The modern church is gnostic

a reply to: Raggedyman

"preaching doesn't work" now that is funny because Elijah preached, Jonah preached, John the Baptist preached, Jesus preached, Peter preached, John preached, Paul preached and many other men have and it works just fine.

Usually, the reason preaching doesn't work for many is because they have a wrong heart and don't receive the preaching because it is aimed at their favorite sin. All the preachers mentioned above had the same issue. Jesus preached such when he said,

Mt 13:1 ¶ The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side.
2 And great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.
3 And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a sower went forth to sow;
4 And when he sowed, some seeds fell by the way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up:
5 Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:
6 And when the sun was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up, and choked them:
8 But other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.
9 Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

Mt 13:18 Hear ye therefore the parable of the sower.
19 When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.
20 But he that received the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;
21 Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he is offended.
22 He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.
23 But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.

I thought giving you the answer on how to "help people stop getting drunk and giving them effective direction in doing so" is what you were interested in. Sending people to a secular organization like AA instead of teaching directly from the context of the Bible, would do more harm than good in a Christian's life. Especially because the Bible contains the words of God not men, thereby are more solid and meaningful than anything man has to offer.

2Peter 1:19 ¶ We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

There is no harm said or the condemnation of the drinking an occasional alcoholic beverage anywhere in the Bible. Being drunken or drunkenness is where the sin lay (as mentioned in previous reply). So just to tell someone to stop drinking beer without Biblical proof texts is a really big error, usually made by men not called of God to pastor or teach, but by those who are just doing it as a job.

I was under the impression from your previous replies that you are in search of seeing, hearing or reading the loving challenges to help people stop getting drunk. And desiring to see that there is teaching in the Bible where they and the others have responsibility to one another and to God about sin. And I was just illuminating you to the fact there are applications in the Bible text themselves, that the person you listened to and yourself were not seeing.

I believe that if a person sees someone doing something as you described, that is "Just Ranting" and not giving true love, compassion or application for their lives, then that person may be the one God is calling to do the pastoring and teaching. It is a calling for God though and not for us to do, it is God through us doing it.

I have only answered you in a cordial and loving manner, in order to help you see more clearly that the word of God is true above all else.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

CJ, from what I see and hear, many people in today's church are far less than chtistian
The average Christian thinks giving Joyce Meyer money will buy their way to heaven
That they can act any way they want and be secure
That learning about God and the Bible is enough

The average minister is more interested in tickling ears, preaching prosperity, not helping people grow, not preaching the sermon on the mount or fruit of the Spirit

The drinking beer issue was a description of the problem. The beer drinking is not the issue, the issue is nobody is helping those who have problems, or helping people grow, changing their lifestyles

CJ, I don't need an answer, I see a lukewarm church full of people who claim Christianity but don't live it and ministers who are lazy, ignorant and self serving with no concept of helping people in any way other than preaching at them

Simply I got invited to a bible study, it won't be a bible study, what it will be is a history lesson.


Preaching doesn't work, we are called to act as Christians, not just talk about it, don't you get that
Go read the Sermon on the Mount again, then the fruit of the Spirit
Understand them and see if it reflects on today's church

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: ChesterJohn

CJ, from what I see and hear, many people in today's church are far less than chtistian
The average Christian thinks giving Joyce Meyer money will buy their way to heaven
That they can act any way they want and be secure
That learning about God and the Bible is enough

I agree and yep people follow people to the grave and to hell everyday.

The average minister is more interested in tickling ears, preaching prosperity, not helping people grow, not preaching the sermon on the mount or fruit of the Spirit

Again I fully agree. I hate prosperity theology it is BS. And again people will follow people straight on tot he grave. When the one they should have been following was God Almighty, who came in the fulness of God bodily in Jesus Christ.

The drinking beer issue was a description of the problem. The beer drinking is not the issue, the issue is nobody is helping those who have problems, or helping people grow, changing their lifestyles

I gave you the tools for you to help those you saw in that church who you thought weren't being ministered too.

CJ, I don't need an answer, I see a lukewarm church full of people who claim Christianity but don't live it and ministers who are lazy, ignorant and self serving with no concept of helping people in any way other than preaching at them

Simply I got invited to a bible study, it won't be a bible study, what it will be is a history lesson.

The Answer is in the AKJV Bible. True Christianity does not exist without the Holy Scriptures. God calls people. And when I see a guy get mad about what is not being done or sees a lukewarm church, I see a man being called of God, right where he is at.

Preaching doesn't work, we are called to act as Christians, not just talk about it, don't you get that
Go read the Sermon on the Mount again, then the fruit of the Spirit, Understand them and see if it reflects on today's church

The God who inspired holy men of God to speak and writes as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, knows everything man needs, and everything that man has need of is found in the pages of the only Bible with all the words, verses, phrases, sections and chapters in it the AKJV Bible. Everyone from Moses to John the Beloved preached the word and you can too, it still works today.

You have to understand that the sermon on the mount was a pre-cross teaching to the Jews preparing them for how it was going to be to living in the kingdom of heaven which was at hand. Once they crucified their king by rejecting Christ God gave them another chance but they rejected the holy Ghost when they stoned Stephen.

What you are seeing today is the falling away which was to come first before the revelation of the son of perdition the man of sin.

But not every Christian is as you see them. There are great Spiritual lessons in the Sermon on the mount for us today, but doctrinally is for the Jews and those who living the Kingdom which now wont come until the end of the Great Tribulation.

My grand-daddy used to say, if you don't like something, fix it. So stop looking at the things you don't like and complaining about them and get out there and do something about what you see is wrong. Man, God has given you a spirit of a prophet to see what is wrong, so get out there and preach it like it hasn't been done in more than 100 years.

CJ I am sorry, the bible is just a book, it's just paper
The answer is not the bible,and never will be.
The bible did not hang on the cross, did not become human, did not create a new covenant for me and the bible certainly did not enter my heart like the Spirit did

Funny thing is, you act like you know the bible but then talk like you don't
All the great prophets warned Israel to repent and change, the kings and people ignored the prophets and Israel was flushed away over and over again
People don't listen and never have
Now obviously I am no great prophet and you have given me nothing but words

If preaching the word worked as well as you say it does, why is Christianity such a minor religion with so small a following
It seems you can't engage the concept of logic

God bless you CJ, but you have offered nothing but rhetoric

I know what is supposed to happen, I know people are turning away, I am just telling christians to stop learning for the sake of learning and learn to love as Jesus did


We were called to read the word, preach the word, but we were also called to live the word, I am telling you, live it

Stop talking and think about that

a reply to: Raggedyman

To bad you think that way, but so does Mrs White down in Florida, and Hagee, and Olsteen et al. Each of them, much like the Moslem sects, use a different version of the Bible to teach from. JW's use all of them because one Bible wont suffice to teach their ever morphing false teachings, and it allows more Confusion to be propagated.

Without the Bible you would not know of Jesus Christ, his ministry to Israel, his work on the cross for sin or his coming again to set up the kingdom of heaven.

You too then have fallen away, yet the Spirit has moved you to see the truth, but you like Jonah run from your calling which is not to the Jews only, as all were up until Paul, but to all men where you are located. No prophet was great, to call them such is to place a title that they would deny, even Elijah, who may by far be the one who worked the most fantastic works next to Moses. The worst prophet was Saul, the first king of the Jews. David was a prophet as well and he fell in the middle and sinned just like Samson (known as Hercules in Greece).

Christianity today is as I have said upward of over hundreds of times is polluted by men who see the ministry as a JOB! This is promoted by 99% of every Seminary, Bible College and Christian University in the world and every one of then uses a different Bible to sell their college degrees. This is where many learn their doctrines of men. And fail at knowing the doctrines of God. Jesus Christ, he never once rejected the words of God, he preached them, he taught them, he shared them and he used them to get his message across. Just like all the prophets before him and after him had done, but you reject those words.

To love as Jesus loved, will not cause one unsaved or saved person to repent, it wont cause one thing to change and it wont save a single person. Only Personal trust/faith/belief in the finished work of the Cross of Jesus Christ can do that.

I am out there every week street preaching, and going door to door to tell people about the Love of God for people. I get doors slammed in my face, I get spit one, yelled at, laughed at and ridiculed, yet I persevere because I believe the AKJV Bible, every word of it, and in my saviour Jesus Christ who saved me from hell. I still sin, though my heart is not to. Today I awoke fresh and renewed in Christ Jesus just as I did yesterday, and the day before that, just as the scriptures say. Though through his strength I have not sinned that I know of. If I have I know it is under his blood.

I not only read, study it, believe it, preach it, teach it, I live it and I share it with others.

You step out in faith and serve him as he is calling you, and you think about that long and hard. You say that Jesus Says not to judge, yet you judged me with condemning tones how many times in your last 5 replies? You didn't show the love of Christ once according to your belief. But I have held back many remarks that I knew were not loving and gave you sound doctrine and direction. And you still judged me. Go stand and look hard and long in the mirror and read back the judgements you made towards me, and the judgements you made against God's words, and see for yourself that in so doing you judged yourself more than I.

Go your way, for it is not the way of Jesus Christ.

Guitarchurch has little to do with Christianity.

God hates those perverse sounding love songs btw.. Keep your pants on Christian rockers! I can feel you licking my ear through the speakers.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

And I feel sorry for people who worship the bible, turn it into an idol, listen to yourself

Christianity is useless without God, without Christ, without the Holy Spirit
When Jesus walked with His Disciples and for two and a half centuries after there was no bible, no AKJV, no English language, no canon, no nothing
Yet you in your arrogance and fundamentalist bent demand I believe that God needed a book to redeem mankind
That I need your version of a book to be a Christian, when that stupid book didn't even exist till 250 ad or even latter if the AKJV is your choice of idols
Logic doesn't exist in your head my dear brother

Stop knocking on doors, it puts people off, everything you do puts people off

I am sorry, your heart is to hard to be reached, you don't care for people, only your legalism, been poisoned by the church

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Raggedyman

Which Gospel? The gospel of the kingdom,

Matt 4:23 ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

the gospel of the Grace of God

Ac 20:24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

or the Everlasting Gospel

Rev 14:6 ¶ And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

By the "undeserved kindness (KJV: "grace") of God" (Ac 20:24), the "kingdom of God" (Lu 17:20,21) will bring the everlasting "glad tidings" of everlasting "peace" (Eph 6:15) and "everlasting life" (Mr 10:29, 30) "to those who dwell on the earth" (Re 14:6, 7). This is all indeed "good news" (KJV: "gospel"). It's still part of the same subject, there's no need to differentiate as you did in your questions regarding the 3 verses you mentioned. There are more verses where the "good news" is mentioned sometimes with different details than the 3 you just mentioned, still the same subject, just different details. So one could extend your line of questioning with more than 3 if one wants to stick with that way of thinking about the "good news" instead. But as I said, there's no need for that.

Good News

This refers to the good news of the Kingdom of God and of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. It is called in the Bible “the good news of the kingdom” (Mt 4:23), “the good news of God” (Ro 15:16), “the good news about Jesus Christ” (Mr 1:1), “the good news of the undeserved kindness of God” (Ac 20:24), “the good news of peace” (Eph 6:15), and the “everlasting good news” (Re 14:6).

The Greek word translated “good news” (“gospel” in KJ and some other versions) is eu·ag·geʹli·on. “An evangelizer” (the English word being almost a transliteration of the Greek) is a preacher of the good news.​—Ac 21:8; 2Ti 4:5.

Its Content. An idea of the content and scope of the good news can be gained from the above designations. It includes all the truths about which Jesus spoke and the disciples wrote. While men of old hoped in God and had faith through knowledge of Him, God’s purpose and undeserved kindness were first “made clearly evident through the manifestation of our Savior, Christ Jesus, who has abolished death but has shed light upon life and incorruption through the good news.”​—2Ti 1:9, 10.

Centuries earlier God had declared the good news to Abraham, thereby indicating the means by which he purposed to provide the good news. He said: “By means of you all the nations will be blessed.” (Ga 3:8) Later, through the prophet Isaiah, Jehovah spoke of the preaching of the good news. Jesus Christ read from this prophecy in the synagogue at Nazareth, afterward saying: “Today this scripture that you just heard is fulfilled.” (Lu 4:16-21) Isaiah’s prophecy described the purpose and effect of the good news to be preached, particularly from the time of Messiah’s coming.​—Isa 61:1-3.

Its Progress. At Jesus’ birth the angel announced to the shepherds: “Have no fear, for, look! I am declaring to you good news of a great joy that all the people will have.” (Lu 2:10)
...
Jesus’ disciples asked him, “What will be the sign of your presence and of the conclusion of the system of things?” In his answer Jesus enumerated certain things due to occur at that time. He said, among other things: “This good news of the kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations; and then the end will come.” (Mt 24:3, 14; Mr 13:10; compare Col 1:23.) In the Revelation given to the apostle John about 96 C.E., John saw an “angel flying in midheaven” who had “everlasting good news to declare as glad tidings to those who dwell on the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and people, saying in a loud voice: ‘Fear God and give him glory, because the hour of the judgment by him has arrived.’” (Re 14:6, 7) These inspired statements indicate that in the “last days” there would be an unparalleled proclamation of the good news of the Kingdom.

Wikipedia mentions that the magazine entitled The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom "is the most widely circulated magazine in the world, with an average circulation of approximately 70 million copies every four months in 334 languages." The Watchtower is by far the most widely distributed religious magazine in the world. In fact, very few magazines of any kind top its circulation.
Awake! is the most widely distributed general-interest magazine in the world.

a reply to: whereislogic

And from what I hear Awake Watchtower literature carries more authority for a JW than the bible
Interesting in relation to what you are selling

a reply to: Raggedyman

I don't know why people think that believing the AKJV Bible as complete, whole, inspired and preserved word of God is considered worshiping it or idolizing it.

Not since we have so many verses in it that tell us to believe it, gives examples of what happens to people who don't believe it and those who do believe it. Or follow it and examples of what happens to people who don't follow it and who do follow it.

If the Bible was never written in any language we would not be able to know who God is. We would not know about Jesus Christ and God's plan of Salvation via God's plan using his son to bring that about. We would not know about about the Holy Ghost/Spirit, how he operates and that the Bible itself is Authored by the Holy Ghost.

When Jesus walked this earth during his earthly ministry, he read from the Bible/scriptures in the synagogue, quoted and taught it to his disciples. Even before that he was questioning and answering many things with the priests int eh temple. Even Herod required of the priests to where was he who was born king of the Jews to be born. They said it was WRITTEN by the prophet that he was to be born in Bethlehem. So to say there was no Bible/scriptures when Jesus walked the Earth is an error.

I never never never never ever said you NEEDED the AKJV Bible to be a Christian or to get saved.

Again as far as I can tell we are not brothers, unless you are considering the biblical term "brotherhood of man", if that be the case we are.

Jesus says he knocks on the door, and even says if we knock it will be opened, so as long as Jesus will knock on doors I will knock on as many doors as I can. You know I have knocked on doors and have led people to Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Saviour. some of those I led to Christ died within a matter of days because of a terminal disease. So it doesn't put all people off, as a matter f fact I have had some thank me before and after for KNOCKING on their door.

James said to show your faith by your works. Going door to door is art of the work that shows my faith.

My heart is not hard my friend it is as tender as it has been since the day the Lord Jesus Christ came into my heart.

Talk about judging people to the disregard to the commandment of Jesus Christ when he said, "judge not less thee be judged." Can't you see what you just did by ignoring the teaching of the man you claim to follow? Why does a person who claims follows Jesus disobey such a vital teaching?

The only legalism I hold to is the Law of Liberty.

James 1:25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

a reply to: whereislogic

all of the different gospels have different requirements when one believes on that Gospel. to list them as the same is to show our lack of tstudy of each of them.

Q. What did John the Baptist require of those who were preached the gospel of the Kingdom were to do if they believed his Message?
A. Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins. Remission is not the same as forgiven.

Jesus preaching the gospel of the gospel of the kingdom said they were to repent too.

Q. What did Paul require of those who believed the gospel of the grace of God?
A. Nothing but their faith.

To be fair repentance was also under the gospel of the kingdom but he never followed his preaching with repent of be baptized. Repentance under his gospel is a natural work of the Holy Ghost in the believer. And we all know very well not one of us could have listed out and repented of every sin we were guilty off.

Q. What did the Angel require of those who heard his "everlasting gospel"?
A. Fear God, and give glory to him;

Not one Bible version other than the AKJV says for us to Study the word of truth.

That is why many think the gospels are the same. They learned it from someone else and parrot those same words without ever once studying. Studying is searching the scriptures and comparing them just as the Holy Ghost teaches us.

You did a great job of cross referencing the words grace, everlasting and gospel.

But you changed grace to undeserved kindness. The word grace has more meanings that undeserved kindness to think so would do a disjustice to the words of God.

You also changed the word gospel to mean only good news. However there is lots of examples of good news in the Bible where the word gospel is not applied to it.

I could teach all that using the AKJV without once going to the Greek or Hebrew. That is if I wanted to teach what you did which is out of context and a false teaching. Wrongly joining scriptures by removing their context leads one down the road of apostasy to God's word.

JW's use any and all versions including the one they made the New World Translation, and yet you still need to go to the Greek and Hebrew. And not only that it is obvious you came to those words with a bias to change them to fit you view rather than letting God's word change you view. when you do such you say, without verbally expressing it, "I do not believe the Bible, the words of God, the scriptures. I do not believe God is able to preserve his words to every generation forever as his words say he will. I believe my groups style of teaching and it is my final authority when it comes to the Bible. instead of the Bible being the final authority to your group, its style of teaching and its doctrines over God's words." Thus making yourself, your group and your style of teaching, god in God's stead.


Remember the only Bible that tells you to study and how to study, is the one that is hated just as much as the living Word is today just as much as when he walked this earth.

It is like your/JW's view of two Gods, the Un-created God JHVH and the Created God Jesus Christ. Totally wrong, in error, out of context and a false doctrine.

Have you ever wonder why the JW's stopped using the title' The Watchtower" and started using the title AWAKE for its magazine, which by the way many JW's like yourself give it more faith and belief than the Bible. Just like the Roman Catholics do with their Knights of Columbus publication, the Columbia Magazine, or the Mormons do their books and magazines, as does the church of Christ magazines. You all have one thing in common, "You don't believe the Bible"

You can say all you want about the three VERY DIFFERENT gospel presented to three different groups and claim their being the exact same, but like much of what if found in the AWAKE nonsense it is wrong and God's Word is correct.

I found the word Awake in the AKJV that perfectly matches the description of you/your groups/the JW's.

a reply to: Raggedyman

And here Raggedyman we once again agree.

a reply to: Raggedyman
Don't believe everything you hear. Especially if it takes the form of slander or looks like an attempt to discredit (painting with a broad brush) an entire group of people in the eyes of those who think they're getting their information from the bible and don't notice how much their thinking is influenced by the eisegesis of their teachers in the past and present (those who they got their information and ideas about biblical subjects from during their lifetimes, regardless whether these spiritual fathers are still alive or not) that are also mentioned at 2 Timothy 4:3,4 (eisegesis is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text).

“A fool will believe anything.”—PROVERBS 14:15, TODAY’S ENGLISH VERSION.

See alternate rendering in my signature.

2 Timothy 4:3,4 (for those who haven't seen me quote it before yet and since it's been a while):

For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] 4 They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.* [KJV: "myths"; Greek: "mythos"]

The spiritual fathers (or teachers) of Trinitarians are still Tertullian and Athanasius, to name 2 of the most prominent or influential ones in history.
Part 3—Did the Apologists Teach the Trinity Doctrine?

Tertullian (c. 160 to 230 C.E.) was the first to use the Latin word trinitas [for God, see context I skipped]. ... Tertullian proposed that God is ‘one substance consisting in three persons.’25⁠ This does not mean, however, that he had in mind three coequal and coeternal persons. However, his ideas were built upon by later writers who were working toward the Trinity doctrine.

Tertullian’s concept of Father, Son, and holy spirit was a far cry from Christendom’s Trinity, for he was a subordinationist. He viewed the Son as subordinate to the Father. In Against Hermogenes he wrote:

“We should not suppose that there is any other being than God alone who is unbegotten and uncreated. . . . How can it be that anything, except the Father, should be older, and on this account indeed nobler, than the Son of God, the only-begotten and first-begotten Word? . . . That [God] which did not require a Maker to give it existence, will be much more elevated in rank than that [the Son] which had an author to bring it into being.”⁠26

Also, in Against Praxeas, he shows that the Son is different from and subordinate to Almighty God by saying:

“The Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: ‘My Father is greater than I.’ . . . Thus the Father is distinct from the Son, being greater than the Son, inasmuch as He who begets is one, and He who is begotten is another; He, too, who sends is one, and He who is sent is another; and He, again, who makes is one, and He through whom the thing is made is another.”⁠27

Tertullian, in Against Hermogenes, states further that there was a time when the Son did not exist as a person, showing that he did not regard the Son as an eternal being in the same sense that God was.⁠28
...
No Trinity

If you were to read all the words of the Apologists, you would find that while they deviated in some respects from the teachings of the Bible, none of them taught that the Father, the Son, and the holy spirit were coequal in eternity, power, position, and wisdom.

This is also true of other writers of the second and third centuries, such as Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Origen, Cyprian, and Novatian. While some came to equate the Father and the Son in certain respects, in other ways they viewed the Son as subordinate to God the Father. And none of them even speculated that the holy spirit was equal to the Father and the Son. For example, Origen (c. 185 to 254 C.E.) states that the Son of God is “the First-born of all creation” and that the Scriptures “know Him to be the most ancient of all the works of creation.”31

Any objective reading of these early church authorities will show that Christendom’s Trinity doctrine was not in existence in their time. As The Church of the First Three Centuries says:

“The modern popular doctrine of the Trinity . . . derives no support from the language of Justin: and this observation may be extended to all the ante-Nicene Fathers; that is, to all Christian writers for three centuries after the birth of Christ. It is true, they speak of the Father, Son, and prophetic or holy Spirit, but not as co-equal, not as one numerical essence, not as Three in One, in any sense now admitted by Trinitarians. The very reverse is the fact. The doctrine of the Trinity, as explained by these Fathers, was essentially different from the modern doctrine. This we state as a fact as susceptible of proof as any fact in the history of human opinions.”32

Actually, before Tertullian the Trinity was not even mentioned. And Tertullian’s “heterodox” Trinity was much different from that believed today. How, then, did the Trinity doctrine, as understood today, develop? Was it at the Council of Nicea in 325 C.E.?

The numbers are references, there's a list of detailed references on that page.
Part 4—When and How Did the Trinity Doctrine Develop?

“A Minority Viewpoint”

At Nicaea, did the bishops in general believe that the Son was equal to God? No, there were competing points of view. For example, one was represented by Arius, who taught that the Son had a finite beginning in time and was therefore not equal to God but was subordinate in all respects. Athanasius, on the other hand, believed that the Son was equal to God in a certain way. And there were other views.

Regarding the council’s decision to consider the Son of the same substance (consubstantial) as God, Martin Marty states: “Nicaea actually represented a minority viewpoint; the settlement was uneasy and was unacceptable to many who were not Arian in outlook.”⁠5 Similarly, the book A Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church notes that “a clearly formulated doctrinal position in contrast to Arianism was taken up by a minority only, although this minority carried the day.”⁠6 And A Short History of Christian Doctrine notes:

“What seemed especially objectionable to many bishops and theologians of the East was the concept put into the creed by Constantine himself, the homoousios [“of one substance”], which in the subsequent strife between orthodoxy and heresy became the object of dissension.”⁠7

After the council, disputing continued for decades. Those who were for the idea of equating the Son with Almighty God even fell out of favor for a time.
..
So to assert that the Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E. established or affirmed the Trinity doctrine is not true. What later became the Trinity teaching was not in existence at the time. ..
Nicaea, though, did represent a turning point. It opened the door to the official acceptance of the Son as equal to the Father, and that paved the way for the later Trinity idea.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: whereislogic

Have you ever wonder why the JW's stopped using the title' The Watchtower" and started using the title AWAKE for its magazine, ...

No because they haven't. They are 2 different magazines that discuss bible teachings who are still produced side by side. I can see very clearly that the teachings in them are based on the bible and there are numerous bible quotations and references in the articles for me or any other person to verify that, just like those who "received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so." (Ac 17:11) What I see you doing on the other hand is ignoring what the bible says (including the KJ) and teaching or applying your own eisegesis to a select few cherry-picked verses from one translation produced by Trinitarians whose main source (the Textus Receptus) was produced by a Roman Catholic priest from my country (Erasmus) who dedicated his work to the pope as he was pressurized by the Roman Catholic Church to add that famous Trinitarian phrase at 1 John 5:7 which you won't be honest about like these Trinitarians' partial honesty while still trying to downplay the deception and what it means for the doctrine/teaching of the Trinity in a somewhat similar manner to the way Eugenie C. Scott does it with Haeckel's embryo fraud and what that means for the teaching of evolutionary myths and the honesty of those promoting those like herself: 'nothing to see here', 'go back to sleep please'.

a reply to: whereislogic

You see, you have a mere sinful man trying to tell God whether one of his inspired scriptures should be in the Bible?

Who is the more intelligent man or God?

Who is more capable of preserving his words for man in our generation, Man or God?

1Cor 1:25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
26 For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
27 But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
28 And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:
29 That no flesh should glory in his presence.
30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

All you prove is what I have been saying all along, "YOU AND THE JW's ARE NOT BIBLE BELIEVERS BUT BIBLE CORRECTORS. MAKING YOURSELF GOD IN GOD'S PLACE.

I trust no man, not Erasmus and especially an RC priests, nor do I put trust in any supposed old TR manuscripts, Greek Manuscipts or any other supposed originals.

I put my trust and faith in God, that God by his own power, by the Holy Ghost, during the years of the AKJV translation, God by inspiration preserved his words in English just as God had given them in the originals.

Remember those mythological originals you all keep claiming you are studying when you change God's word's and remove God's words? Not one of those documents from the oldest to the newest are an ORIGINAL DOCUMENT, they are all pieces of copies of copies. We have no complete original in any of the many languages God had inspired his words in, in the past. If you have no original and you claim to be going to the originals then you or anyone who uses those terms to captivate your listeners/followers, are nothing but BOLD FACE LIARS.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: whereislogic

You see, you have a mere sinful man trying to tell God whether one of his inspired scriptures should be in the Bible?

See, no honesty about that Trinitarian phrase at 1 John 5:7. One of the clearest cases of a deliberate addition to God's Word motivated by Trinitarianism. Frequently acknowledged by most Trinitarians (except for the motivation part). That's not "a mere sinful man trying to tell God whether one of his inspired scriptures should be in the Bible". Your description is turning reality upside down and a demonstration of Isaiah 5:20,21. It was Erasmus who added the phrase to the Textus Receptus which was how it was incorporated into the KJB. If anyone has done or is doing what you were describing it would be Erasmus and all those jumping on his bandwagon (which includes the ones making the same arguments as the modern day King James Only movement).

Deuteronomy 4:2 (KJB)

Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.

NWT:

You must not add to the word that I am commanding you, neither must you take away from it, so as to keep the commandments of Jehovah your God that I am commanding you.

Isaiah 5:20,21 (NWT)

20 Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,

Those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,

Those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

21 Woe to those wise in their own eyes

And discreet in their own sight!

Who is the more intelligent man or God?

God, therefore I do not need the additions, changes and translation mistakes (deliberate or not) the men who produced the KJB made. Neither do I need to accept the same arguments that the men who started the King James Only movement made. Regarding the history of the King James Only movement wikipedia starts with:

Benjamin G. Wilkinson (1872–1968), a Seventh-day Adventist missionary,...

A man.

Who is more capable of preserving his words for man in our generation, Man or God?

God. And he has done so in spite of dishonest men like Benjamin G. Wilkinson or Erasmus. Men whose arguments and falsehoods you repeat, therefore you are testifying against yourself that you are a (spiritual) son of these dishonest men.

"Well, then, fill up the measure of your forefathers." (Mt 23:32)

From Justin, Tertullian, Constantine and Athanasius to Erasmus, Wilkinson and Gail Riplinger.

An Historical Account of Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture - Wikipedia

In the King James Version Bible, 1 John 5:7 reads:

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

Using the writings of the early Church Fathers, the Greek and Latin manuscripts and the testimony of the first versions of the Bible, Newton ... demonstrated that the words "in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one," that support the Trinity doctrine, did not appear in the original Greek Scriptures. [whereislogic: and one can do so without being in possession of the originals, but go ahead, you'll deny that anyway, for me the evidence is clear, if the Textus Receptus is the first Greek manuscript that has it, what is the basis for pretending it's part of God's inspired Word? Just because we don't have the originals and some King James Only promoters claim that only the KJB is inspired, or the translators that worked on the KJB, is not a reasonable justification when all the actual evidence points in the other direction. And remember, it's wikipedia choosing to use the word "original"; I'd phrase that as "there is no evidence that this phrase is part of God's Word, the inspired Scriptures" if I was having a conversation with someone who is easily triggered by the word "original" and starts doing something that reminds me of atheists that love to avoid providing any evidence for their claims as they make one after another]
...
Newton describes this letter as "an account of what the reading has been in all ages, and what steps it has been changed, as far as I can hitherto determine by records",[1] and "a criticism concerning a text of Scripture".[2] He blames "the Roman church" for many abuses in the world[1] and accuses it of "pious frauds".[2] He adds that "the more learned and quick-sighted men, as Luther, Erasmus, Bullinger, Grotius, and some others, would not dissemble their knowledge".

I.e., they knew full well what they were doing, they just wouldn't tell. That's called: dishonest.

Proverbs 14:5 (Reference Bible)

5 A faithful witness is one that will not lie, but a false witness launches forth mere lies.

a reply to: whereislogic

WIL, we disagree, you are just going to have to accept that
I don't trust Awake and don't care for your beliefs

Though I don't believe the bible is 100% accurate I believe it points to Jesus being one of the Trinity 100% perfectly. Jesus is my God

Stop preaching watchtower doctrine at me, I am not interested

a reply to: Raggedyman
Where is what you derisively call "watchtower doctrine" (as in theological doctrine) in the comment you were responding to? It's mostly just discussing history and Tertullian's doctrine in comparison to later Trinitarian doctrines (such as later Apologists and modern Trinitarianism). Also, the quotations and references in the article I linked are from sources that are not affiliated with those publishing the magazine entitled The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom.

Proverbs 9:12 (Study Bible)

12 If you become wise, you are wise to your own advantage,

But if you are a ridiculer, you alone will bear it.

a reply to: whereislogic

I am not a JW, I will never be one, I am awake, maybe you should wake up.
My church doesn't tell me not to read anti church literature on the net
If you really are free, go study why people who have left your church left and why they left
Go read anti JW articles on the net

Please, I am just not interested in arguing with you

a reply to: whereislogic

But then you miss the as you say "Trinitarian" term "godhead" in

Col 2:8-9 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily

There are two other verses in Acts 17:29 and Romans 1:20, the Greek word is theotes, it literally means that in Jesus Christ is the fulness of divinity. Not a created God but one with God just as it says in

John 1:1-3;14 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. . . . And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
Re 19:11-16 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself. And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God. And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

You skip over all the verses that deal with Jesus Christ being the Word except the one Your teachers say is in error. spurious, a wrong translation, or was added later by someone else or another. Ignoring the fact that God is God and you are not God, and God can place in his word for us in English any words he chooses and you would still be wrong.

1John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.

you will notice that the AKJV translators did not add one word to the verse of 1John 5:7 as you claim. If they did those added words, like all the other italicized words above, would be in italics so you knew they added them. Compare that to any other versions in English you can find and none of those committees did anything so you could tell what they added or took away.

I'll stick to the AKJV 1John 5:7 as true and other others are a lie.