Jehovah`s Witness/Quest for the truth - Matthew 28:19
As much as I hate to go against what I said, not to entertain anymore proddings from Mr. Holland. I'll make this an exemption for his own enlightenment.
So, what is this nonsense that he is now ranting about?
>>"What happened to "I will tolerate no rivalry against my God, Jehovah?" <<
>>"What happened to "I will tolerate no rivalry against my God, Jehovah?" <<
What a silly question. I'm not sure why it was even asked, unless, unless of course my assumption is correct. That is, that Mr. Holland is confusing my non-response response and rejection of him as a toleration of "attacks on the Scriptures". I think this is the case as evidenced by his next statements quoted below.
Continuing his words, he says:
>>Uh, that's what you just did, Eddie. Your Pal attacks the Scripture that was inspired by Jehovah, and you say nothing. He tells us that the Holy Spirit can't even preserve the Bible without error for centuries, and you are afraid to counter it, for fear of upsetting him, even when you KNOW he's wrong. You wouldn't even stand up for Jehovah's inspired Word. You threw Him under the bus, as Ms. T did....All to keep from upsetting Rando." - DH<<
Unbelievable! Don't you think?
He thinks that because I rejected the questions he sent to me about what my dear brother Rando said of Matthew 28:19, I'm now being accused of "throwing my brother under the bus", "afraid to counter it, for fear of upsetting him"? Then turns around and accuses brother Rando of saying the Holy Spirit is unable to "preserve the Bible without error for centuries"?
Seriously? Is Mr. Holland really this confused and clueless? What nonsense is this? Furthermore, what do you make of it?
Well, either Mr. Holland fits what I said above - clueless or brother Rando is really "attacking the Scripture that was inspired by Jehovah". Only one is true but which one do you think is the case?
Frankly speaking, to accuse brother Rando of "attacking the Scripture that was inspired by Jehovah" is beyond me and ridiculous. SO, such accusation is quite laughable. Especially coming from a known critic of JWs.
Thus, this leads me to an unmistakable conclusion - Mr. Holland is confused and clueless 'bout what's he's saying.
But to enlighten him, what Brother Rando is alluding to is in regards to the KJV Bible. That is, since it's widely known by many scholars and serious Bible students that the KJV Bible is full of mistakes and spurious texts (1 John 5:7 or 1 Tim 3:16 for example) , thus the holy spirit had NOTHING to do with it. Hence it's not the work of the holy spirit but someone else.
Case in point. Here's just a snippit of what brother Rando had said in one of his post 'bout the KJV. He said:
"One of the most Deceptive and Erroneous man-made writings can be found in the KJV. Scripture after scripture is corrupt, false, and misleading. The KJV is not a translation of the Hebrew or Greek translation but a King James Version who was also a Roman Pagan worshiper of his Pagan forefathers."
Did you noticed it?
Here's some more - quoted from Mr. Holland's own post:
>>RANDO: "Remember when a "Born Again Baptist" claimed that Holy Spirit changed the meaning of "passover" to "EASTER" in the 16th Century?"
"Derrick Holland picks and chooses a quote to deliberately deceive. After all, he proclaims the Holy Spirit was lying to us for 1500 years"<<
Did you see it?
Notice. Here we can see Mr. Holland's apparent confusion as to what brother Rando was saying.
Brother Rando wasn't saying that "the Holy Spirit was lying to us for 1500 years", but that since DH admitted that the "Holy Spirit changed the meaning of "passover" to "EASTER" in the 16th Century", thus he (Mr. Holland) made it appear the H.S. was responsible for INTRODUCING an error into the Bible. Something that is impossible to occur because when God's holy spirit is involved, such as when the Bible was written, then it WAS indeed "without error" infallible!
Thus, brother Rando used Mr. Holland's own words to state the ridiculousness of what he said, that the "Holy Spirit changed the meaning of "passover" to "EASTER" in the 16th Century".
There's NO WAY in the universe that Jehovah's holy spirit will make a mistake let alone INTRODUCE a pagan teaching (Easter/Ishtar) as Christian teaching!
As the Scripture says:
"...All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness," (2 Timothy 3:16)
The TRANSLATION of it however into other languages is suspect as it's prone to mistakes and errors since it's affected by many factors - such as biases/misinterpretations. The KJB translation is a prime example of this. For instance the removal of God's holy name Jehovah and replacing it with the title LORD.
This case is well documented and cannot be debunked.
Hence as Bible Students we should be very aware and careful of what Bible versions we use.
Now, in regards to Matthew 28:19, whether if it was tampered with by Trinitarians, time well tell. But as far as what I've seen and read so far, the evidence is quite convincing, even logical. Of course for me, it will take more than what I've done to conclusively believe that it was tampered with. But as evidence mount, that might as well be the case.
Very glad though that brother Rando raised the issue.
In any case, here's just one of what I've found. Read the link for yourself and decide whether if it was tampered with or not.
But what would this do to the NWT? Would this "tampering" invalidate it, if found true?
The answer is NO! Absolutely NOT! Instead it will make OUR case that much much more stronger, even unassailable! That the Trinity Dogma is NOT in the Bible. That it owes its existence to the Trinitarians who purposefully added it into the Bible.
In addition, even in its current state, Matthew 28:19 doesn't support the Trinity teaching. No matter how hard Trinitarians try to make it to conform to their dogma, Matthew 28:19 will not work. The trinity formula is just not there! So whether it should be corrected or not it's up to the Bible Committee to make the decision (as they have the resources to make the determination - in my opinion). Either way it doesn't affect nor change what i already know. The Trinity dogma is a man made doctrine full of inconsistencies and mysticism.
Of course Trinitarians will adamantly disagree as expected, but it doesn't matter because they're fighting a losing battle, a lost cause. The truth will always prevail and will always come out no matter how long and how hard they try to hide it.
Still, you can make the determination on your own, if you choose to, like brother Rando. We have the freedom to do so with the intention of finding out the truth. In fact we're encourage to make the truth OUR OWN!
Now that this nonsense has been dealt with, what do you think though? Is Mr. Holland really this concerned about "Jehovah's inspired Word"?
If he is, then why use the KJB? Why use a Bible that erroneously removed God's Holy Name - Jehovah - from its many pages in the first place? If he is really this concern about the "attacks on the Scriptures", then why is he not in agreement with the NWT when the spurious texts at 1 John 5:7 were removed?
That is: “In heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”—King James Version.
". . .For there are three witness bearers: 8 the spirit and the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement." (1 John 5:7, 8)
If he is, why does he continue to promote this spurious text? Why does he continue to tolerate the lie?
(For comparison with other Bible translation see: https://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cfm?b=1Jo&c=5&t=KJV#s=t_bibles_1164007)
Or 1 Tim 3:16, from:
[1Ti 3:16 KJV] 16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
". . .Indeed, the sacred secret of this godly devotion is admittedly great: ‘He was made manifest in flesh, was declared righteous in spirit, appeared to angels, was preached about among nations, was believed upon in the world, was received up in glory.’” (1 Timothy 3:16)
Or John 1:1 for that matter?
". . .In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was a god." (John 1:1 NWT)
Obvious answer is, because the NWT - DOESN'T SUPPORT his TRINITY DOCTRINE - plain and simple. And if Matthew 28:19 was somehow corrected to read "in the name of Christ", then the vestiges that purportedly support the Trinitarian doctrine has been fully exposed and removed for good.
Unfortunately, even if this is the case, Trinitarians like Mr. Holland will still CONTINUE to attack the NWT of Jehovah's Witnesses in order to hide the truth about their beloved KJV. This they will gladly do at the expense of denying even "in the name of Christ"!!!
So there you have it.