R
rock17
Guest
The begining of the Gospel of John points out the seperate but together elements of God so to all the “Christian” religions who do not believe in the Trinity as being three in one what is your reason for this.
- Status
J
JackVk
Guest
to accomodate their unitarian beliefs, the Jehovah’s Witnesses had to deliberately mistranslate this passage from Greek. Their Bible, the New World Translation, instead of saying “and the Word was God”, it says “the Word was ‘a god’”, since they believe Jesus is a created being. Among the committee of the Watchtower and Tract Society who compiled the New World Translation, only one of them had any academic credentials: he had studied non-Biblical Greek for a few years. Greek scholars say the NWT of the Bible is a horribly inaccurate translation from Greek.
A
AmericanMuslim
Guest
Do you mean John 1:1-5?
R
rock17
Guest
AmericanMuslim yes I am sorry I did not clarify, and to what JackVK said it seems that the Jehovah’s Witnesses seem like they are polytheistic religion if they believe that the word was a seperate god. And polytheism is not a Christian trait.
R
rock17
Guest
So my question is what do Christians who do not believe in the trinity think when it comes to the nature of Jesus and the Holy Spirit and where is your doctrine or scripture on it?
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Some believe that they are separate. Some believe that the Holy Spirit is a spirit of God but part of His being, rather than a persona by Himself. Sort of like every human has a spiritual soul that is part of us. There are not two of us but one soul and body. They believe its the same thing with God and the Holy Spirit.
M
milidrag
Guest
This seems like a fairly good question (although one could point to the ambiguity of the notion ‘nature’, and particularly ‘God’s nature’, as well as principal human inability to comprehend ‘God’s nature’).
Yet, I’m a bit puzzled - how come Roman Catholics don’t pose the same question regarding the Filioque? Where is the doctrine of it in Scripture?
Consequently, what have JWs done differently from RCs?
S
Skeptic92
Guest
For those non-Christians that have posted, incase you are unsure of what the OP means, heres the section of John 1 that s/he’s on about
[BIBLEDRB]John 1:1-20[/BIBLEDRB]
Yes in my opinion it’s quite solid evidence for the trinity, as God is referred to as the “Word” and St John states that the “Word was made flesh”, basically saying that God was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us.
[BIBLEDRB]John 1:1-20[/BIBLEDRB]
Yes in my opinion it’s quite solid evidence for the trinity, as God is referred to as the “Word” and St John states that the “Word was made flesh”, basically saying that God was made flesh, and dwelt amongst us.
R
rock17
Guest
Not sure what the filioque and i am still kind of confused by your post. And John does talk about the nature of God in the first chapter.
M
milidrag
Guest
Sorry, there is a chance it was me who misread your argument and that filioque does have nothing with this.
My argument was that non-Trinitarians apply the same technique as those who profess filioque - disregarding what’s been revealed about God through the Holy Bible (both Old and New Testament). Yet, I’m not so sure anymore that the debate about it wouldn’t amount to hijacking your thread. So, feel free to disregard it.
N
Nicea325
Guest
Actually there is scriptural support and the East did come to an agreement in the 15th century,but lasted shortly. However, this is not the thread.
R
rock17
Guest
Milidrag i now see where you are coming from but unless you feel different from the fact that there are three persons in one God than i think we are on the same page i know there is a difference between the orthodox and roman catholic teaching but this thread is mainly pointed at the lds and JWs who have a completly different view of the “nature of God.”
So any lds or non trininatarian christians please jump on in.
thank you skeptic92
So any lds or non trininatarian christians please jump on in.
thank you skeptic92
J
jamil_joseph02
Guest
I know of a denomination who views the Father as “God alone” and Jesus and Holy Spirit were but created beings. They view Jesus as purely man, but believe He is “a special man,” the thing that makes Him different from us. They don’t believe in the Holy Spirit as a person. All they know is that there are “seven spirits of God” as mentioned in Revelation 7. Thus they thought we Trinitarians believe in “seven Holy Spirits,” and they go further and even concluding that “so you have actually nine Gods! (Father + Son + 7 Holy Spirits).”
I guess that’s the problem of assuming Unitarianism.
A
agent_grey
Guest
How about we look into what star wars has to say about God. Only then will we have certainty.
Or how about the Matrix. That ones got to inspired.
Seriously do you honestly think a slice of literature is how God reveals himself.
How about your conscience? Ever thought of looking into that one for your answer.
Or how about the Matrix. That ones got to inspired.
Seriously do you honestly think a slice of literature is how God reveals himself.
How about your conscience? Ever thought of looking into that one for your answer.
R
rock17
Guest
I cannot believe you just compared Star Wars to the Bible!
well i looked to my conscience and i know what i believe i just wanted to know what others beleive. Your post was way uncalled for and quite combative i don’t understand why you took this defensive stance noone was attacking anyone so instead of trying to take away from a conversation that could have some good why don’t you actually try and sound intelligent and talk about the topic at hand.God bless.
B
Big_Dummy
Guest
Filioque? huh
forananswer.org/John/Jn1_1.htm
Arians and Semi-Arians read “the word was God” as “the word was a god” in the sense that an angel is called a god or mighty one. Not as a second god, but as a second created being with divine influnce like an angel has.
UPC, Jesus only, or sabellianists aka modalists, reads “the word was god” as “the word was the father”. I know this contradicts “the word was[face to face] with god”.
google.com/#hl=en&sa=X&ei=aA4RToGcDsTEsQLs_6GLCg&ved=0CCYQBSgA&q=John+1%3A1+modalism,+sabellianism,+%22jesus+only%22+UPC&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=John+1:1+Arianism+%22semi-arianism%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
Mormons tends to go something like Joseph Smith’s translation of Bible, but there are many different spins depending on which LDS you talk to and how educated that person is in their theology.
John 1:1–34
1In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.
lds.org/scriptures/jst/jst-john/1?lang=eng
restorationherald.blogspot.com/2008/01/arianism-and-semi-arianism.html
Biblical Unitarians … well read for yourself,
biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=61
google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=John+1:1+unitarians&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
forananswer.org/John/Jn1_1.htm
Arians and Semi-Arians read “the word was God” as “the word was a god” in the sense that an angel is called a god or mighty one. Not as a second god, but as a second created being with divine influnce like an angel has.
UPC, Jesus only, or sabellianists aka modalists, reads “the word was god” as “the word was the father”. I know this contradicts “the word was[face to face] with god”.
google.com/#hl=en&sa=X&ei=aA4RToGcDsTEsQLs_6GLCg&ved=0CCYQBSgA&q=John+1%3A1+modalism,+sabellianism,+%22jesus+only%22+UPC&spell=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=John+1:1+Arianism+%22semi-arianism%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
Mormons tends to go something like Joseph Smith’s translation of Bible, but there are many different spins depending on which LDS you talk to and how educated that person is in their theology.
John 1:1–34
1In the beginning was the gospel preached through the Son. And the gospel was the word, and the word was with the Son, and the Son was with God, and the Son was of God.
lds.org/scriptures/jst/jst-john/1?lang=eng
restorationherald.blogspot.com/2008/01/arianism-and-semi-arianism.html
Biblical Unitarians … well read for yourself,
biblicalunitarian.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=61
google.com/#sclient=psy&hl=en&source=hp&q=John+1:1+unitarians&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=bb9a4fba297be287&biw=1024&bih=468
R
rock17
Guest
Alright now we are getting somewhere now do these people believe in that Christ is God or is He a lower being or who is Jesus and the Holy Spirit?
So it seems like there is a difference of translation here. not just interpratation.
S
stevekehl
Guest
Well, Star Wars had Darth Vader, the father, Luke Skywalker, the son, and Obi Wan Kenobi, who became a spirit after death. The Matrix had Orpheus, father figure, Neo, sent into the matrix to save the world, and** Trinity**.
I guess these works were unconsciously edifying Christianity. Is the Bible as literature a teaching of the Orthodix Catholic Church?
R
rock17
Guest
well it looks like no one wanted to touch this one last call for any lds or JWs who want to talk about this
- Status