My biggest beef with the WTS

[WoundedEgo]

My biggest beef with the WTS is that they do not practice 1 Corinthians 14. Instead, they organize their sect in much the same way as the Catholic and Protestant churches do, which is modeled after Rome.

[Alcoth]

Sorry... WTS?

I even hit up http://www.acronymfinder.com/WTS.html

World Toilet Summit and What The Shizzle don't seem to be appropriate matches.

[WoundedEgo]

LOL!

I was referring to the "Watchtower Society" - I thought that was the accepted acronym.

[Alcoth]

Now that you say it, I'm having a "duh" moment

[Darth Ovious]

My biggest beef with the WTS is that they do not practice 1 Corinthians 14. Instead, they organize their sect in much the same way as the Catholic and Protestant churches do, which is modeled after Rome.

Can you expand on this? I'm not sure what you mean here.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Obviously. We'll forget little things like denying the Trinity, denying the full deity of Jesus, denying the physical resurrection, denying the personhood and deity of the Holy Spirit, numerous false prophecies, numerous deaths of children who couldn't get blood transfusions, families split apart, millions of souls dying without Christ, and making a scandalous translation of Scripture.

Those are only secondary points after all. Right?

[Darth Ovious]

Obviously. We'll forget little things like denying the Trinity, denying the full deity of Jesus, denying the physical resurrection, denying the personhood and deity of the Holy Spirit, numerous false prophecies, numerous deaths of children who couldn't get blood transfusions, families split apart, millions of souls dying without Christ, and making a scandalous translation of Scripture.

Those are only secondary points after all. Right?

They deny the resurrection?????? It's worse than I thought then.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Yes. They say Jesus rose spiritually and not physically.

[Darth Ovious]

Yes. They say Jesus rose spiritually and not physically.

Why those nutcases.

[WoundedEgo]

I don't think that the allegation that the JWs do not believe that God raised Jesus bodily from the dead is based on fact:

http://www.watchtower.org/e/20010315/article_02.htm

Can you show some evidence to that effect?

Secondly, Paul seems to teach that the body of believers will NOT be raised from the dead, but rather that they will be issued a new body from the sky:

1 Cor 15:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

But yes, Trinity and Hell, etc, are ALL secondary issues to 1 Cor 14 (IMHO). First of all, if "Trinity" is the "central pillar of Christianity" and the like, why isn't it taught in the Bible? And where is "Hell" ever described in scripture as "everlasting, conscious torment," if this teaching is central to the scriptural message?

So, unlike these other issues, which Catholics and Protestants get all wrong, along with pretty much every thing else, 1 Cor 14 is the explicit teaching of Paul, and specifically addresses that which Paul felt could (and ultimately did) "destroy the body of Christ."

To be more specific, 1 Cor 14 describes the organization of the body and how to handle differences of opinion. Paul called it "the Better Approach" - better than what he called the "carnal" practice of the Corinthians. Here is the "Better Approach":

1 Cor 14:
26 ¶ How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
34 ¶ Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36 ¶ What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Where in Christendom - including Kingdom Halls - is this practiced?

[ApologiaPhoenix]

I don't think that the allegation that the JWs do not believe that God raised Jesus bodily from the dead is based on fact:

http://www.watchtower.org/e/20010315/article_02.htm

Can you show some evidence to that effect?

See "What Does The Bible Really Teach?" pages 73-74. Here is section 22 of that.

After Jesus was put to death as a human, Jehovah did not allow His faithful Son to remain in the grave. (Psalm 16:10; Acts 13:34, 35) God resurrected Jesus, but not as a human. The apostle Peter explains that Christ was “put to death in the flesh, but . . . made alive in the spirit.” (1 Peter 3:18) This truly was a great miracle. Jesus was alive again as a mighty spirit person! (1 Corinthians 15:3-6) Jesus was the first ever to receive this glorious type of resurrection. (John 3:13) But he would not be the last.

Secondly, Paul seems to teach that the body of believers will NOT be raised from the dead, but rather that they will be issued a new body from the sky:

1 Cor 15:
37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:
38 But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body.

Um. Don't see how this supports your case. I believe we will be given a new body as well, but it is new in quality in that it is immortal and imperishable.

But yes, Trinity and Hell, etc, are ALL secondary issues to 1 Cor 14 (IMHO).

Yes. The very nature of God himself is a secondary issue.

First of all, if "Trinity" is the "central pillar of Christianity" and the like, why isn't it taught in the Bible?

Who says it isn't?

And where is "Hell" ever described in scripture as "everlasting, conscious torment," if this teaching is central to the scriptural message?

Matthew 24. Rev. 14:9-11. Rev. 20:11-15. Come on. Give me a hard one.

So, unlike these other issues, which Catholics and Protestants get all wrong, along with pretty much every thing else, 1 Cor 14 is the explicit teaching of Paul, and specifically addresses that which Paul felt could (and ultimately did) "destroy the body of Christ."

Yes. It apparently doesn't matter who Christ is but this one matters far more.

To be more specific, 1 Cor 14 describes the organization of the body and how to handle differences of opinion. Paul called it "the Better Approach" - better than what he called the "carnal" practice of the Corinthians. Here is the "Better Approach":

1 Cor 14:
26 ¶ How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.
27 If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret.
28 But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to God.
29 Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge.
30 If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace.
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted.
32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.
33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
34 ¶ Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36 ¶ What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
38 But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.
39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.
40 Let all things be done decently and in order.

Where in Christendom - including Kingdom Halls - is this practiced?

This would also mean there's something to disagree on. I don't think Christ died just to teach us how to have disagreements.

[WoundedEgo]

Re: JW resurrection. I don't know, you might be right as I don't that much about JWs. Next time I have an opportunity, I might ask them about it.

>>>Um. Don't see how this supports your case. I believe we will be given a new body as well, but it is new in quality in that it is immortal and imperishable.

A careful reading of Paul's argument of 1 Cor 15 (Romans 8 is different - that speaks of "resurrection of your MORTAL body after the pattern of Jesus' resurrection) indicates that here he teaches that the body that the believer will receive comes out of the sky, rather than up from the dirt:

1Co 15:
47 The first man [Adam] is [from out] of the earth, [or,] earthy: the second man [Jesus] is the Lord [who's flesh originated] from heaven [up in the sky].
48 As is the earthy [the one that came out of the dirt], such are they also that are earthy [from out of the dirt]: and as is the heavenly [the one who's flesh originated from out of the sky], such are they also that are heavenly [who's flesh will originate from the sky].
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy [Adam], we shall also bear the image of the heavenly [Jesus].

Like the plant that is not "resurrected" but rather "receives a new body - not the one you planted" - so shall the resurrection of the dead be. I realize that this is really re-incarnation, not resurrection, per se, but this is how Paul conceives of "re-standing" or "resurrection."

>>>Yes. The very nature of God himself is a secondary issue.

I know that for Trinitarians (your stated religion), "The Doctrine of the Trinity" is THE basic dogma, but can you not see that "Trinity" is NEVER ONCE mentioned in the scriptures? Hello? It is a 4th Century dogma that ascended to the central of the Catholic religion, enforced on pain of death. One cannot "buy or sell" in Trinitarian circles, unless one has the Trinity number emblazoned on one's forehead. But there is no such charge in scripture. That is the only "trinity" mentioned in the scriptures.

What DOES occupy Paul, chapter after chapter of 1 Corinthians, is how the Corinthians were carnally dealing with differences, and thus destroying the body of Christ.

>>>Who says it isn't?

I do. Show me where any "Trinity" is taught, other than in relation to the false religion of the man worshiped as God.

>>>Matthew 24. Rev. 14:9-11. Rev. 20:11-15. Come on. Give me a hard one.

Matthew 24 speaks of an everlasting punishment. That, of course is "the wages of sin" which is "death." Not the sleep of death that believers experience, but the second death, from which one does not ever wake again.

Rev 20:11-15 speak of the "lake of fire." This fire will burn up mortal men, because non-believers are mortal.

Rev 14:9-11 is not speaking of hADES (which he will speak of in chapter 20). These folks here "shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:" These are, sorry to have to tell you, are Trinitarians. They will be tormented (consciously) forever in heaven. What a way to go.

>>>Yes. It apparently doesn't matter who Christ is but this one matters far more.

Mistakes of doctrine happen. Paul is less concerned about that, which is inevitable, than about the destruction of the body of Christ. He put it this way:

1 Cor 13:
1 ¶ Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 ¶ Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 ¶ Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

This would also mean there's something to disagree on. I don't think Christ died just to teach us how to have disagreements.

Perhaps your value system which prizes dogmas so highly is really what is off:

Joh 17:
11 ¶ And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 ¶ Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 ¶ Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

[ApologiaPhoenix]

Re: JW resurrection. I don't know, you might be right as I don't that much about JWs. Next time I have an opportunity, I might ask them about it.

>>>Um. Don't see how this supports your case. I believe we will be given a new body as well, but it is new in quality in that it is immortal and imperishable.

A careful reading of Paul's argument of 1 Cor 15 (Romans 8 is different - that speaks of "resurrection of your MORTAL body after the pattern of Jesus' resurrection) indicates that here he teaches that the body that the believer will receive comes out of the sky, rather than up from the dirt:

1Co 15:
47 The first man [Adam] is [from out] of the earth, [or,] earthy: the second man [Jesus] is the Lord [who's flesh originated] from heaven [up in the sky].
48 As is the earthy [the one that came out of the dirt], such are they also that are earthy [from out of the dirt]: and as is the heavenly [the one who's flesh originated from out of the sky], such are they also that are heavenly [who's flesh will originate from the sky].
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy [Adam], we shall also bear the image of the heavenly [Jesus].

Um. No. Jesus's body didn't come from Heaven. He came from Heaven, but not his body. His body is made of matter like anyone else's.

Like the plant that is not "resurrected" but rather "receives a new body - not the one you planted" - so shall the resurrection of the dead be. I realize that this is really re-incarnation, not resurrection, per se, but this is how Paul conceives of "re-standing" or "resurrection."

Baloney. Do yourself a favor and pick up N.T. Wright's "The Resurrection of the Son of God."

I know that for Trinitarians (your stated religion), "The Doctrine of the Trinity" is THE basic dogma, but can you not see that "Trinity" is NEVER ONCE mentioned in the scriptures?

The word? Yes. The concept? No.

Hello? It is a 4th Century dogma that ascended to the central of the Catholic religion, enforced on pain of death.

Nonsense. Theophilus used the word in the second century and Tertullian spoke of the Trinity. The ECF affirmed the full deity of Jesus, the Spirit, and the Father, and that there is one God.

One cannot "buy or sell" in Trinitarian circles, unless one has the Trinity number emblazoned on one's forehead. But there is no such charge in scripture. That is the only "trinity" mentioned in the scriptures.

Do you really want to tangle on the Trinity?

What DOES occupy Paul, chapter after chapter of 1 Corinthians, is how the Corinthians were carnally dealing with differences, and thus destroying the body of Christ.

Yes. There was no need to teach the basic doctrine. That was already understood in the oral tradition.

I do. Show me where any "Trinity" is taught, other than in relation to the false religion of the man worshiped as God.

Start with Jesus. What did he affirm before the high priest? You will see the Son of Man sitting on the throne coming with the clouds of Heaven.

That's my beginning.

Matthew 24 speaks of an everlasting punishment. That, of course is "the wages of sin" which is "death." Not the sleep of death that believers experience, but the second death, from which one does not ever wake again.

That would mean believers in Heaven would cease to exist as well. The everlasting is the same.

Rev 20:11-15 speak of the "lake of fire." This fire will burn up mortal men, because non-believers are mortal.

Does a fire burn death? Does a fire burn a spirit?

Rev 14:9-11 is not speaking of hADES (which he will speak of in chapter 20). These folks here "shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:" These are, sorry to have to tell you, are Trinitarians. They will be tormented (consciously) forever in heaven. What a way to go.

Tormented forever? Hmmm. Seems like everlasting conscious suffering to me. And really? Trinitarians. How cute.

Mistakes of doctrine happen. Paul is less concerned about that, which is inevitable, than about the destruction of the body of Christ. He put it this way:

Actually, Paul is quite concerned about doctrine. That's what the gospel is. It is a set of propositions first.

1 Cor 13:
1 ¶ Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
3 And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 ¶ Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up,
5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth;
7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 ¶ Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.
10 But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.
11 When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.
12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
13 And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.
1 ¶ Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

Hmmm. It seems your dogma is love is all that is needed. Shame then. Christ died just so we could love one another?

Perhaps your value system which prizes dogmas so highly is really what is off:

Joh 17:
11 ¶ And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
13 And now come I to thee; and these things I speak in the world, that they might have my joy fulfilled in themselves.
14 I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
15 I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil.
16 They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
17 ¶ Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
18 As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world.
19 And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.
20 ¶ Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;
21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one:
23 I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.

Yeah. The gospel has nothing to do with Christ. Jesus just came so we could all get along.

[WoundedEgo]

>>>Um. No. Jesus's body didn't come from Heaven. He came from Heaven, but not his body. His body is made of matter like anyone else's.

My understanding of the virgin birth and other passages that indicate that Jesus did not have sin living in his flesh are explained that Jesus' flesh came from the sky. This is, in fact, what 1 Cor 15 teaches.

John 6:
41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven?
43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

This may be what the JWs have in mind - I don't really know from your snippet.

>>>Baloney. Do yourself a favor and pick up N.T. Wright's "The Resurrection of the Son of God."

I think that 1 Cor 15 is the more authoritative text on the resurrection, don't you?

>>>The word? Yes. The concept? No.

So where is the concept of one God existing eternally in three persons, not dividing the substance, yada, yada, yada taught in the scriptures?

>>>Nonsense. Theophilus used the word in the second century and Tertullian spoke of the Trinity. The ECF affirmed the full deity of Jesus, the Spirit, and the Father, and that there is one God.

Yes, but Augustine is the one credited with formulating "the Doctrine of the Trinity" that is in question. That the word was coined in the 2nd century really is irrelevant. Paul said that the "man of sin" was already brewing in his own lifetime, but would not come to bold relief until the one who hinders was taken out of the way (ie: the Emperor prior to Constantine).

>>>Do you really want to tangle on the Trinity?

I merely want to call attention to the fact that you call yourself a "Trinitarian" and well you should. You are the son of a dogma, the devotee of a 4th century fabrication that is not taught in scripture. But if you have some evidence that the scriptures set it forth as the definition of God, the true faith, that one must believe or be damned, then by all means, bring it forth....

>>>Yes. There was no need to teach the basic doctrine. That was already understood in the oral tradition.

So much for sola scriptura, then. It is conveniently hard to disprove such a tradition. I guess you'll just have to take it "by faith" but please forgive me if I pass....

>>>Start with Jesus. What did he affirm before the high priest? You will see the Son of Man sitting on the throne coming with the clouds of Heaven. That's my beginning.

So, to your mind, even if you were not indoctrinated at your conversion into Trinitarianism that if you encountered this passage you would have inevitably come to the conclusion that God is three persons, eternally equal, not dividing the substance? I think not. The passage literally means "the human being" (son of man). And it alludes to the king who appears **before God** and receives a kingdom from God!! It is as much teaching "Trinity" as is the story of Bambi!

Apparently, you are wearing "Trinity colored glasses" and everything looks like it is teaching "Trinity" to you.

The scriptures speak of a Trinity, though, but it is a deep offense to God, even though it is wondered upon throughout the world.

Rev 13:
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
7 And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.
8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

This is Paul's "man of sin," worshiped as God:

2 Thess 2:
3 ¶ Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.
7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

>>>That would mean believers in Heaven would cease to exist as well. The everlasting is the same.

No, believers have everlasting *life* whereas the wicked are punished with an everlasting punishment: death. When Adam and Eve sinned, did God fail to mention something? "You will have difficulty with weeds, menstrual cramps, marital problems and you will die. Oh, and did I mention that you would be tormented forever?!" No, the wages of sin is death. How? They were denied access to the tree of life and after a period of time, dropped on their backs with their arms and legs perched above them.

>>>Does a fire burn death?

Apparently. Unless, perhaps this is a figure of annihilation?

>>>Does a fire burn a spirit?

I'm not sure to what you refer.

>>>Tormented forever? Hmmm. Seems like everlasting conscious suffering to me. And really? Trinitarians. How cute.

Yes, but this is not "Hell" (hADES).

Re 14:10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone ***in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb***:

Where is Jesus? In "heaven" (the sky). So are the angels. That is where this takes place. Not in hADES which is in the dirt.

>>>Actually, Paul is quite concerned about doctrine. That's what the gospel is. It is a set of propositions first.

Oh yeah, that's right, I remember... that is why he catechized everyone about Trinity in his ORAL tradition. In fact, he did SUCH a GREAT job of indoctrinating everyone about "Trinity" that he didn't even have to mention it in his writings! Ditto for "Hell" and the like! How silly!

>>>Hmmm. It seems your dogma is love is all that is needed. Shame then. Christ died just so we could love one another?

Of course not. He died so that we could all have the correct "Doctrine of the Trinity!"

>>>Yeah. The gospel has nothing to do with Christ. Jesus just came so we could all get along.

Eph 5:
25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
28 So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
29 For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
30 For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
31 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
32 This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
33 Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

1 Cor 3:
16 ¶ Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

>>>Yeah. The gospel has nothing to do with Christ. Jesus just came so we could all get along.

Has anyone ever commented to you that you are abusive towards things that are not familiar to you or that you don't understand?

[apostoli]

So where is the concept of one God existing eternally in three persons, not dividing the substance, yada, yada, yada taught in the scriptures?

I detect from your posts that you oppose Sabellianism (1 God=1 individual, 3 faces of the actor, a 3rd century heresy) and in fact do not know what the Trinitarian teaching has been since 325CE (1 Godhead=3 individuals). The Nicene creed clearly states "We believe in one God the Father..." It then continues "and in one Lord...God from God...homoousia... and the Holy Spirit...".

The paradigm is simple, the Father as the primordial being from whom all things are, including the Son and Spirit, is in human terms God absolute. However, this is not the revealed truth of arrangement. A.John & A.Paul tell us that the Son is a replica of the Father (John 1:1; Phil 2:6; Heb 1:3) and we learn that all things made wheteher in heaven or earth were created by the Son (Jn 1:1-3; Col 1:15-16; Heb 1-3). Jesus tells us all things were given to him by his Father, and the Spirit has all that the Son has (Jn 16:15)

The word homoousia was used at Nicea to exclaim the true sonship of Jesus. Just as I am what my father is, so the Son. Thus when we see the Son we see the Father (John 12:45; 14:9).

The NT attributes to the Son all that the OT attributes to the tribal god of Israel. And if you have a close read of the OT you'll find Israel's acceptance of their god was repetatively conditional, not an absolute. So rather than rant against Trinitarianism, first you should understand what God is, and with acceptance of the grace of the Father you'll understand John 17:3.

Also, I draw your attention to Rev 22:1 where we have 1 throne, 3 identifications.

Peace


ps:

I know that for Trinitarians (your stated religion), "The Doctrine of the Trinity" is THE basic dogma, but can you not see that "Trinity" is NEVER ONCE mentioned in the scriptures?

Though the word isn't (just as the words Bible, incarnation also do not occur) the teaching occurs explicitly in several places.

Hello? It is a 4th Century dogma

Actually not. the teaching of Jesus' divinity can be traced to the first century. In 325CE a council was held to debate the Arian presumption of tri-theism (3 Gods). In the 3rd century the opposite heresy was defeated (1 hypostasis, 3 prosopon=1 individual presenting three faces to us). If any criticism is to be laid on Trinitarianism is they maintained the middle road, which was a necessity as it was fully supported by scripture.

that ascended to the central of the Catholic religion

Trust you know Catholic simply means universal. Aside from the confederation of the Roman churches, there are also the eastern churches that don't recognise the papacy.

enforced on pain of death.

Something of an exageration there. For numerous decades Trinitarianism was the persecuted belief. The Arians having influence in the Roman court and later influence over the Gauls & Huns.

One cannot "buy or sell" in Trinitarian circles, unless one has the Trinity number emblazoned on one's forehead. But there is no such charge in scripture. That is the only "trinity" mentioned in the scriptures.

Thats ratbag talk. Guess you haven't read Rev 22:1; Mt 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; John 15:26 etc