is the lowest form of
identity theft imaginable. People do it all the time; and it's what I expect
from human beings, but that is not the kind of behavior I have a right to
expect from an arch angel.

4• A so-called materialized body is not a real person; it's an avatar.

5• Neither Paul, nor Peter, nor John, nor James, nor Jude, ever even one
single time in any of their writings correlate Jesus Christ with Michael the
angel: not once. You'd think that if Michael the angel was Jesus Christ, that
those men would have said so because that would be a really big deal.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 

[Apple7]

That should suffice for now, though there are many more scriptures that attest to the fact of Jesus' consistent subjection to the Father.

Subjected to another in no way means that either is greater or lesser than the other.

There are numerous scriptures stating that The Holy Spirit is subjected to The Son, and this does absolutely nothing to diminish deity.

It's up to you if you want to ignore them and toss them out the window. The Trinity and these verses do not harmonize. Choose what you will....these verses cannot be erased.

Your challenge will be to refute my rebuttal...in stead of running away like a good witness.

Let's see what you do next...

(And I am wondering why you spent such a long time showing that Jesus is the Truth. I believe that as well! )

To prove Jesus' statement regarding proper worship to God includes worship of Him!

You just owned yourself!!!


:cigar::cigar::cigar:

 

[Apple7]

NWL and KingdomRose are witnesses.

Witnesses to The Trinity!!!


:up::up::up:

 

[rocketman]

Not only is Jesus Christ ‘The Truth’ in the Holy Bible -but in the Koran, as well...





Defining the term…


الحق = “alhaqqi”

“alhaqqi” definition:

The Truth; one of the names of “allah” ; due share; justice; right claim; what ought to be; duty; incumbent.

It comes from the root “haqqa”, which means it was, or became, suitable to the requirements of wisdom, justice, right or rightness, truth, or reality, or fact; or to the exigencies of the case; it was, or became, just, proper, right, correct, or true; authentic, genuine, sound, valid, substantial, or real; established, or confirmed as truth or fact; and necessitated, obligatory, incumbent or due; it was, or became, a manifest and an indubitable fact or event; it happened, betided, or befell, surely, without doubt or uncertainty. To be right, just or fitting, worthy of, justly due to, proper, genuine, real, a fact, true, necessitated, suitable, necessary, incumbent upon, suited to the requirement of justice, become certain, authentic, deserve.

References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume two, pp. 605 – 610
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar p. 131


Per the classic definition, “alhaqqi” means 'The Truth', and is actually a name for “allah”.




Observe how “alhaqqi” is applied to Jesus Christ in the Koran…


• The Truth is only Jesus Christ (4.171)
• The Truth is The Word (6.73, 4.171)
• The Truth created the Universe (6.73, 6.101, 10.5, 14.19, 15.85, 16.3, 29.44, 39.5, 45.22, 46.3, 64.3)
• The Truth paid the debt and is the sacrifice (48.28 )
• The Truth forgives sins (47.2)
• The Truth is “Muhammad” (47.2)


An example...


يأهل الكتب لا تغلوا في دينكم ولا تقولوا على الله
إلا الحق إنما المسيح عيسى ابن مريم رسول الله
وكلمته ألقيها إلى مريم وروح منه فءامنوا بالله
ورسله ولا تقولوا ثلثة انتهوا خيرا لكم إنما الله
إله وحد سبحنه أن يكون له ولد له ما في
السموت وما في الأرض وكفى بالله وكيلا

Ya ahla alkitabi la taghloo fee deenikum wala taqooloo AAala Allahi illa alhaqqa innama almaseehu AAeesa ibnu maryama rasoolu Allahi wakalimatuhu alqaha ila maryama waroohun minhu faaminoo biAllahi warusulihi wala taqooloo thalathatun intahoo khayran lakum innama Allahu ilahun wahidun subhanahu an yakoona lahu waladun lahu ma fee alssamawati wama fee al-ardi wakafa biAllahi wakeelan

4.171 You The Book's family, do not go beyond the limits in your faith, and they do not say on “allah” except The Truth (is) only The Messiah Jesus, Mary's son, “allah’s” messenger, and his Word, cast forth to her, Mary, and Spirit from him; so believe by “allah”, and his messengers, and they do not say "Three." Refrain (it is) certainly agreeable to you, only “allah” one god glory be to him, that He has certainly been his Son, truly His what is in the heavens and in the earth and He sufficed by “allah”, a witness.





Here is the classic definition for “innama”…

إنما = “innama”

“innama” definition:

According to the grammarians, it is a compound of “inna” and “ma”, which latter prevents the former’s having any government: it imports restriction: it imports the restriction of that which it precedes to that which follows it. In other words, it is used to particularize, or specify, or distinguish a thing from other things: it affirms a thing in relation to that which is mentioned after it, and denies it in relation to other things. Some say that it does not import restriction, but only corroboration of an affirmation, because it is a compound of the corroborative “inna” and the redundant “ma” which restrains the former from exercising government, and that it has no application to denote negation implied in restriction. It therefore seems that it is susceptible of both these meanings, bearing one or the other according as this or that suits the place. Rendered as “only”, verily.

References:
An Arabic-English Lexicon, E.W. Lane, volume one, pp. 103 – 111; 118
A Grammar of the Arabic Language, W. Wright, Third edition, volume 1, p. 285
The Dictionary of the Holy Qur’an, 1st edition, Abdul Mannan Omar, p. 35
A Dictionary and Glossary of the Koran, John Penrice, p. 11


The classic definition quite clearly states that “innama” affirms a thing in relation to that which is mentioned after it.

Thus, “alhaqqi” (i.e. The Truth), is the “thing” that is being related to Jesus – which is mentioned after it.

Hence, “The Truth is only Jesus Christ”.


Thus.....its a boom moment for witness-deniers such as yourself....

This is good stuff Apple...Kudos on your thorough study on the subject, it really just establishes & solidifies the deity of Christ even in alternate writings. :thumb:

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

People need to first get saved. You preach the gospel of repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus, the work of salvation the work of God by His Spirit, not by your debating skills! Tell the Jehovah's Witness they belong to a dangerous cult, to read John 1 five hundred times in the King James, then wish them a nice day.

If a person is not saved, all you're doing is arguing with somebody who will never get the things of God, until saved and born of the Holy Spirit. The first step is always, and always has been, receiving the gospel of salvation and being born again, to then grow to understand the things of God. This would be true of dealing with a Muslim or an atheist, also, anybody else such, because the things of God are only understood by His Spirit in us. It's foolishness to expect somebody to understand things they can't possibly understand, to tell a blind person, over and over, "Can't you see that?"

There are a lot of people here who are not saved, in the first place, whose theology is rooted in error and a clear lack of understanding, sadly, issues out the wazoo on messages boards that should not be issues, to real Christians, the deity of the Lord Jesus just one major issue of spiritual blindness. If you're saved, you need to first realize they will never understand, until they're saved. All this endless disputing is nothing, and nowhere. As a matter of fact, the Lord clearly commands you're not to be a some angry and argumentative troll. I really don't know why more people don't find what goes on here a senseless bore, in the main. I see some threads, where narcissistic people are chasing their tails and clawing at each other, for ten pages or more, and question the very intellect of some, for good reason.

Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

1 Timothy 6

3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

 

[Apple7]

This is good stuff Apple...Kudos on your thorough study on the subject, it really just establishes & solidifies the deity of Christ even in alternate writings. :thumb:

Thanks!

 

[Apple7]

People need to first get saved. You preach the gospel of repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus, the work of salvation the work of God by His Spirit, not by your debating skills! Tell the Jehovah's Witness they belong to a dangerous cult, to read John 1 five hundred times in the King James, then wish them a nice day.

If a person is not saved, all you're doing is arguing with somebody who will never get the things of God, until saved and born of the Holy Spirit. The first step is always, and always has been, receiving the gospel of salvation and being born again, to then grow to understand the things of God. This would be true of dealing with a Muslim or an atheist, also, anybody else such, because the things of God are only understood by His Spirit in us. It's foolishness to expect somebody to understand things they can't possibly understand, to tell a blind person, over and over, "Can't you see that?"

There are a lot of people here who are not saved, in the first place, whose theology is rooted in error and a clear lack of understanding, sadly, issues out the wazoo on messages boards that should not be issues, to real Christians, the deity of the Lord Jesus just one major issue of spiritual blindness. If you're saved, you need to first realize they will never understand, until they're saved. All this endless disputing is nothing, and nowhere. As a matter of fact, the Lord clearly commands you're not to be a some angry and argumentative troll. I really don't know why more people don't find what goes on here a senseless bore, in the main. I see some threads, where narcissistic people are chasing their tails and clawing at each other, for ten pages or more, and question the very intellect of some, for good reason.

Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.

1 Timothy 6

3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.

1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

I prefer the Berean approach...

 

[intojoy]

People need to first get saved. You preach the gospel of repentance towards God and faith in the Lord Jesus, the work of salvation the work of God by His Spirit, not by your debating skills! Tell the Jehovah's Witness they belong to a dangerous cult, to read John 1 five hundred times in the King James, then wish them a nice day.



If a person is not saved, all you're doing is arguing with somebody who will never get the things of God, until saved and born of the Holy Spirit. The first step is always, and always has been, receiving the gospel of salvation and being born again, to then grow to understand the things of God. This would be true of dealing with a Muslim or an atheist, also, anybody else such, because the things of God are only understood by His Spirit in us. It's foolishness to expect somebody to understand things they can't possibly understand, to tell a blind person, over and over, "Can't you see that?"



There are a lot of people here who are not saved, in the first place, whose theology is rooted in error and a clear lack of understanding, sadly, issues out the wazoo on messages boards that should not be issues, to real Christians, the deity of the Lord Jesus just one major issue of spiritual blindness. If you're saved, you need to first realize they will never understand, until they're saved. All this endless disputing is nothing, and nowhere. As a matter of fact, the Lord clearly commands you're not to be a some angry and argumentative troll. I really don't know why more people don't find what goes on here a senseless bore, in the main. I see some threads, where narcissistic people are chasing their tails and clawing at each other, for ten pages or more, and question the very intellect of some, for good reason.



Proverbs 26:4 Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him.



1 Timothy 6



3If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

4He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

5Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.



1 Corinthians 2:2 For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.

Not only correct but we are forbidden to give them entry into our homes.
This is misplaced evangelism.

I tell them they are going to hell and shut the door. They feel vindicated as if they are suffering persecution? No big deal - they according to scripture are Untouchable and those who bid them
God speed partake in their Evil deeds.

Ps
The Bereans were unbelievers

 

[Apple7]

Not only correct but we are forbidden to give them entry into our homes.
This is misplaced evangelism.

I tell them they are going to hell and shut the door. They feel vindicated as if they are suffering persecution? No big deal - they according to scripture are Untouchable and those who bid them
God speed partake in their Evil deeds.

Ps
The Bereans were unbelievers

Jews are inherently unbelievers.

The Bereans, however, at least carefully studied their scriptures, and, as a result of this effort, many became believers...

 

[SonOfCaleb]

Spending time with Satan where? In a literal Hell? Gehenna?

Matthew 7:6 "Do not give what is holy to dogs nor throw your pearls before swine, so that they may never trample them under their feet and turn around and rip you open."

 

[SonOfCaleb]

You are blind to the truth of the Scriptures.

Im curious how familiar are you with the history of Triune Gods from a secular/academic viewpoint? As using your line of reasoning you could sensibly assume that Christendom adopted the Trinity teaching from pagan religions, as Triune God heads have been prevalent in antiquity as far back as the Egyptians and also the Babylonians.
Either way the word 'Trinity' isn't found in any Bible translation. There was no concept of the word in early Christian or in Judaic scriptures in Greek, Aramaic or Hebrew prior to 1AD. Not only that none of the so called Early Church Fathers such as Justin or Origen mentioned the Trinity.

Question for you when Jesus was baptized by John and the holy spirit descended on him, Matthew 3:17 says in the New International Version "And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased." Verses 16 & 17 are very clear. The spirit descends upon Jesus and a voice from heaven gives 'his' approval of Jesus. How do you square that circle proverbially if you believe all 3 are one? Presumably you believe Jesus was talking to himself and his spirit or a spirit descended on him also?

 

[KingdomRose]

Re. Apple's post #262:

You are not correct in thinking that you have ripped anyone's beliefs to shreds. You claim that JWs don't know anything about the Trinity doctrine. You've got to be kidding. Trinity advocates are a motley mix. THEY can't agree on what the Trinity is! We've heard so many versions it's almost comical. So it's not that JWs don't know what the Trinity is......Trinity believers don't agree on what the Trinity is!

 

[Apple7]

Re. Apple's post #262:

You are not correct in thinking that you have ripped anyone's beliefs to shreds. You claim that JWs don't know anything about the Trinity doctrine. You've got to be kidding. Trinity advocates are a motley mix. THEY can't agree on what the Trinity is! We've heard so many versions it's almost comical. So it's not that JWs don't know what the Trinity is......Trinity believers don't agree on what the Trinity is!

State for us, right now, in your own words, what you believe The Trinity to be...waiting...