Jehovah`s Witness/Classic Eddie G....
Well, today's "answer" to Eddie G, is precisely what we have come to expect from him. Same old diversionary tactics.
After receiving a letter from a questioner named Charles, Eddie does what Eddie always does to someone who makes him feel ridiculous and tells him the facts....Create a diversion, and try to put the questioner on the defensive. I quote....
"In fact all we heard from him is 'Eddie did this and Eddie did that, Rando twisted this and Rando twisted that, they don't understand this, they don't understand that'."
Let me briefly address this one first of all. Eddie G claimed he "understands" the Trinity thoroughly, and since he doesn't, his misunderstandings have been addressed. Now, to avoid embarrassment that comes with being shown that he doesn't know what he is talking about, he tries to make it appear he is being "attacked". No Eddie, your claim to "understand" the Trinity, was merely being addressed in detail, and exposed as the false claim that it was.
And as for Rando, what you are trying hard NOT to say here, is that you could care less that he lies and slanders. Basically, Eddie is saying here that Rando can make up false slanderous statements about me, Richard, and any other Christian that he wants to, but we aren't supposed to say anything about it. Nor are we to ask Eddie why he would support a liar, if he is honest himself. No matter...The lies told by Eddie and Rando regarding the Trinity, have been completely brought to light.
And the readers are obviously noticing.
But then, Eddie attempts to turn things back on Charles, to get the heat off of himself. And he uses another one of his tactics of taking two completely irrelevant topics, and making a completely illogical connection between the two. Kind of like the "Since the Trinity is beyond human understanding, that proves it is man made"
, illogical argument.
But this one is even better. He writes...
"But since you're so confident that he already discredited us, will you now please answer this one very simple questions?
Since Trinitarians like yourself accept that Jesus is "God Almighty as His Father", who was Jesus referring to when he said:"
Say WHAT???? Eddie, what does my having thoroughly discredited you, have anything to do with asking Charles a question about the Trinity? If I didn't know better, I would think you are trying hard to change the subject.
Fact is, your question about the Trinity, is completely irrelevant to my having exposed the fact that you don't have an accurate understanding of it. One has nothing to do with the other. Since when do YOU, the "expert", get to pose questions to the questioner now? I mean, its not like you guys are in a debate, or anything.
But actually, the point of my writing this, is to show Eddie's slight dishonesty in claiming that I have not answered HIS questions, when he in fact, has been sitting on a question from me for 4 days now, without a reply.
In Eddie's reply to Charles, he makes the following interesting statement, referring to me....
“And since he hasn't provided an answer to any of my Scriptural questions, how could I be losing? Know what I mean?”
Well, if a failure to answer someone’s question is the measuring stick that determines if someone is “winning” or “losing”, then Mr. Eddie is getting pummeled. Eddie, I do believe there is something you “forgot” to mention here, that really should be brought out. There are a couple of problems with your above statement.
First, I have already said in 2 different posts now, that the reason I have not “answered” any of your questions, is because you have not sent me any questions. As already stated, I am not answering questions asked to Rando but directed at me, whether they are from you, or that other extremely immature questioner of Rando’s, assuming you are not the same person. I will happily answer any question sent to me, by anyone who sincerely wants an answer. I am not answering questions which are asked insincerely, by cowardly people who are scared stiff to send them to me. Its that simple. If you or they want answers, then you can send them to me, like its SUPPOSED to be done.
So, to answer this charge, I have not answered your questions because you haven’t sent me any.
What I HAVE done, is to thoroughly expose your claim to “understand” the Trinity, as completely false. And now, because you cannot even defend your own “understanding” of the teaching in light of the proof that you don’t grasp it, you have once again, resorted to trying to mislead the public. The fact is, ALL of your “questions” (written to Rando, and not me) are BASED ON your misunderstanding of the Trinity. And that goes for the ridiculous questions being asked by the other anonymous and frightened "questioner" of Rando's, as well. If you really understood the Trinity teaching, you wouldn’t even have asked those questions to begin with, as if they have anything at all to do with the Trinity.
So, it makes sense to first set straight what the Trinity actually IS, and is NOT, and then the “questions” answer themselves. You have not asked a question as of yet, that contradicts the teaching of the Trinity.
But again, you are trying to divert attention off of the fact that you have been shown to not understand the Trinity, despite your many claim to the contrary.
But there is something else that you, in your dishonest tactics, failed to mention. And this is the kicker….
YOU have failed to answer a question I sent to YOU 4 days ago. Now, you don’t get much more hypocritical, than to come on here in public and tell the world that I haven’t answered your questions (when you haven’t sent me any), and then NEGLECT to mention that you have not answered MY questions (which WERE sent to you).
Now, as of this writing, you have not replied to my question of 3/14/14.…It has been 4 days at this very moment that I am writing this, since I sent you my questions. And if you have not replied by the time this appears in the forum, it will have been 5 days. I realize that you might very well send a reply sometime tonight after my hitting “send” on this writing, and if that happens, then your reply should also appear in the forum right along with this writing.
And readers, if you do not see Eddie’s reply to my question from 3/14/14 in the forum with this writing, then you will know that he has been SENT the questions below, DIRECTLY TO HIM, from me, and he has failed to answer or reply in any way. And then has the nerve to come on here publicly and hypocritically claim that I have not answered HIS questions, while the fact is, he has not answered mine. Eddie has not sent me any questions….I DID send him questions.
And as of this writing, still no reply.
Below, is what was sent by me, to Eddie G, on 3/14/14.…….
"Hello, Eddie, and welcome back to Allexperts. As I indicated that I was going to do upon reactivation of your Allexperts profile, I wanted to follow up with you on some questions that you left unanswered, in regards to your “understanding” of the Trinity doctrine. Since you do enjoy writing about it a great deal, we can both agree that a basic and common sense requirement, would be that you understand it.
And you have assured us that you do, in the following emphatic statement…
“Having studied extensively the many facets and the many faces of the doctrine as it evolved throughout the millennia, I do understand the Trinitarian position! Having read many explanations of this doctrine throughout the years, I do indeed understand the Trinitarian position!”
So, since you are on record as saying that you understand the doctrine so thoroughly, I would like to quote for you again, the following statements regarding the Trinity, that have been posted by Rando. I will not ask you to elaborate on each one, unless of course you want to.
My question is simple….Since you understand the Trinity, do you or do you not, believe the following statements, present an accurate picture of the Trinitarian belief?
A few options....Perhaps you believe they all portray an accurate description of the Trinity, perhaps you believe none of them do, and perhaps you believe some do, and some don’t. Would you please outline which, if any, you believe are inaccurate, and state if you believe the following posted statements ARE accurate?
Thank you for your time on these statements….
Claim #1: ““The Trinity Doctrine comes down to this BOLD LIE: God became a man, so that man can become God.”
Claim #2: ““Trinitarians make the claim that Jesus is the Father himself in the Old Testament”
Claim #3: “The Trinity is made up of three Gods.”
Claim #4: “Matter of fact, Religion has not told the truth about the only True God, Jehovah. They say Jehovah alone is not the most high, he shares his position with two other gods that are equal to him.”
Claim #5: “By claiming the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father”
Additional note: In reading the above Claim #5, and DW’s actually reasonably fair definition of the Trinity in his post on the subject, I found a statement in DW’s post that would seem to present a problem with Rando’s statement in Claim #5.
4) “The Father is not the Son or the Holy Spirit“
5) “The Son is not the Father or the Holy Spirit”
But Rando claims: “The Father is the Son and the Son is the Father”
Now, I am no rocket scientist, mind you, but it seems obvious to even me, that the above comments from DW and Rando, are completely contradictory. In other words…There is NO possible way they can BOTH be correct.
So, could you tell me WHICH statement most accurately represents the Trinity teaching?
Thank you for your time, and I appreciate your straightforward answer to the questions, without diversions or attacks."
and was asked on 03/14/2014
Now Eddie, I asked you these questions 4 days ago. I had the guts to send them directly to you, exactly as its supposed to be done. And you have not answered them, nor have you replied. Now, I realize the undesirable predicament that these questions put you in, but that isn’t my problem…Its yours. I didn’t ask you to come on here and support known lies against the Trinity, and align yourself with a proven liar. You chose to do that on your own. And since you boasted that you “understand” the Trinity (when you obviously do not), then you SHOULD be able to answer these questions.
Now, I know you showed extreme dishonesty on that “worshipping the cross” lie that you got caught in, but I really thought you would have better sense than to come on here and tell everyone I have not answered your questions, knowing FULL WELL that you are sitting on questions I have sent to you, and have not so much as even attempted a reply. What? Did you just think I wouldn’t read the board, and see you make that claim, or something? Something just doesn’t “click” with you, Eddie. You do things that have no logic or reason behind them.
And like Charles so correctly pointed out, you have only succeeded in discrediting yourself….Again.
"ADDITIONAL NOTE: As I was in the process of sending this answer, Eddie’s reply came in, after 4 days. But no matter….He still didn’t answer the questions asked of him….exactly as I suspected. And he hypocritically talks about my not answering questions, that have not even been sent to me? So Eddie, I sent you a follow-up, giving you yet another opportunity to show us how this question answering thing is done. Let’s see if you will, or if you will only try to divert again.
But try actually answering the questions this time.