W
- Status
Right; that particular pamphlet is not currently on the jw.org website.
They have this instead:
jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201308/trinity/
Same subject and title but the supporting authorities are different. It might be interesting for someone to look up the authorities here as well and see what they really say.
W
Waynec
Guest
I took a look at this article. It is very short in comparison to the “Trinity” magazine. I find it interesting that they would quote the KJ bible and not their own. I am going to see what I can find out about this article.
And do I want to waste my time on their article???
Notice how they always name the Catholics?
It is hard to discuss with them because they don’t beleive in Tradition or the Church Fathers if they are even allowed to read the Church Fathers.
On second thought I don’t think I’ll waste my time.
A
ajcstr
Guest
From the Catechism - they quote from paragraph 251:
249 From the beginning, the revealed truth of the Holy Trinity has been at the very root of the Church’s living faith, principally by means of Baptism. It finds its expression in the rule of baptismal faith, formulated in the preaching, catechesis and prayer of the Church. Such formulations are already found in the apostolic writings, such as this salutation taken up in the Eucharistic liturgy: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ and the love of God and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
250 During the first centuries the Church sought to clarify her Trinitarian faith, both to deepen her own understanding of the faith and to defend it against the errors that were deforming it. This clarification was the work of the early councils, aided by the theological work of the Church Fathers and sustained by the Christian people’s sense of the faith.
251 In order to articulate the dogma of the Trinity, the Church had to develop her own terminology with the help of certain notions of philosophical origin: “substance”, “person” or “hypostasis”, “relation” and so on. In doing this, she did not submit the faith to human wisdom, but gave a new and unprecedented meaning to these terms, which from then on would be used to signify an ineffable mystery, “infinitely beyond all that we can humanly understand”.
252 The Church uses (I) the term “substance” (rendered also at times by “essence” or “nature”) to designate the divine being in its unity, (II) the term “person” or “hypostasis” to designate the Father, Son and Holy Spirit in the real distinction among them, and (III) the term “relation” to designate the fact that their distinction lies in the relationship of each to the others.
A
ajcstr
Guest
This is what you can see for free on the Britannica site:
Trinity, in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.
Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presumed presence and power of God among them—i.e., the Holy Spirit, whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, …
britannica.com/topic/Trinity-Christianity
As always, the JW cut off where necessary to skew the context.
Trinity, in Christian doctrine, the unity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three persons in one Godhead.
Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Hebrew Scriptures: “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4). The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications of the coming of Jesus Christ and of the presumed presence and power of God among them—i.e., the Holy Spirit, whose coming was connected with the celebration of the Pentecost. The Father, Son, …
britannica.com/topic/Trinity-Christianity
As always, the JW cut off where necessary to skew the context.
A
ajcstr
Guest
So I had a visitor yesterday which I am sorry to say I was totally unprepared for. But in the course of conversation we were talking about Bible versions and she said it didn’t matter what version I used as if I compared the NWT to any other version it would not be that different.
I said that that was not a true statement and that the NWT was vastly different, then we got into the divinity of Christ and the Trinity and it was downhill from there. Again, I talk, get blank stare.
Anyway, this is not the first time a JW told me it didn’t matter what version I used. Is this just a “sales” tactic? I would think that they know how different their version is, especially with regard to Christ’s nature and John 1 sticks out like a sore thumb. I like to think that the people on the street at least are on the up and up but my experience has shown me the opposite.
On a side note, she said she was a Catholic before and she seemed to have no idea Catholics believed in a literal resurrection of the body. She said on ash Wednesday the priest says we will return to dust.
I said that that was not a true statement and that the NWT was vastly different, then we got into the divinity of Christ and the Trinity and it was downhill from there. Again, I talk, get blank stare.
Anyway, this is not the first time a JW told me it didn’t matter what version I used. Is this just a “sales” tactic? I would think that they know how different their version is, especially with regard to Christ’s nature and John 1 sticks out like a sore thumb. I like to think that the people on the street at least are on the up and up but my experience has shown me the opposite.
On a side note, she said she was a Catholic before and she seemed to have no idea Catholics believed in a literal resurrection of the body. She said on ash Wednesday the priest says we will return to dust.
F
fbl9
Guest
We do return to dust physically when we die but on the last day our bodies are resurrected.
A
ajcstr
Guest
Understood, but I’m not sure she realized that
F
fbl9
Guest
Sorry
i read it the wrong way.Speaking with JW’s is a challenge especially clueless former Catholics.
L
Logically
Guest
If they had used the NWT in the article, critics would just say:
“That’s their own Bible! They have obviously changed it to cut out the Trinity!”
So, in cases like this the JWs use a widely accepted translation (KJV or NIV) to show what they are arguing is what the Bible actually says.
Please don’t consider reasoning on what the Bible says a waste of your time.
L
Logically
Guest
I totally agree with that statement he made.
In fact our new app for the Bible has several common translations included and we are encouraged to show people how other translations read. After all, the NWT still doesnt exist in many languages, (or at all until the 1960’s) yet we continue to teach and preach with whatever translation is available or people prefer.
The excuse: “Oh they must have changed the Bible.” every time we show someone a scripture is rather weak.
A
ajcstr
Guest
The NWT has CLEARLY changed (CHANGED) (ALTERED) every reference to the divinity of Christ in the NT although the first edition did miss Hebrews 1:6. How can you possibly defend that. I will state here that I do not know Greek at all. I rely on people who do know Greek, to render an English version for me. Why would anyone trust renderings that have never been seen until the mid 1900’s made by translators that were unknown?I totally agree with that statement he made.
In fact our new app for the Bible has several common translations included and we are encouraged to show people how other translations read. After all, the NWT still doesnt exist in many languages, (or at all until the 1960’s) yet we continue to teach and preach with whatever translation is available or people prefer.
The excuse: “Oh they must have changed the Bible.” every time we show someone a scripture is rather weak.
Why do YOU use the NWT? Do you personally use any other versions?
PS - Nice to chat with you again
A
ajcstr
Guest
I saw a pretty good video that hit home for me, I would be interested to get Logically’s take on this:
The NT (non NWT) teaches three things regarding “God”
The NT of the NWT teaches 1 and 3 but not 2.
When JW argue against the Trinity, they are arguing against a Trinity that is defined by 1 and 2.
The NT (non NWT) teaches three things regarding “God”
- There is ONE God
- The Father, Son, Holy Spirit are described as God
- The Father, Son, Holy Spirit are separate persons
The NT of the NWT teaches 1 and 3 but not 2.
When JW argue against the Trinity, they are arguing against a Trinity that is defined by 1 and 2.
S
ShanPO
Guest
Can you post a link to that video, please?
A
ajcstr
Guest
I sent you a PM with the link - I want to stick to the question asked for now only because I keep hearing from JW that the NWT is not that different from the other versions.
W
Waynec
Guest
I didn’t mean that studying the bible is a waste of time. I meant that it is a waste of my time to point out the untruths of the particular article. Christians reading this particular article will see the untruths and a Witness will beleive the article with out question.I
Please don’t consider reasoning on what the Bible says a waste of your time.
Welcome Back
I
imerej
Guest
Hi,
I would want to seek your advise because my JW boyfriend and I have been together for more than 2 years now and it seems that everytime we exchange religious views, we end up at arguments or debates in defense of each of our faiths.
We love each other so much! I can tell he loves me because he is a baptized JW and has surrendered most of his time with me, to the extent that he rarely attends their meetings. But something seems to still be lacking. You know, I kept praying to God for guidance and strength and patience that my JW boyfriend may have a change of heart and that he may welcome the Truth in the teachings of the Catholic faith.
Meantime, any advise that could strengthen my faith?
I would want to seek your advise because my JW boyfriend and I have been together for more than 2 years now and it seems that everytime we exchange religious views, we end up at arguments or debates in defense of each of our faiths.
We love each other so much! I can tell he loves me because he is a baptized JW and has surrendered most of his time with me, to the extent that he rarely attends their meetings. But something seems to still be lacking. You know, I kept praying to God for guidance and strength and patience that my JW boyfriend may have a change of heart and that he may welcome the Truth in the teachings of the Catholic faith.
Meantime, any advise that could strengthen my faith?
A
adf417
Guest
Greetings imerej and welcome to CAF. My heart felt prayers go out for you today.
1st and foremost we Christians MUST be Christlike in our dialogue and exchange with ALL people. This is very difficult to do when emotions come into play and our faith is questioned. So my 1st advice is- “be not afraid”, “His yoke is easy and His burden light”.
Truth is absolute and a loving God would not leave us in a state where this truth would be obscure or unknowable. If any argument ends up unsettled or in a state of tension it is not of God.
My 2nd advice, and ultimately the single point of all contention within Christianity, is determining which “authority” we should follow. If the bible is the authority then you can plan on debating till the end of time as there is no authority in the bible that tells us how to interpret its own self. If authority comes from an organization, and even JW’s will eventually get to this realization at some point, then you must vet this authority.
Jesus left us a Church and this Church is alive and well today and everyday since, completely full of sinners but he also said not to worry because “I will be with you till the end of the age”.
Peace!!!
A
ajcstr
Guest
Read the Bible and the Catechism so that you have a clear understanding of your faith. Pray and make use of the sacraments.
Some things to consider (Every JW I have ever met has been a wonderful, dedicated person so understand where I am coming from - these are observations I have made personally).
JW know THE WORDS of the Bible extremely well, there is no denying that but their interpretations are drawn from the Millerite Movement in the early 1800’s and Seventh Day Adventism which the JW’s basically are offshoots of.
After 2000 years of Christianity, how could they produce a translation of the Bible (New World Translation) that contains rendering of verses that no christian would have ever seen before. Did their translators have a unique understanding of Greek that no one else ever had or did they just rewrite the verses that disagree with their theology.
They accuse Christianity of falling into apostasy in the first few centuries. That would mean the first Christians who were taught by the apostles (verbally as there was no NT yet) got everything drastically wrong or they went off course later. We have the writings of those that were taught either directly by apostles or were twice removed. These writings agree with what is taught today, so where did the apostasy occur? In contrast compare what Russell and Rutherford (first two leaders of the JW) taught and you will find many differences.
In every JW publication I read I have noticed that they use quotes, but seldom give you enough information to go back and read that quote. For instance, “Bible scholar Bruce Metzger says…” Or “A Trinitarian monk added …”. Contrast that to most other publications that will cite exactly where a quote is coming from.
Hope this helps, again read the Bible, understand why the Catholic Church believes what it believes. Stay close to the sacraments. That’s how you strengthen your Faith.
P
Porknpie
Guest
Imerej -
Couple of things not in any order:
- Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You can use the CCC when discussing areas of faith with your boyfriend. There are an endless number of footnote references to scripture and writings of Church councils supporting Church teaching.
- Catholic.com. - where you have questions, use search the library and forums. The library has many tracts covering Witness apologetic points
- Walking With God - I can’t recommend this book enough. It’s a journey through the bible, basically a commentary. I doesn’t cover every book but covers the timeline to present the “big picture”.
- In speaking with Witnesses or Mormons, I always have this question early in the conversation… understanding that they believe that the Church lost the true faith, went apostate after the death of the last apostle (confirm this with your boyfriend, the normally answer by 100 ad), how is it that they accept as infallible, the 27 book canon of the NT? This wasn’t discerned and affirmed until the late 4th century. 27 books out of several hundred early Christian writings.
Those fallible men were Catholic Bishops.
Who also professed some 50+ years earlier, in 325 at Nicea, the Doctrine of the Trinity.
And they ALL professed belief in the Eucharist.
Every one of them.
- Status