[Tj3]

"First, let me comment that copying and pasting articles is inappropriate unless you give credit to the source and in fact illegal unless you abide by their copyright provisions. (BTW, I have a copy of that CD)"

- Happy day for you and your opinion. Mine happens to be different from yours.

It won't be your opinion or mine that matters when legalities are involved. (it is Copyright Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania). If you use it appropriately, there is no issue, but posting it as though it is your work is not right.

[Fanspoman]

it won't be your opinion or mine that matters when legalities are involved.

Lol

[Fanspoman]

It won't be your opinion or mine that matters when legalities are involved.

Considering the fact that we readily (and daily) share this same information publicly in our earth-wide preaching work, there's no worry about legalities.

[Tj3]

Considering the fact that we readily (and daily) share this same information publically in our earth-wide preaching work, there's no worry about legalities.

Does ethics play any part in your preaching work?

In any case, I think that we have established that your responses are not your answers, but are copied and pasted from a copyrighted source and that was the key point that I thought was important.

[Fanspoman]

Does ethics play any part in your preaching work?

In any case, I think that we have established that your responses are not your answers, but are copied and pasted from a copyrighted source and that was the key point that I thought was important.

Considering I'm a lifelong member of the religious faith of which the information came from, your ethics dig is irrelevant.

Also, what's been established is that my responses are the answers of the religious faith to which I belong... and as such my personal answers would always echo those. That's the key point I believe is important.

[Tj3]

Considering I'm a lifelong member of the religious faith of which the information came from, your ethics dig is irrelevant.

I think that there is a ethical point when copying and pasting from copyrighted material. But if you don't, then you've answered my question.

[Fanspoman]

I think that there is a ethical point when copying and pasting from copyrighted material. But if you don't, then you've answered my question.

Which is, yet again, a matter of opinion.

[Tj3]

Which is, yet again, a matter of opinion.

No, really - you have answered my question.

[Fanspoman]

No, really - you have answered my question.

Happy day for you. Your opinion is yours alone, I couldn't care less what it is. I just know it doesn't match mine.

[TitaniumG]

The Bible does speak of the three in one concept although the word trinity is not used.I think that JWs have their promblems with the term trinity because of its origin seeing that this concept was officially introduced at the council of nicea.But the idea of the trinity is in the bible and was an accepted belief among the apostles so the fact that the Roman Catholic church decided to make it official at a meeting doesn't say that they created the concept but they simply accepted and made it one of their beliefs.

[Fanspoman]

The Bible does speak of the three in one concept although the word trinity is not used.I think that JWs have their promblems with the term trinity because of its origin seeing that this concept was officially introduced at the council of nicea.But the idea of the trinity is in the bible and was an accepted belief among the apostles so the fact that the Roman Catholic church decided to make it official at a meeting doesn't say that they created the concept but they simply accepted and made it one of their beliefs.

The main problem with the "trinity" is that it is NOT a Biblical teaching. There is no scriptural support for it whatsoever. It is a false, blasphemous, god-dishonoring teaching of men that muddles what the Bible has already made clear: that God is ONE God, and that Jesus is the first of God's creations. The apostles never believed in the nonsense of the "trinity", they fully knew Jesus to be the Son of God, and not Almighty God himself.

[Tj3]

The main problem with the "trinity" is that it is NOT a Biblical teaching. There is no scriptural support for it whatsoever. It is a false, blasphemous, god-dishonoring teaching of men that muddles what the Bible has already made clear: that God is ONE God, and that Jesus is the first of God's creations. The apostles never believed in the nonsense of the "trinity", they fully knew Jesus to be the Son of God, and not Almighty God himself.

Who is the Redeemer in Is 48:17?

[Fr_Chuck]

This is really looking like a copy of the other thread, the last few posts almost copies. This one closed.