Humpty Dumpty

[Faber]

"When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean" (Humpty Dumpty in 'Through the Looking Glass' by Lewis Carroll).

Those who deny the Trinity often employ the same rational as Humpty Dumpty in their approach to defining the words of the Bible. Since the proper definitions refute their doctrine they resort to attacking the meanings of the biblical words as found in the lexicons.
What they offer is simply their opinion of what they think the words ought to mean in accordance with their beliefs.
"The Bible is inspired not the lexicons" is a claim so often made. What is ignored is that the words of the Bible are to be properly defined otherwise like Humpty Dumpty words can simply mean anything we want them to. Communication will inevitably break down.

[kayky]

The Episcopal church also chose its own name. It simply means that we have bishops. We chose that name after splitting from the Church of England during the American Revolution.

[OnceConvinced]

[ Are] words "Jehovah's Witnesses" in the bible?

ISAIAH 43:10
You are my witnesses, declares Jehovah, Yes, my servant whom I have chosen

The most trusted translations use the name "lord" not "Jehovah".

Nevertheless there is still no term ever mentioned in the bible where it puts the two words together and says "Jehovah's Witnesses". You've taken something and made a name based on it to describe your group. All other Christians believe they are Witnesses for God too, but don't call themselves that.

That is all the "Trinity" is. It's a term that has been used to describe God in three persons. It is irrelevant whether the term is mentioned in the bible or not. It's just a name to describe something.

BTW where did Jesus ever refer to himself as a Jehovah's Witness? Surely he would have if it were how it was supposed to be?

Jehovah's Witnessses (unlike many Christian groups) have not been given their name by opposers or others, or taken on the name of some human leader (for example Lutherans ) ... but formerly adopted that name based on the bible scripture of Isaiah 43:10.

It's still a name that you've taken that was never mentioned as a name in the bible (not even by Jesus himself!). EXACTLY the same as "Trinity".

Why do you JWs make such a big deal about names anyway? God has to be called Jehovah? Can't call him anything else. And even though the bible talks about the father, the son and the holy ghost, we can't call that the Trinity? Why on earth not?

That's all it is, just a name for all three, something that can be said quickly rather than "the father, the son and the holy ghost". You can call them the trinity even if you don't believe they are all one god.

[OnceConvinced]

The Episcopal church also chose its own name. It simply means that we have bishops. We chose that name after splitting from the Church of England during the American Revolution.

Yes and there are many groups of Christians who have likewise given themselves their own names. The Brethren, the Baptists, the Lutherans, the Anglicans, the Assembly of God, the Mormans...

Does the fact that a name does not appear in the bible automatically make it something false? No, of course it doesn't. I don't even know why JW would make such an argument. One has to delve further into the bible to learn about the trinity, not just look for the word "trinity".

It's like Jesus never called anyone Christians, but now we look back and we see his followers as Christians. Jesus never said they were, but that doesn't mean they were imaginary. For that matter Jesus never even mentioned Jehovah's Witnesses. You would think he would have called himself one.

[bluethread]

I didn't realize that the point of this thread is to bash the JW's. I thought the OP was asking why words that ARE in the Scriptures are given different meanings by different people. Was I mistaken?

[JehovahsWitness]

Why do you JWs make such a big deal about names anyway? God has to be called Jehovah? Can't call him anything else.

However it is pronounced, Jehovah's Witnesses believe the personal name of God (YHWH/Yahweh/JEHOVAH) is of utmost importance, as it identifies the True God.

I will glorify YOUR NAME to time indefinite."PSALM 86:12

"Therefore, you should pray like this: Our Father in heaven, YOUR NAME be honored as holy." - Jesus Christ

"Moses asked: Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, The God of your forefathers has sent me to you, and they say to me, What is his name? What should I say to them? Jehovah answered: I Will Become What I Choose to Become. [...] is what you are to say to the Israelites, JEHOVAH [YHWH] the God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you. This is my name forever, and this is how I am to be remembered from generation to generation." - Exodus 3:13, 14, 15

Video Lecture: Geoffrey W. Jackson: The Divine Name of Our Heavenly Father
[youtube][/youtube]


Anyway, perhaps it would be best to start another thread on this topic, as it is indeed a big one.




JW

[marco]

"When I use a word it means just what I choose it to mean" (Humpty Dumpty in 'Through the Looking Glass' by Lewis Carroll).

Those who deny the Trinity often employ the same rational as Humpty Dumpty in their approach to defining the words of the Bible. Since the proper definitions refute their doctrine they resort to attacking the meanings of the biblical words as found in the lexicons.
What they offer is simply their opinion of what they think the words ought to mean in accordance with their beliefs.
"The Bible is inspired not the lexicons" is a claim so often made. What is ignored is that the words of the Bible are to be properly defined otherwise like Humpty Dumpty words can simply mean anything we want them to. Communication will inevitably break down.

Excellent advice. But who, then, attaches meanings to Biblical words? Trinity unfortunately is a word that does not appear in the Bible, so how can the Bible be of any use in its definition? As you say, the words of the Bible must be properly defined, but what happens when a word isn't mentioned in the Bible? Perhaps you can tell us.

[Willum]

Why does it always seem to be up to me to teach you folks your own religion?

Matthew 28:19,20

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.

Trinity enough?

[marco]

Why does it always seem to be up to me to teach you folks your own religion?

Matthew 28:19,20

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.[/quote

Trinity enough?

Well not really, Willum. The word TRINITY doesn't feature, so one can't offer a biblical definition.

You mean that three entities are mentioned, but we know there are not three gods. Fortunately the previous verse resolves this dilemma:

"Jesus spake unto them, saying: All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth."

The Father has given him the power he requires, to do miracles if he wishes. Were he himself God, then "given" would not come into it.

[Willum]

[Replying to post 18 by marco]

Sorry, it's a difference that makes no difference to me:
Trinity is a Latin word, and the Greek equivalent is not a apropos translation.

Of course Hebrew wouldn't have a trinity, and thus, via the magic of language, we see that calling the three entities distinctly, as one, such as in a baptism, a trinity, in English or Latin, is perfectly acceptable short-hand.

V/R

[marco]

[Replying to post 18 by marco]

Sorry, it's a difference that makes no difference to me:
Trinity is a Latin word, and the Greek equivalent is not a apropos translation.

I don't know what you mean. Trinitas is certainly a Latin word but the point being made concerns this statement from the OP:

"Those who deny the Trinity often employ the same rational as Humpty Dumpty in their approach to defining the words of the Bible. Since the proper definitions refute their doctrine they resort to attacking the meanings of the biblical words as found in the lexicons. "

The rationale (sic) I'm using here is not Humpty Dumpty's - I am noting that there is no word - be it in whatever relevant language - that signifies Trinity, and so questions of definition do not arise.

Of course Hebrew wouldn't have a trinity, and thus, via the magic of language, we see that calling the three entities distinctly, as one, such as in a baptism, a trinity, in English or Latin, is perfectly acceptable short-hand.

Very true, but not the point. I wasn't arguing about finding justifications for using the word Trinity - I was discussing definitions of words in the Bible, and since the word TRINITY was brought up, it is relevant to say it does not appear in the Bible. You are justifying the later employment of "Trinitas" but that's another question.