Stephen Adams wrote:

>posted a lengthy defense of this in the article. Give me a break.
>It wasn't just a bald statement without backup. You snipped my entire
>defense and then berate me for claiming to teach the truth without
>any backup. That's pretty dishonest.

Than there was no point in you making that statement. Up until that
point you hadn't offered anything. IF your reply was the post as a
whole than why make such a puerile statement up front? IF you feel I
was trying to make you look as if you had no meat in your buffet I
apologize.

>Stephen Adams wrote:

>>On the contrary, the Scriptures support exactly my position. Not
>>yours.

You didn't defend your position with scriptures. You sprinkled them
amongst the opinions of trinitarians

I don't think you should lecture me about honesty Steve. You made a
nonsensical claim that you "thrashed me" when, in fact, we barely
exchanged any words on this board. You were simply grandstanding and it
was dishonest of you to publicly stae it. When I exposed your flaw You
then failed to be man enough to acknowledge it.

>Not a smoke screen at all! You said, quoting the Scripttures, that
>private interpretation was forbidden. I applied it to the man whose
>private interepretation created your religion.

CT Russell did not start "my" religion. Jesus Christ started my
religion. Satan started yours (sorry I couldn't resist. But I honestly
do believe that. I am not saying you are a "satanist", only that you've
been mislead. See 2 Cor. 4:4 for details).

And I DID NOT say "interpretation" was forbidden. But if those
interpretations are presented as scripture that is forbidden. Quoting
the ante-Nicene church fathers or the Nicene Council really doesn't
have any authority as to what the Bible says.

Private REVELATION is forbidden and THAT is what the trinity is. But on
the question of "private interpretations" did you read 2 Pet. 1:20?

>The Orthodox Church *is* following the Scripture

the "orthodox" church is Jehovah's Witnesses so I agree. Jehovah's
Witness teaching is "catholic"- the word- not the church.

The examples you provide I see no conflict with. Disciples are to pass
on the Holy Scripte and not add to it, which is what Trinitarians need
to do to support an unBiblical heresy. It is the proverbial square peg-
round hole.

>The JW's do NOT meet
>these basic Scriptural tests.

Prove it Steve. The Trinity is not in the Bible so if you are basing it
on that idolatrous doctrine you are simply bonkers.

The JWS are the *only* church that meet those tests. Your "catholic"
church or "trintarians" in general are guilty of what is written at
Gal. 1:6-9 so you have something in common with Mormons and their
latter day prophets.