Jehova paljasti sen pyhän henkensä välityksellä

>>Esiintyykö tässä uuden valon tulvassa yhtään ainoaa ilmoitusta kolminaisuudesta?
>>Ei.

>>Se kyllä mainitaan tässä keskustelussa, muttei kolmiyhteyden kolmantena persoonana.

>>Julistiko hän kolminaisuutta?
>>Ei.

>>Tässä ei vihjatakaan kolminaisuuteen!

Minua ihmetyttää, kaiken sen ehdottomuuden jälkeen jota Vartiotorniseura edustaa tässä kysymyksessä, miksi Vartiotorniseuran on turvauduttava harhaanjohtamiseen? En tarkoita niinkään sitä miten kolminaisuus yleensä tuodaan esille, vaan epärehellistä lainaamista. Miksi kolminaisuuden hyväksyviä lähteitä on lainattava siten, että lainauksen lukijalle jäisi tunne, että kyseessä olisi kolminaisuuden kieltäminen?

Tässä ensin Vartiotorniseuran julistajalle antama ohje (Qualified To Be Ministers. 1967 p. 199):

“Be very careful to be accurate in all statements you make. Use evidence honestly. In quotations, do not twist the meaning of a writer or speaker or use only partial quotations to give a different thought than the person intended.”

Kas näin Vartiotorniseura itse toteuttaa jäsenistöltään odottamaa käytöstä painotuotteessaan ja nettijulkaisussaan Should You Believe in the Trinity?


Ensin alkuun lainaus ilman osa- ja sivuviitettä, jotta tarkistamista ei tehtäisi liian helpoksi:

http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_02.htm

Should You Believe in the Trinity? p. 4:

“The Encyclopedia Americana notes that the doctrine of the Trinity is considered to be ‘beyond the grasp of human reason.”

The Encyclopedia Americana osa 27 sivu 116 hieman laajemmin:

“It is held that although the doctrine is beyond the grasp of human reason, it is, like many of the formulations of physical science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended (though it may not be comprehended) by the human mind.”

Samassa yhteydessä The Encyclopedia Americana esittää myös:

"It is probably a mistake to assume that the doctrine resulted from the intrusion of Greek metaphysics or philosophy into Christian thought; for the date upon which the doctrine rests, and also its earliest attempts at formulation, are much older than the church's encounter with Greek philosophy."


Should You Believe in the Trinity? jatkaa lainaten loppuunmyytyä A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge, kertomatta painovuotta (1875) ja sivunumeroa:

"Precisely what that doctrine is, or rather precisely how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves."

Kuitenkin juuri ennen lainattua kohtaa on teksti:

"It is certain, however, that from the apostolic times they paid worship to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, addressed to them their prayers, and included them in their doxologies."

Ja Dictionary of Religious Knowledge jatkaa:

The Bible represents God to us as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. It represents them as equally entitled to our highest reverence, affection, and allegiance."

Ja Illustrated Bible Dictionary lainaus sivulla 5:

"The word Trinity is not found in the Bible...It did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century."

Sanakirja lisää kuitenkin seuraavaa:

(a) "Though it is not a Biblical doctrine in the sense that any formulation of it can be found in the Bible, it can be seen to underlie the revelation of God, implicit in the Old Testament and explicit in the New Testament. By this we mean that though we cannot speak confidently of the revelation of the Trinity in the Old Testament, yet once the substance of the doctrine has been revealed in the New Testament, we can read back many implications of it in the Old Testament."

(b) "But even in the opening pages of the Old Testament we are taught to attribute the evidence and persistence of all things to a threefold source." (Not 3 sources separate)

(c) "By way of contrast it must be remembered that the Old Testament was written before the revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity was clearly given and in the New Testament after it."


Tämän jälkeen on vuorossa New Catholic Encyclopedia ilman sivunumeroa (304):

"There are few teachers of Trinitarian theology in Roman Catholic seminaries who have not been badgered at one time or another by the question, 'But how does one preach the Trinity?' And if the question is symptomatic of confusion on the part of the students, perhaps it is no less symptomatic of similar confusion on the part of their professors."

New Catholic Encyclopedia kuitenkin puoltaa kolminaisuutta ja niinpä sivu 297 mainitsee:

….Tertullian's grasp of the sense in which God is one and the sense in which God is three was impressively clear and systematic…. thus came into being the doctrine of relative properties to explain in some measure the non contradictonary plurality of Persons in the one unique Godhead.

Jatketaan edelleen:

HOW could such a confusing doctrine originate? The Catholic Encyclopedia claims: "A dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation."

Lainatussa artikkelissa todetaan toisaalla:

"The phrase 'in the name' [Greek inserted here] affirms the Godhead of the Persons and their unity of nature.

It is incredible that the phrase 'in the name' should be here employed were not all the Persons mentioned equally Divine. Moreover the use of the singular, 'name,' and not the plural, shows that these Three Persons are that One Omnipotent God in whom the Apostles believed.

Besides these passages there are many others in the Gospels which refer to one of other of the Three Persons in particular and clearly express the separate personality and Divinity of each."

Should You Believe in the Trinity? jatkaa totuttua linjaansa leikkaamalla ja liimaamalla:

Catholic scholars Karl Rahner and Herbert Vorgrimler state in their Theological Dictionary: "The Trinity is a mystery . . . in the strict sense . . . , which could not be known without revelation, and even after revelation cannot become wholly intelligible."

Lainatun kohdan jatko on:

"Its import is as follows. (1) The one God exists un three 'Persons' (Subsistences) which are the one divine Nature (the one divine essence, the divine substance) and therefore are equally eternal and almighty."

Should You Believe in the Trinity? jatkaa:

However, contending that since the Trinity is such a confusing mystery, it must have come from divine revelation creates another major problem. Why? Because divine revelation itself does not allow for such a view of God: "God is not a God of confusion."—1 Corinthians 14:33, Revised Standard Version (RS).

Taas Vartiotorniseuralle ominainen tapa lainata ainoastaan osittain. Verrataanpa tekstiä Kolossalaiskirjeen 2:2, jossa mainitaan mysteerin olemassaolo:

"comprehension, into accurate knowledge of the mystery of the God, of Christ, on whom are all the treasures of the wisdom and of knowledge hidden avay (ones)." KIT


http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_03.htm

Should You Believe in the Trinity? jatkaa:

The Encyclopedia of Religion admits: "Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity."

Samassa artikkelissa The Encyclopedia of Religion esittää:

"The fatherhood of God should not be retought in light of the critique of feminist theologies."

"Trinitarian doctrine cannot be christomonistic, excluding persons of other faiths from salvation, nor can it surrender its conviction that God is fully present in Christ."


Should You Believe in the Trinity? lainaa:

And the New Catholic Encyclopedia also says: "The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O[ld] T[estament]."

Lainatun kohdan jatko:

"In the NT the oldest evidence is the Pauline epistles, especially 2 Cor. 13:13, and 1 Cor. 12:4-6. In the Gospels, evidence of the trinity is found explicitly only in baptismal formula of Mt. 28, 19."

"In many places of the OT however, expressions are used in which some of the Fathers of the Churc saw references or foreshadowings of the trinity."

"...the minds of God's people (Old Testament) were being prepared for the concepts that would be involved in the forthcoming revelation of the doctrine of the Trinity. In the New Testament, the revelation of the truth of the Triune life of God was first made in the New Testament, where the earliest references to it are in the Pauline epistles."

"Since the Son and the Holy Spirit are mentioned on a par with the Father, the passage clearly teaches that they are equally divine with the Father, who is obviously God."

"...they testify, under divine inspiration, in the belief of the Apostolic Church in a doctrine of three persons in one God."


Jesuiitta Edmond Fortmanin sanoja Should You Believe in the Trinity? lainaa seuravalla tavalla:

“Jesuit Fortman states: ‘The New Testament writers. . . give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons... Nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the Godhead”



The Triune God, 1972 sivulta 15 lainataan ensin “The New Testament writers”, jonka jälkeen siirrytään sivulle 16. Tähän väliin jää mm.:

“They call Jesus the Son of God. Messiah. Lord. Savior, Word. Wisdom. They assign Him the divine functions of creation, salvation, judgment. Sometimes they call Him God explicitly. They do not speak as fully and clearly of the Holy Spirit as they do of the Son, but at times they coordinate Him with the Father and the Son and put Him on a level with them as far as divinity and personality are concerned.

Sivulta 16 lainattu jatkuu seuraavasti:

“They give us no formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. But they do give us an elemental trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine of the Triune God may be formulated.”

Seuraava lause Fortmanin kirjassa on:

"The doctrine of the Triune God has had an amazing history. Convinced that this doctrine is a christian doctrine that did and could originate only from divine revelation, I start the study from the authentic record of divine revelation that is found in the sacred writings of the Old and New Testaments:…"

Should You Believe in the Trinity? lainaa nettisivullaan:

http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_03.htm


The New Encyclopædia Britannica observes: "Neither the word Trinity nor the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament."

Yllä lainatun tekstin lopussa on alkuperäisessä tekstissä pilkku ja artikkeli tukee kolminaisuutta, päättyen:

"Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity."

Bernhard Lohsen A Short History of Christian Doctrine väärinlainaus:

"As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity."

Bernhard Lohsen mielipide kirkastuu kun artikkelia luetaan eteenpäin; sivu 39:

"In other passages of the New Testament the predicate 'God' is without doubt applied to Christ. With these affirmations, which for Jewish monoteism were utterly offensive. Christians expressed their faith that it was not merely some heavenly being which encountered them in Jesus Christ, but God himself and that because of this his coming, especially his cross and resurrection, had meaning for the entire world."

Should You Believe in the Trinity? nettisivulla Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, 1922, v.12, p. 461 on lainattu seuraavalla tavalla:

http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_03.htm

“At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian. . . It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the N[ew] T[estament] and other early Christian writings”.

Tässä teksti hieman laajemmin:

“The transition from the Trinity of experience to the Trinity of dogma is describable in other terms as the transition from the economic or dispensational Trinity [Greek words inserted] to the essential, immanent, or ontological Trinity [more Greek words]. At first the Christian faith was not Trinitarian in the strictly ontological reference. It was not so in the apostolic and sub-apostolic ages, as reflected in the NT and other early Christian writings.”

Ja vielä eräs katkaistu New Catholic Encyclopedia lainaus, jonka tulisi päättyä pisteen asemesta puolipisteeseen:

"The formulation 'one God in three Persons' was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. . . . Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective."

Lainatun kohdan jälkeinen osuus:

"among the 2nd-century Apologists, little more than focusing of the problem as that of plurality within the unique Godhead."

Luulisi jo kovapäisemmänkin huomanneen, että vartiotornilaiset eivät usko kolminaisuusoppiin. No hyvä niin. Mutta entä sitten? Ei siihen uskomattomuus sinua pelasta.


Ei tiennyt Tuomas mitään kolminaisuudesta, mutta hänen uskontunnustuksensa oli:
"Minun Herrani ja minun Jumalani!"

- vartiotornilainen selittää, että Tuomas kiroili


Tuskin oli Stefanoskaan kolminaisuuden kannattaja, mutta hänen lähes viimeiset sanansa olivat:
"Herra Jeesus, ota minun henkeni!"

- päähänsä saaneen horinoita, tosi vartiotornilainen on mykkäkoulussa Jeesuksen kanssa


Ananiaskin oli lain mukaan hurskas juutalainen, joka tuskin olisi tinkinyt siitä, että "Kuule Israel, JHVH meidän Jumalamme JHVH on yksi!". Hänen kehoituksensa herätyksen tilassa olevalle Saulukselle oli:
"Ja nyt, mitä viivyttelet? Nouse, huuda avuksi hänen nimeänsä ja anna kastaa itsesi ja pestä pois syntisi."

- vartiotonilainen alkaa puhumaan käsityksiään kolminaisuusopista, jotta usko hallintoelimeen säilyisi



Jos ei ole kolminaisuusoppia Raamatussa, ei siihen uskovan tarvitse kuitenkaan kieltää ja kiemurrella edellä olevienkaan raamatunkohtien edessä. Hän saattaa tulla Jeesuksen eteen epätäydellisinä anoen Jumalan vanhurskautta ja anteeksiantoa Herransa Jeesuksen nimessä ja veressä. Vartiotornilaiset raportoivat suorituksiaan ja hyödyntävät täysimääräisesti Jeesuksen ansiota.