Actually, Jesus existing since the Creation is the doctrine of Arianism (not Aryanism L), which was repeated by Charles Taze Russell & his followers, both JWs & Bible Students. It’s also taught by the Concordant Bible folks.
Welcome back, raindog!
If Arianism involves Jesus being created at the Creation, what’s the name of the idea that Jesus was created at his begetting? i.e., no “pre-existence” at all? I had thought that was what Arianism involved.
Judaism?
snerk
I’d freely acknowledge I come to the texts with Trinitarian presuppositions. Partly because that’s the general direction in which Christianity has evolved and I do tip my hat a bit to tradition. but more importantly because, like Swinburne and to some extent John of Damascus, I think you can make good arguments for the Trinity based on reason alone, without recourse to scripture.
Raindog,
Also, what do you make of the references in John’s Gospel equating Jesus with God?
Thoughtful comment and I appreciate that. JWs (and I’ve become what JWs call “inactive” or what you would call non- practicing) JWs place no value on outside sources of human reasonings. One, of course, is they place a great and solitary premium on the bible. They’re what a constitutional scholar would call a “strict construction.” In their view, if it was wrong and pagan 1800 years ago, is wrong today. They give tradition no quarter.
Secondly they’re really really good historians. They know not just the history, tradition and argument for the Trinity, they know the secular history as well. So to quote Monty Python then, “it’s right out.”
Thirdly, the argument against the Trinity in the bible, in their mind (and mine also) is that the bible isn’t compelling its overwhelming.
So.for the same reasons they reject Christmas etc, they reject the Trinity as pagan and non-biblical.
Hey Friar Ted. Good to see you.
Nah, to jews, you’ve not beggetted until you’ve graduated from medical school.
I’m packing to move and I’m posting from an iPhone. My bibles, concordances etc are packed up. The text most often cited is John 1:1 and would need it’s own thread. There’s maybe a half a dozen posters who could tackle that thoughtfully. The gist of it however, is one of translation and the indefinite article. The bible refers to a wooden structure as a god, a belly (through gluttony) and other things as A god. JWs make a compelling case that the translation is incorrect and has a Trinitarian bias. Jesus is God or he is a god. As I said, that’s a great discussion but I’m not sure we could have that discussion and keep the banshees at bay. I know of no other texts that specifically call him the Capital G God, and JWs maintain he isn’t called that there either.
Revenant Threshold, Friar Ted, it’s really good to see you. Polycarp still around?
Just wanted to say welcome back to Raindog. I hope to see you post in other threads.
Polycarp died about a year ago IIRC. The world is a poorer place without him.
There’s no debate about that.
Hey DocCathode.
It’s nice to see you. It may be a few weeks before I’m fully back. I enjoyed your posts and looking forward to chatting with you again.
I’m quite sad about Polycarp. He was a giant here.
Here’s a follow-up question:
I understand that Muslims, like Christians, believe Jesus Christ will come again; this individual is far more supernatural than us regular mortals, according to the Qur’an.
What do Muslims believe Jesus is?
Wow, turns out I totally misunderstood the basis of the Jehovah’s Witness faith.
I thought it meant that if God needed an alibi for last Friday, you were supposed to say he was at your place.
Well, damn.
the virgin-born, personally sinless, servant & prophet of Allah, but not the Son of Allah or in any way sharing the same Divine nature as Allah. There is debate as to if Jesus was crucified & died or if Allah deceived Jesus’s enemies into thinking they had killed him. At any rate, Jesus was raised to Allah & will return to judge both the Jews who rejected him and the Christians who idolized him, and to witness to the world the truth of Islam.