Jehovahs Witnesses article attacking the Deity of Christ again

  • Thread starter Thread starter yogosans14
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SPH1 said:
Come on, knock it off. The Trinity, IMO, has an allusion in nature. Siamese Twins. You have two persons in one body. When one person speaks to the other, they aren’t speaking to themself. So Christ can speak/pray to the Father as a separate person, while being in the same body of the Godhead.

I suppose with Siamese Triplets we have an example of the entire Trinity.

Siamese Twins no doubt would be considered a disability of nature. However, one shining light is that this condition can reveal how the Trinity can not only be possible, but conceivable.
Click to expand...
Idk about this… it just sounds so wrong to me.

Comparing siamese twins is like comparing regular twins. I hate analogies to the Trinity because they always have holes in them and just never feel right.
 
dronald said:
Idk about this… it just sounds so wrong to me.

Comparing siamese twins is like comparing regular twins. I hate analogies to the Trinity because they always have holes in them and just never feel right.
Click to expand...
I don’t see comparing Siamese twins as regular twins. I think that Siamese twins are the closest thing nature has to conceive of the trinity: three persons in one godhead. Siamese twins are two persons in one body. Siamese triplets would be three persons in one body.

I don’t offer the example of Siamese twins as a perfect example of God/Trinity. God is much more complex. Still, I think Siamese twins are an (albeit imperfect) example: two persons in one body. And this is not multiple personality disorder.

IMHO, the example of Siamese twins should work against all JW, Muslim, etc., attacks against the “absurdity” or “impossibility” of the Trinity doctrine.

Do you have a better example for the Trinity doctrine?
 
SPH1 said:
I don’t see comparing Siamese twins as regular twins. I think that Siamese twins are the closest thing nature has to conceive of the trinity: three persons in one godhead.

I don’t offer the example of siamese twins as a perfect example of God/Trinity. God is much more complex. Still, I think Siamese twins are an (albeit imperfect) example: two persons in one body.

IMHO, the example of Siamese twins should work against all JW, Muslim, etc., attacks against the “absurdity” of the Trinity doctrine.

Do you have a better example for the Trinity doctrine?
Click to expand...
The problem with this analogy is that Jesus is 100% God and does not share with the Father, nor does the Father share with the Son who is also 100% God. When we look at the Trinity in human terms it says that Jesus is 33%, the Father is 33% likewise the Holy Spirit. So to say a persons head on a body takes up one half of the body is a false analogy theologically.

The best analogy I can give is the human body as it relates to the soul. We are not 50% body and 50% soul, rather we are 100% body and 100% soul. Our body is not our soul nor is our soul our body, yet they share in complete unity as one.
 
dronald said:
The problem with this analogy is that Jesus is 100% God and does not share with the Father, nor does the Father share with the Son who is also 100% God. When we look at the Trinity in human terms it says that Jesus is 33%, the Father is 33% likewise the Holy Spirit. So to say a persons head on a body takes up one half of the body is a false analogy theologically.

The best analogy I can give is the human body as it relates to the soul. We are not 50% body and 50% soul, rather we are 100% body and 100% soul. Our body is not our soul nor is our soul our body, yet they share in complete unity as one.
Click to expand...
I said I didn’t offer Siamese twins as a perfect example. Just an example.

I don’t know about your figures, whether they are theologically correct.

I guess whatever works as an explanation. You go with your figures and I’ll throw the fact of Siamese twins on Trinity doubters. Hopefully it all works out for the greater glory of God in the end.

As a side note, I think that it is a great shining light on the “tragedy” of Siamese twins to point to the truth of the Trinity doctrine. That perhaps God made it so.
 
SPH1 said:
I said I didn’t offer Siamese twins as a perfect example. Just an example.

I don’t know about your figures, whether they are theologically correct.

I guess whatever works as an explanation. You go with your figures and I’ll throw the fact of Siamese twins on Trinity doubters. Hopefully it all works out for the greater glory of God in the end.

As a side note, I think that it is a great shining light on the “tragedy” of Siamese twins to point to the truth of the Trinity doctrine. That perhaps God made it so.
Click to expand...
The only reason I say anything is Trinitarians are often careful not to say Jesus is 33% God, because that would be false, rather Jesus is completely 100% God. So with the siamese if one brain even controls one arm then you have a person who is 10% and the other person is 90%.

The siamese analogy can’t work because each person would have to be 100% of the person, and that’s physically impossible. That’s why I think only Spiritual analogies work. Another one I hear often is the 3 leaf clover but that also carries the same problem because each individual leaf would have to be the entire clover… again, such is physically impossible.
 
dronald said:
The only reason I say anything is Trinitarians are often careful not to say Jesus is 33% God, because that would be false, rather Jesus is completely 100% God. So with the siamese if one brain even controls one arm then you have a person who is 10% and the other person is 90%.

The siamese analogy can’t work because each person would have to be 100% of the person, and that’s physically impossible. That’s why I think only Spiritual analogies work. Another one I hear often is the 3 leaf clover but that also carries the same problem because each individual leaf would have to be the entire clover… again, such is physically impossible.
Click to expand...
I agree with you completely. The analogies of the 3 leaf clover, water (liquid, solid and gas) and the Siamese twins idea all fall so short that we should never really use them at all. 👍
 
dronald said:
The only reason I say anything is Trinitarians are often careful not to say Jesus is 33% God, because that would be false, rather Jesus is completely 100% God. So with the siamese if one brain even controls one arm then you have a person who is 10% and the other person is 90%.

The siamese analogy can’t work because each person would have to be 100% of the person, and that’s physically impossible. That’s why I think only Spiritual analogies work. Another one I hear often is the 3 leaf clover but that also carries the same problem because each individual leaf would have to be the entire clover… again, such is physically impossible.
Click to expand...
I don’t know how Siamese twins work with regard to their one body. I’d probably assume that each “brain/head” can control the entire body. Otherwise, how could they walk, if each brain/head controlled one leg? I don’t know.

I think that the Siamese twins are an as good “imperfect” analogy as the three-leaf clover and the water-gas-ice analogy. But from what I hear you saying, there is really no analogy for the Trinity. I’m still going to go with the Siamese twins if presented the opportunity.

I think you are trying to take an imperfect analogy and make it into a full proof. That was never my intention. Just the basic concept of two persons in one body, I think, is a sufficient starting place as against Trinity deniers who think the concept absurd and impossible. Nature already shows that is is not absurd or impossible.

Since the Catholic Faith is not, at its core, inconsistent with true science, I think that one day physics will be able to demonstrate via an equation on a blackboard not only the Trinity doctrine but also Transubstantiation and the mass as the representation of the Sacrafice on Calvary. For the latter, perhaps a bending of time and space to one point at each Mass. But I digress…
 
SPH1 said:
I don’t know how Siamese twins work with regard to their one body. I’d probably assume that each “brain/head” can control the entire body. Otherwise, how could they walk, if each brain/head controlled one leg? I don’t know.

I think that the Siamese twins are an as good “imperfect” analogy as the three-leaf clover and the water-gas-ice analogy. But from what I hear you saying, there is really no analogy for the Trinity. I’m still going to go with the Siamese twins if presented the opportunity.

I think you are trying to take an imperfect analogy and make it into a full proof. That was never my intention. Just the basic concept of two persons in one body, I think, is a sufficient starting place as against Trinity deniers who think the concept absurd and impossible. Nature already shows that is is not absurd or impossible.

Since the Catholic Faith is not, at its core, inconsistent with true science, I think that one day physics will be able to demonstrate via an equation on a blackboard not only the Trinity doctrine but also Transubstantiation and the mass as the representation of the Sacrafice on Calvary. For the latter, perhaps a bending of time and space to one point at each Mass. But I digress…
Click to expand...
If you have the time then check out this video:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=P10rHuAb4MU

Nabeel’s first step towards accepting the Trinity had to do with sub atomic particles and physics. There’s a great analogy in there but I don’t have time to watch the whole video right now.

He went from Islam to Christianity.
 
McCartney said:
I believe the human form of Jesus was praying to the Father.
Click to expand...
You cannot separate the humanity of Christ from his divinity. He has two natures but he is one Person. His human will was perfectly aligned to his divine will. When Jesus prayed to the Father it was as a Son, not as a type of nature (human).
 
dronald said:
My favourite is, “All [other] things were made through him.” Where in the world can you find the word, “other” in the Greek?
Click to expand...
In their "new"bible the word other is not put in parenthesis any more. It is just out there for all to read in error.
 
Phyllo said:
In their "new"bible the word other is not put in parenthesis any more. It is just out there for all to read in error.
Click to expand...
Well apparently the JW’s that came to my door last week didn’t have the new one then.

I always ask them what they believe about Jesus and when they twist “firstborn” I ask them to show me where that is in the Bible. I then point to that silly word in brackets and ask them if they know why it’s there. I guess things just got more challenging.

Guess I gotta bring out my Greek papers. 🙂
 
Matt_Guitar_Man said:
Are you asserting that God cant be 2 persons or for that matter 3 at the same time and still be God?
Click to expand...
No not in the slightest. I’m merely saying it defies logic to the point that asserting it as truth upon others is foolish. It is not some clear evident truth. It is a mystery of a particular faith. God may be and he may not. I believe in many Gods so this is just my logical observations.
 
SteveVH said:
The difference here being that we did not arrive at this conclusion on our own. The Trinity is a divinely revealed truth, not one arrived at through human endeavor. We only seek to understand what has been revealed and no human words will ever adequately explain such a mystery. Yet we believe it because of the One who revealed it.

This may be difficult for you to understand as all of your “gods” can be explained and understood with the human mind because they are a product of the human mind, making them no greater than the one who conceived them in the first place. In short, any god who can be fully understood with the human mind cannot be God.
Click to expand...
Oh please don’t patronize me.
I am familiar with the doctrine of the trinity. But the claim of revelation does not make it true I’m not saying someone was lying so much as pointing out that too many people lay claim to divine revelation to lay claim to having the right one.
My Gods cannot fully be understood in the slightest. Do not mistake that I can never fully understand Odin or Thor or Loki or any of them but I won’t shoot down other personal revelations for THIS VERY REASON. Your God is infinite but he seems rather boxed in to me.
 
Lokadottir said:
No not in the slightest. I’m merely saying it defies logic to the point that asserting it as truth upon others is foolish. It is not some clear evident truth. It is a mystery of a particular faith. God may be and he may not. I believe in many Gods so this is just my logical observations.
Click to expand...
Good answer. We do come to God by/through faith. I am glad you acknowledge that for God the trinity is indeed possible.
 
Lokadottir said:
No because this was the physical reality before him! That is my point in this.
Click to expand...
I thought your point was that whatever one person views is his reality, is his reality.

Is that not a correct explication of your POV?
 
PRmerger said:
I thought your point was that whatever one person views is his reality, is his reality.

Is that not a correct explication of your POV?
Click to expand...
Physical reality is in fact to some degree this way, (everybody can think back to fights with their siblings) but everything is more or less the same as long as all minds are healthy.
The issue is that nonphysical reality can never even be confirmed definitively and therefore no matter what one believes, it boils down to faith and should be treated as such.
 
Lokadottir said:
The issue is that nonphysical reality can never even be confirmed definitively and therefore no matter what one believes, it boils down to faith and should be treated as such.
Click to expand...
What about using logic and reason to come to a Truth about nonphysical reality? Can that be a way to come to Truth?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top