If the Watchtower believed the Trinity...

[IncRus]

The point is, eating blood nor blood transfusion CANNOT defile a man before the eyes of God because according to Jesus, NOTHING that enters a man FROM outside DEFILES a man.

Then you may ask, what's the point of ABSTAINING from blood? Well, there are numerous reasons why one would like to abstain from blood. But one thing is certain, not abstaining from blood does not defile a man in the eyes of God.

I never made the argument that the improper use of blood defiled a man. That is your argument. I argue that since the holy spirit commands one to abstain from blood, that one who actively and knowingly argues that this command is not to be obeyed is blaspheming the holy spirit and has committed an unforgivable sin. You may not be defiled in the sense of the verse to which you mistakenly apply this text, but you are disobedient and wicked if you do not obey.

There's the wisdom of apostle Paul's admonition not to think beyond what is written.

Jesus said that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God.

The apostles wrote the Gentile converts that they would do well to abstain from blood, etc.

It must be noted that the letter was decided upon to resolve a bigger problem that arose between the Jewish and the Gentile converts concerning circumcision. Therefore, that admonition was specific to the Gentile converts at that period of time when the controversy on circumcision existed.

On the other hand, Jesus' statement that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God applies to everyone ANY time.

[Cal_Minian]

There's the wisdom of apostle Paul's admonition not to think beyond what is written.

Jesus said that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God.

The apostles wrote the Gentile converts that they would do well to abstain from blood, etc.

It must be noted that the letter was decided upon to resolve a bigger problem that arose between the Jewish and the Gentile converts concerning circumcision. Therefore, that admonition was specific to the Gentile converts at that period of time when the controversy on circumcision existed.

On the other hand, Jesus' statement that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God applies to everyone ANY time.

I argue that you incorrectly apply the principle to Acts 15. Acts 15 does not speak of what defiles a man. This is a foreign concept being imported to the Acts 15 passage.

[Elahrairah]

On the other hand, Jesus' statement that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God applies to everyone ANY time.

Nonsense. What Christ said was Matt 15:11. His point is to emphasize how damaging blasphemies and hypocrisies are. If we were to take this as literally as you suggest, then that would only support the camp that believes that the Bible condemns neither alchohol, blood, drugs, or idol meat.

[Robert_Frazier]

What would the reaction be?

Every self-appointed JW apologist on Earth would immediately start saying, "We Jehovah's Christian Witnesses have always taught that the Trinity is true. I defy anyone to prove otherwise." If anyone then quoted from pre-Trinity Watchtower publications, he would be informed that the material is quoted out of context, and besides, that's in the past. The light is getting brighter.

Robert V Frazier

[IncRus]

There's the wisdom of apostle Paul's admonition not to think beyond what is written.

Jesus said that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God.

The apostles wrote the Gentile converts that they would do well to abstain from blood, etc.

It must be noted that the letter was decided upon to resolve a bigger problem that arose between the Jewish and the Gentile converts concerning circumcision. Therefore, that admonition was specific to the Gentile converts at that period of time when the controversy on circumcision existed.

On the other hand, Jesus' statement that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God applies to everyone ANY time.

I argue that you incorrectly apply the principle to Acts 15. Acts 15 does not speak of what defiles a man. This is a foreign concept being imported to the Acts 15 passage.

Of course, Acts 15:29 does not speak of what defiles a man. And that's the wisdom of the Holy Spirit which teaches to "compare spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor. 2:13) in order to "rightly divide the word of God" (2 Tim. 2:15).

Since Acts 15:29 does not speak of what defiles a man, then it is not Biblical for religious groups to impose penalty for the eating of blood, implying that eating blood defiles a man before the eyes of God, contrary to what is stated in Matt. 15:11, 17-20.

[IncRus]

On the other hand, Jesus' statement that NOTHING that enters a man from outside CAN defile a man before the eyes of God applies to everyone ANY time.

Nonsense. What Christ said was Matt 15:11. His point is to emphasize how damaging blasphemies and hypocrisies are. If we were to take this as literally as you suggest, then that would only support the camp that believes that the Bible condemns neither alchohol, blood, drugs, or idol meat.

You are injecting your thoughts into what Jesus actually said. That means you are thinking beyond what is written contrary to what apostle Paul admonished the first-century Christians not to do (1 Cor. 4:6).

So what if what Jesus literally said support those who believe that the Bible condemns neither alchohol, blood, drugs, or idol meat? Jesus knows more about religious matters than all religious leaders combined! Besides, Jesus is the savior whom people must believe in order to be saved.

[Sparko]

You are injecting your thoughts into what Jesus actually said. That means you are thinking beyond what is written contrary to what apostle Paul admonished the first-century Christians not to do (1 Cor. 4:6).

What you mean like YOU do all the time? Like when I quoted what Thomas said to Jesus, "My Lord and My God" and you came back and tried to tell me what Jesus and Thomas really was thinking?

[IncRus]

You are injecting your thoughts into what Jesus actually said. That means you are thinking beyond what is written contrary to what apostle Paul admonished the first-century Christians not to do (1 Cor. 4:6).

What you mean like YOU do all the time? Like when I quoted what Thomas said to Jesus, "My Lord and My God" and you came back and tried to tell me what Jesus and Thomas really was thinking?

The context tells us what Jesus and Thomas were really talking about. And that's not about whether Jesus is God or not. Therefore, to inject the idea that Thomas was calling Jesus God when he said "My Lord and my God" is thinking beyond what is written. On the other hand, to say that Thomas' statement was an "expression of belief" is in line with what Jesus and Thomas were talking about.

[Sparko]

The context tells us what Jesus and Thomas were really talking about. And that's not about whether Jesus is God or not. Therefore, to inject the idea that Thomas was calling Jesus God when he said "My Lord and my God" is thinking beyond what is written. On the other hand, to say that Thomas' statement was an "expression of belief" is in line with what Jesus and Thomas were talking about.

What is written is that Thomas called Jesus God. And Jesus did not rebuke him.

You are going beyond what is written, thereby breaking your own rule.

To claim otherwise is ridiculous.

Here. let's read it together:

John 20:28
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

In the greek it actually says "The Lord of me and the God of me"

So it was not merely an expression like the english "My God!" Greek doesn't have that expression. It actually says "The God of me"

To try to claim it is not saying that is to "think beyond what is written" as you so cleverly put it.

[IncRus]

What is written is that Thomas called Jesus God. And Jesus did not rebuke him.

You are going beyond what is written, thereby breaking your own rule.

To claim otherwise is ridiculous.

Here. let's read it together:

John 20:28
Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God!"

In the greek it actually says "The Lord of me and the God of me"

So it was not merely an expression like the english "My God!" Greek doesn't have that expression. It actually says "The God of me"

To try to claim it is not saying that is to "think beyond what is written" as you so cleverly put it.

So what if Jesus did not rebuke Thomas? As I said in another post, Jesus is the authority not Thomas. And Jesus is my savior - not Thomas. Just because Jesus did not rebuke Thomas does not mean that Jesus was deferring to Thomas. Hence, Thomas'saying "The Lord of me and the God of me," does not make Jesus God.

As far as I am concerned, whatever Thomas says that contradicts what Jesus has taught them does not make me change my belief in what Jesus said about himself and about the Father. Jesus said he is a man (John 8:40) and the Father is the only true God (John 17:3).

Why anyone would reject what Jesus has said in favor of Thomas' statement is beyond rational thinking.

[Sparko]

So what if Jesus did not rebuke Thomas? As I said in another post, Jesus is the authority not Thomas. And Jesus is my savior - not Thomas. Just because Jesus did not rebuke Thomas does not mean that Jesus was deferring to Thomas. Hence, Thomas'saying "The Lord of me and the God of me," does not make Jesus God.

As far as I am concerned, whatever Thomas says that contradicts what Jesus has taught them does not make me change my belief in what Jesus said about himself and about the Father. Jesus said he is a man (John 8:40) and the Father is the only true God (John 17:3).

Why anyone would reject what Jesus has said in favor of Thomas' statement is beyond rational thinking.

there you go thinking beyond what is written again.

Thomas called Jesus his God. that's what the bible says.

Either he was telling the truth, or he was blaspheming God and Jesus didn't say anything.

[IncRus]

So what if Jesus did not rebuke Thomas? As I said in another post, Jesus is the authority not Thomas. And Jesus is my savior - not Thomas. Just because Jesus did not rebuke Thomas does not mean that Jesus was deferring to Thomas. Hence, Thomas'saying "The Lord of me and the God of me," does not make Jesus God.

As far as I am concerned, whatever Thomas says that contradicts what Jesus has taught them does not make me change my belief in what Jesus said about himself and about the Father. Jesus said he is a man (John 8:40) and the Father is the only true God (John 17:3).

Why anyone would reject what Jesus has said in favor of Thomas' statement is beyond rational thinking.

there you go thinking beyond what is written again.

Thomas called Jesus his God. that's what the bible says.

Either he was telling the truth, or he was blaspheming God and Jesus didn't say anything.

If you want to take Thomas' statement as truth against what Jesus has declared in John 8:40 and John 17:3, that's your prerogative. After all, it's your soul at stake, not mine.

Jesus said, "But you do not belierve because you are not my sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall not perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of my hand" (John 10:26-28).

Again, I say, why anyone would reject what Jesus has said in favor of Thomas' statement is beyond rational thinking.

[Sparko]

If you want to take Thomas' statement as truth against what Jesus has declared in John 8:40 and John 17:3, that's your prerogative. After all, it's your soul at stake, not mine.

Jesus said, "But you do not belierve because you are not my sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall not perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of my hand" (John 10:26-28).

Again, I say, why anyone would reject what Jesus has said in favor of Thomas' statement is beyond rational thinking.

so you don't believe what was written? That figures.

You are happy to go outside what is written when it suits your purposes, but you whine if anyone else does it.

[Cal_Minian]

Hello Cal,

If so, what do you make of John 16:12-15?

Assuming the "Spirit of truth", the parakletos of John 14:16-17; 15:26 refers to the Holy Spirit (as most commentators would have it) it seems from John 16:15, we have a definite specification that makes the "Spirit of truth" an entity distinct from both the Father and the Son.

Examining John 16:12-15, I detect at least six specified degrees in which the "Spirit of truth" is differentiated from both the Father and the Son.

Peace

What you are trying to do is make various descriptions of the multi-faceted holy spirit to "walk on all fours." You should consider all the verses about the holy spirit such as:

NET 1 Corinthians 2:10 God has revealed these to us by the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the man's spirit within him? So too, no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.

There verses that represent the spirit of man as being differentiated from man in the same context as the spirit of God, but you don't argue that man's spirit is a person independent from that man!

-Cal

[OldShepherd]

What you are trying to do is make various descriptions of the multi-faceted holy spirit to "walk on all fours." You should consider all the verses about the holy spirit such as:

NET 1 Corinthians 2:10 God has revealed these to us by the Spirit. For the Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who among men knows the things of a man except the man's spirit within him? So too, no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God.

There verses that represent the spirit of man as being differentiated from man in the same context as the spirit of God, but you don't argue that man's spirit is a person independent from that man!

-Cal

Here Sam, weave these vss. into your selective argument.

The Holy Spirit is the third person in the Trinity. He is fully God. He is eternal, omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, has a distinct will, a distinct mind, a distinct self, and can speak. He is alive. He is a person. He is not particularly visible in the Bible because His ministry is to bear witness of Jesus (John 15:26).

Some false teaching religions like the Jehovah's Witnesses, etc., claim that the Holy Spirit is nothing but an impersonal force (Reasoning from the Scriptures, 1985, pp. 406-407). This is false. If the Holy Spirit were merely an impersonal force or power, then He could not speak (Acts 13:2); He could not be grieved (Eph. 4:30); and He would not have a will (1 Cor. 12:11), a self, (Jn 16:13), or a mind, (Rom 8:27).

The truth is, there are, at least, seventy two (72) personal characteristics or attributes, listed in scripture for the Holy Spirit and He is a person the same as the Father and the Son are, within the Trinity.

Names of the Spirit

1. God -Acts 5:3-4, Acts 28:25-27, Heb 3:7-11, Heb 10:15-17
2. Lord - 2 Cor. 3:18
3. Spirit - 1 Cor. 2:10
4. Spirit of God - 1 Cor. 3:16
5. Spirit of Truth - John 15:26
6. Eternal Spirit - Heb. 9:14

Attributes of (9)

7. Eternal -Heb. 9:14
8. Omnipotent - Luke 1:35
9. Omnipresent - Psalm 139:710
10. Distinct Will from the father and the son– 1 Cor. 12:11
11. Loves - Rom. 15:30
12. Speaks - Acts 8:29; Acts 13:2
13. Distinct Mind from the father and the son – Rom 8:27
14. Distinct Self from the father and the son – John 16:13
15. Alive – John 14:17

Symbols of (3)

16. Dove - Mat 3:15
17. Wind - John 3:5
18. Fire - Acts 2:3

Sins Against (6)

19. Blasphemy - Mat 12:31
20. Resist (Unbelief) - Acts 7:51
21. Insult - Heb 10:29
22. Lied to - Acts 5:3
23. Grieved - Eph 4:30
24. Quench - 1 Thes 5:19

Power in Christ's Life (6)

25. Conceived of - Mat 1:18-20
26. Baptism - Mat 3:15
27. Led by - Luke 4:1
28. Filled with Power - Luke 4:14,18
29. Witness of Jesus - John 15:26
30. Raised Jesus - Rom 8:11

The Works of the Holy Spirit (42)

1 Access to God - Eph 2:18
2 Anoints for Service - Luke 4:18
3 Assures - Rom. 8:15-16; Gal 4:6
4 Authors Scripture - 2 Pet 1:20-21
5 Baptizes - John 1:32-34; 1 Cor 12:13-14
6 Believers Born of - John 3:3-6
7 Calls and Commissions - Acts 13:24; Acts 20:28
8 Cleanses - 2 Thes 3:13; 1 Pet. 1:2
9 Comforts - Act 9:31
10 Communion with believers – 2 Cor 13:14
11 Convicts of sin - John 16:9,14
12 Counsels - John 14:16
13 Creates - Gen 1:2; Job 33:4
14 Empowers - 1 Thes 1:5
15 Empowers Believers - Luke 24:49
16 Fellowship with believers – Phil 2:1
17 Fills - Acts 2:4; Acts 4:29-31; Acts 5:18-20; Acts 9:17
18 Forbids action - Acts 16:6
19 Gives gifts - 1 Cor. 12:8-11
20 Glorifies Christ - John 16:14
21 Guides in truth - John 16:13
22 Helps our weakness - Rom 8:26
23 Indwells believers - Rom 8:9-14; Gal 4:6
24 Inspires prayer - Eph 6:18; Jude 20
25 Intercedes -Rom 8:26
26 Interprets Scripture - 1 Cor 2:1,14; Eph 1:17
27 Leads - Rom 8:14
28 Liberates - Rom 8:2
29 Molds Character - Gal 5:22-23
30 Produces fruit - Gal 5:22-23
31 Raises from the dead - Rom 8:11
32 Regenerates - Titus 3:5
33 Reveals – Luk 2:26
34 Sanctifies - Rom. 15:16
35 Seals - Eph 1:13-14; Eph 4:30
36 Sends - Acts 13:4
37 Sent - Gal 4:6; 1 Pet 1:12
38 Strengthens - Eph 3:16; Acts 1:8; 2:4; 1 Cor 2:4
39 Testifies of Jesus - John 15:26
40 Victory over flesh - Rom. 8:2-4; Gal 4:6
41 Warns – Acts 20:23
42 Worship helper - Phi 3:3

[91]

And FYI Wallace only addresses the personal pronoun . None of these vss. rely on the personal pronoun.