Cos

To all!
 
I’ve never seen so much hypocrisy; I am accused of changing the subject by a name caller, when it is everyone else going off subject. But “the Praeceter” is silent on this…why?
 
You know when people get intimidated by the truth they resort to childish acts of trying to humiliate others by poking fun at them or insulting them, this is NOT how Christians behave…"by their fruits you would recognize them", I believe bruceq quoted this, and then there is the person who thinks his a duck…I have to scratch my head in wonder on this one?
 
Hypocrisy seems to be the common trait with JWs, the claim on the uses of symbols is a point in fact. JW will point the finger and make false accusations which have no bearing of truth. Yet you are the ones guilty of using pagan symbols mixed in as Christian. Charles T. Russell’s gave site…pagan! The cover of Watchtower books with the Egyptian Sun god RA emblazoned on the cover…pagan!  And the list goes on.
 
But I’m even more dumbfounded by the claim made that it is not “fair to say that Arians didn't appear until the 4th century”. This is historically incorrect.
 
The Arian belief system appeared in the fourth century and is the closest to match the JW form of religion, although Arius and JWs differ on the personality of the Holy Spirit among some minor other things.
 
If any form of Arian belief system were present before Arius was even born then the ANF writers, who denounced false teachings, would surely have made mention of any such group! <><

Hello Mr. Joyce,
 
What’s with the different post to answer one post?  You responded to me in FOUR different post, what’s with that?
 
I will respond to your posts in one post.
 
You JW’s, or whatever Arian background you hail, when shown what the first Christians said and believed, make the ridiculous comment like “I do not see the word trinity here…”.
 
You go one and say that you “find any attempt to draw a trinitarian view from 58:2 objectively to be futile” well then please do tell me WHAT you think Clement meant?
 
Here is what he said again;
“For as God lives, and as the Lord Jesus Christ lives, and the Holy Spirit, who are the faith and the hope of the elect.... Amen.” (Letter of Clement to the Corinthians, 58:2)
 
Now you also bring up another objection, which is quite common by JWs who are unaware of history unless it is printed in the pages of that bogus magazine.
 
Why does Clement refer to the phoenix in his letter? You guys really NEED to do some proper Bible study!
 
In order to better grasp the significance of Clement’s use of the phoenix story, we need to uncover some additional background, let’s remember that the early Christians only had access to the Jewish OT.
 
Now the tale of the phoenix is actually found in the Jewish Scriptures – the book of Job.
 
Job 29:18 reads,
 
“Then I said: 'I shall die with my nest, and I shall multiply my days as the phoenix” (JPS)
 
“And I thought, 'I will pass away in my nest, and like the phoenix I shall multiply my days.” LEB
 
“Then I said, "I shall grow old as a palm trunk, and I shall multiply my days as a phoenix'.” (Bullinger Companion Bible)
 
“I said, ‘I will die with my nest, and I will live as long as a phoenix” (The Complete Jewish Bible)
 
Clement symbolic rhetoric device that the phoenix dies and its nest and returns for a length of days seems to have its origins in Scripture.
 
First let me state that the translation above is debatable, for the Hebrew word chol (or Khole) is typically translated in one of three different ways.
 
1.    Sand
2.    Phoenix (see above translation)
3.    Palm tree
 
In almost every context the Hebrew word chol means “sand”. We would expect that that would be the Jewish interpretation. Instead the rabbis unanimously render the word in Job as “phoenix”. According to the Jewish Midrashim document Genesis Bereshit Rabba it explains how Eve “gave the cattle, beasts, and birds to eat of [the forbidden fruit]. All obeyed her and ate thereof, except a certain bird named chol, as it is written, “Then I said: I shall die with my nest, and I shall multiply my days as the chol.” (Job 29:18).
 
Any good Bible commentary such as Albert Barns’ Notes on the Bible, or Kiel and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament, or any commentary that has an extended discussion on Job 29:18 will add more depth than I can show here in this short space.
 
The Jews have always believed that Job 29:18 is speaking of the phoenix bird, in fact if you look up any Jewish translation of Job, you will see that verse 18 is translated as referring to the “phoenix” and not “sand” note how Job dies in his “nest”. This would seem to favour (US favor) the Jewish rendering, some say.
 
NOW here is the point, it is very likely that Clement who could only have access to the Jewish Scriptures, had Job 29:18 in his thoughts because he goes on after mentioning the phoenix to quote passages from Job to explain the long expected hope of the resurrection. Didn’t you see this fact?
 
Moving on quickly, yes I disagree with your idea of “general principles” because like I said, who decided what the “general principles” are? You?
 
I’ll stop now as I have other things to do, I look forward to hearing what you think Clement meant by what you call “the 3-part construction”. <><

Hello Mister Joyce,
 
My deepest and sincere apology on referring to you as “Ms” I meant  “Mr” all I can say is that I for some reason pressed ‘s’ instead of ‘r’. Please accept my apology.
 
You say, “General principles can be drawn from Biblical passages, regardless of context.” I disagree. Who decided what the “general principles” are? In fact 2 Peter 3:16 is applicable in this instance. One must be careful to not read their own ideas into Scripture that is not the intent of the author.
 
I had asked you to explain what you were taught on the Trinity when you were growing up a Roman catholic but you say nothing on this, so I will ask again, can you tell me what you were taught?
 
You ask if I can quote first century examples from the early Christians, you do know that the first century is counted from the year 1 to the year 100 AD? The second century begins from 101 to 200 and so forth. You know we are living in the 21st century don’t you? The last book of the NT was written in the early 90’s of the first century.
 
Anyway, at the turn of the century, that is 100 AD, a person called Clement, believed to be the Clement mentioned in Phil. 4:3, wrote a letter to the church in Corinth, in that letter he said;
 
“For as God lives, and as the Lord Jesus Christ lives, and the Holy Spirit, who are the faith and the hope of the elect.... Amen.” (Letter of Clement to the Corinthians, 58:2)
 
The three are coordinated in this oath. This faith and hope by “the elect” (those, WHO BELIEVE the truth) is straight forward and is reliant on the three together.
 
Let me know if you require more proof on the Trinitarian belief of the first Christians. <><

Hello Ms O’Maly
 
Thank you for your thoughts.
 
Firstly you should look up Messianic Jews on the web, such as “Jews for Jesus”, and ask them whether they are “guided” and “influenced” to believe what they believe by others as you imply; I very much doubt it, but I can’t answer for them.
 
Secondly, can I just say your comment about what you heard “by the non-trinitarian JWs” about reading the Bible on its own is strange, for the Watchtower “warns” JW’s NOT do this.
 
“From time to time, there have arisen from among the ranks of Jehovah’s people those, who, like the original Satan, have adopted an independent, faultfinding attitude... They say that it is sufficient to read the Bible exclusively, either alone or in small groups at home. But, strangely, through such Bible reading, they have reverted right back to the apostate doctrines that commentators by Christendom’s clergy were teaching 100 years ago...”” (Watchtower, August 15, 1981)
 
And
 
" . . . people cannot see the Divine Plan in studying the Bible by itself . . . if he then lays them [Scripture Studies] aside and ignores them and goes to the bible alone, though he has understood his Bible for ten years, our experience shows that within two years he goes into darkness...," (Watchtower, Sept. 15, 1910, p. 298).
 
So basically, what they are saying to the JW’s is that if they read the Bible on its own then after a short time they will believe exactly what I believe, how revealing is that!
 
I don’t know what kind of “killer texts” would satisfy your query; all I can do is show what the early church has believed.
 
Irenaeus (120-202) "For I have shown from the scriptures, that no one of the sons of Adam is as to everything, and absolutely, called God, or named Lord. But that He is Himself in His own right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, and Lord, and King Eternal, and the Incarnate Word, proclaimed by all the prophets, the apostles, and by the Spirit Himself, may be seen by all who have attained to even a small portion of the truth. Now, the scriptures would not have testified these things of Him, if, like others, He had been a mere man.” (Against Heresies, book 3, chapter 19)
 
Tertullian (155-220) "Thus the connection of the Father in the Son, and of the Son in the Paraclete, produces three coherent Persons, who are yet distinct One from Another. These Three are, one essence, not one Person” (Against Praxeas, chapter 25)
 
Hippolytus  (170-235) “A man, therefore, even though he will it not, is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ Jesus the Son of God, who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father made all things subject, Himself excepted, and the Holy Spirit; and that these, therefore, are three.” (Against The Heresy Of One Noetus, section 8)
 
This is just a few examples of what the early Christians believed; there are many more exemplar that could be called on. <><

Hello Bruceq,
 
You bring up the issue of war. And that somehow this issue justifies your Arian claim. JWs proclaim “we don’t participate in war” so therefore “we” are correct. This self-righteous stance does not prove that God is not Triune.  
 
First of all, let’s note that under Charles T. Russell’s direction the then JWs (known as Bible Students) were “allowed” to take part in war. See Zion's Watch Tower 1898 Aug 1 p.231 and Zion's Watch Tower 1903 Apr 15 p.120,
 
War is one of the worst happenings that confront all of us, we can only hope for the time when war is no more. But till then we cannot ignore the continual rise of false political idealism. Consider what the world would have been like if no one had stood up to the Nazi Germany?
 
The Bible even says in Ecclesiastes 3:8 "[There is] a time to love and a time to hate; a time for war and a time for peace."
 
The Bible does not forbid engagement in warfare, and if this engagement in wars had become an unacceptable practice to the writers of the Christian Scriptures they would have stated so.
 
 In fact, several New Testament passages indicate acceptance.
 
When military officers came to John for baptism, John did not direct them to leave the service;
 
"Also, those in military service would ask him: "What shall we also do?" And he said to them: "Do not harass anybody or accuse anybody falsely, but be satisfied with your provisions." (Luke 3:14).
 
This would have been John's perfect opportunity to tell them to resign from the military, but he counseled them instead to be content with their lot in life!
 
At Matthew 8:5-13 Jesus did not turn the soldier away when asking to heal his manservant, rather commending him saying "I have not found anyone In Israel with such great faith" In the account at Acts 10 Cornelius was not required to step down as commander of Roman soldiers before being baptized.
 
I hope that this has helped you see that the JW position is unwarranted. One more thing God is on the winning side. <><

Hello Bruceq
 
Thank you for your comments.
 
It is interesting to note that when Jews convert to Christianity and read and believe the New Testament (they are known as messianic Jews) that they believe in the Triune God. Also one of the reason the Jews persecuted Christians, you know the ones in the New Testament, was because of who they claimed Jesus actually is. And do you not know that the Devil counterfeits the truth, for example, in some pagan religions they have the story of the death and resurrection of a hero figure…sound familiar, does this then mean that the NT witness to Jesus is false? To follow your line of reasoning you must conclude this? <><

Hello Mr Rook,
 
Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
 
I myself am not Roman Catholic, but I am a little surprised by your claim about the people of Haiti, may I ask where did you get your information and statistics from?
 
Also, there is a lot of discussion regarding Constantine’s motives towards the Nicene Council of the fourth century; the debate on this matter is wide open, but I refer to the early Christians who lived before Constantine was even born. Their belief in the Triune God is attested to by the witness of the early church.
 
These first Christians risked being thrown to the lions or to die by some other horrible means as “sport” for the Romans. Their testimony shows that they believed in the Triune God, long before the fourth century and Constantine!
 
On a side note; Constantine’s son, Constantius, attempted to mould the Christian church to follow what he believed. Richard Watson in his Biblical & Theological Dictionary explains, “Constantius,… became warmly attached to the Arian cause, as were all the court party…Constantius supported Arianism triumphantly.” And according to the Encyclopedia of Saints, Constantius “compelled the Eastern churches to embrace” Arianism. (page 146).
 
And to use your words; it was considered “treason against the expressed will of” Constantius “to believe otherwise” <><