| Author | Message | ||
     confused32 New member Username: confused32 Post Number: 1 Registered: 4-2007 Posted From: 166.82.229.251 |
I stumbled across this site while looking up information on Jehovah's Witnesses. I have been a Christian and active member in a Baptist church all of my life. I worked with a lady who is a JW and she started telling me things and I'd discuss my beliefs with her and vice versus. Before I knew it, I was talked into a Bible study and when I left the job, she turned my name into a local KH (she was from a different town) and so a lady has been coming to study with me ever since. I had also met a witness online who offered to answer any questions I had, so I asked lots of questions and she answered fairly quickly. A couple of weeks ago, I asked questions about the founder of the organization and about all of the false prophecies of the WTS. It's been at least 2 weeks and I'm still awaiting my anwers for those questions from the lady I talk to online, the lady I worked with stopped contacting me around the same time and the lady I study with just didn't show up this past week for our study. I called her, because I was going to ask her these questions, and she returned my call late that evening and said she had company in town and forgot to call me and tell me she wasn't going to be able to make it. We ended up having the study over the phone yesterday and she kept asking me the same questions over and over. Our study was interupted when my cousin dropped by and she said to call her back and we'd finish the study. About 15 minutes later, I called her back when my company left, and I got the answering machine, I left a message and she called back around 8:30 pm and said we'd finish our study today at 4:00pm. Well, it's 6:30 and I've yet to hear from her. It's all just so wierd, I don't understand what's going on. Did I do something wrong? They told me to ask all the questions I wanted, but now they all quit contacting me. Am I not progressing towards converting fast enough for them? Am I asking the wrong questions? Is it possible that the lady I met online contacted the local KH about me asking these questions? I remember when I first started talking to me, she wanted to know what town I was from and the names of the lady who comes to study and the friend from work... I don't know, does anyone here know what could be going on? I'm really confused now and I feel like they are trying to hide something from me. | ||
| jlb New member Username: jlb Post Number: 1 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 216.193.176.222 |
The way I look at it with JW's is that as long as they think they are converting you they are fine, but when they think you want to convert them into your Christianity they stear clear. They really (i think) are taught to not associate with non JW's--only to convert.I found that my grandson who was very much depending on other family members to get him away from an unhappy non Christian home,found The JW's , he more or less desserted his family and makes JW's his family. He lived with me for awhile, but once heavy with The JW's he never comes around. He only visits his mom when he and his wife of one year want to wittness to her. They always bring pamphlets etc.He is a very clean cut young man ,but no longer associates with any of our family since we are not Jehovah's. Hardly any family got invited to his wedding, but many Jehovah's were invited. He said he did not have room for his aunts and uncles and cousins who he grew up with. I really belive he has made JW's his family.Thanksgiving and Christmas comes and we all get together ,but he and his wife can't come because they do not celebrate holidays nor birthdays. Very sad | ||
| inkorrekt New member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 2 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 130.253.33.71 |
Well,there were two ladies who tried to convert me. I aksed them asimple question. Whoi is a prophet? They said Jesus christ. I told them that I onloy asked them to define a prophet. they copuld not. I offered to help them. Is Jeane dixon a prophet?They could not answer. Finally, they said prophet is one who brings good news. I told them that they were both prophets because they brought good news to me. They said "No". I said," Just now you told me that prophets bring good news. since you brought good news about God to me, you must be prophets.I broke their defenses. I asked them if they believed all the books in the bible. They said yes. So, you believe that all the 66 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ were fulfilled. They said yes. Well, did you know that JW prophesied that the world was going to come to an end? When nothing happened they changed the dates 3 times. Now, tell me which one should I believe. The Bible(all fulfilled prophesies or Watch tower(all failed prophecies). They said Bible. I told them that their organization gave false prophecy and they are wrong. Now, they are acting like christians. Next time when they run into yu, ask them who is their God, Jesus or Jehovah. Then aske them who is Jesus accoirding to them. They will say he is alittle God. Ask them if they worship Him. they will say yes we pray to him. Turn around and tell them that by worshipping of praying to Jesus, thyey are breaking their first commandment. See how they react. I did something wrong. I was so mad at their deceptive practises. So, I tore the Awake magazine and threw it in garbage before them. They walked away. I should have never done this. Only Stupoiod people who will believe anything become JW. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 1 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Confused32: I am sorry you are experiencing problems. Not all JW’s know the history of how they came about and perhaps they are doing research in order to address your concerns; whatever the matter, you should not be ignored. Many people besides JW’s know this history and as such, I would be more than happy to share with you what I know, however in order to do so, please state your questions specifically here, if you have the time and I will do my best to address them. Please remember, that addressing your concerns, does not necessarily mean you will agree! Sincerely, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 2 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear jib: (Part 1 of 2) I agree with your opening statement, that so long the JW’s has a listening ear, they will respond, teach etc. and when the situation is reversed, they do not. The reason for this is simple: They come from all walks of life, including many from your faith as well, so when someone stops listening, and then tries to present views, most of which they formerly believed, (meaning they came from a place where you are now from) the issue between them and you ends. This is not hocus pocus or mystical in some way, as it is what it is! People do this in everyday life! This is no different than if you chose a new career, after leaving one you have been in for years, especially when you find yourself discussing it with someone, who is in your former career and is successful at it, when you were not! This is simple human behavior and is also a reasonable reaction! JW’s very much believe in the Holy Scriptures, as should any God fearing person, and one of those scriptures puts it this way in 1 Corinthians 15:33 (NIV) “Do not be misled: "Bad company corrupts good character” keeping in mind that this was written to a Christian Congregation to be on guard against people within the that Congregation that could be a bad influence, let alone outside the Congregation of God that did not hold to the same standards. There are many more scriptures stating the same thing. Thus, the JW tries their best to keep to these scriptures and principals, and do them to the best of their human, imperfect ability! This also means that different, individual JW Christians will respond differently to similar circumstances, however, all in an attempt to keep true to these biblical principals. With regards to your grandson, deserting his family etc.; I have learned that every story has two sides; For instance, in one matter, I knew of where a JW was accused of deserting his family; it turned out that these members, (truth be told) were mobsters, who “he” previously engaged in mobster activities with under the cloak of being a “Saved Christian” [Born Again to be Specific] and still others, avoided family members that did drugs, are immoral etc, especially because of their propensity to gravitate to these same things, as they used to do it also. In the end, we do not know and you “may” (I did not say you do not know) not know the whole story except your own personal take on it! JW’s DO NOT teach anything outside the Bible, and certainly do not advocate severing family ties etc., as some people frequently misrepresent, as this is not Christian. I do note that you express good things about your grandson, and in line with that, you should express your feelings to him, on a one to one basis, letting him know how you feel about certain things, no different than if he were involved in any other activity that may cause you ill will! You may be surprised to learn his answer, even if you don’t agree! In the end, a JW takes very seriously Jesus’ commission to Preach the Good News of the Kingdom in all the inhabited earth prior to the end of this current earthly scene! According to the scriptures, and they truly believe this, lives are at stake, so therefore it is not unusual for a person with such a conviction to want to share his beliefs (as he believes lives are at stake) with others. If his mother feels that he does not visit enough or that when he does, all he does is speak about the same thing over and over; then again, like with any family problem or issue, take it directly to the source, the person ‘causing’ the issue, and attempt to settle the matter, as this is also scriptural and Christian, as Jesus counsels us in the scriptures how to settle personal grievances, in Matthew 5:23, 24 and also in Matthew 18:15-17. Continued below: | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 3 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(part 2 of 2) As to his not being at family holidays, please know that Bible scriptures and principles, coupled with the pagan origin of many if not most all holidays in our country (at least, speaking about the USA) prevents believers of the Bible (which is what JW’s are) from associating or participating in these types of festivities, whether it is family or not. However bear in mind, that does not mean that they (your grandson in particular) could not attend other types of gatherings, with his or one’s immediate family, who do not share the same Bible beliefs, like at a barbeque, or other type of family, function, outing etc., and if you feel he (your grandson) is not being fair, then tell him so and why! Again you may be surprised to learn of his reply, though in the end, it is up to him, as the JW’s DO NOT tell people what to do or control them as many have unfairly accused them of doing. Please know that what you grandson does or does not do, is solely up to him, as it is with each individual JW, since are just that, individuals, and as such must deal with their own Bible trained conscience on their own! Sometimes what works for one JW does not work for another, as this is a personal decision. Owing to this, some family members that are not JW’s often arrange for such occasions to spend time with their family, JW’s, no different than if you and yours drank alcoholic beverages, and one family member, was now a successful recovering alcoholic; You would not arrange for a party and invite the recovering one, knowing that alcoholic beverages would be served (etc. etc. etc.) especially if that one had a great propensity or weakness to do so! That would be both unloving and disrespectful of that one’s right to do as they please; as you have the right to do as you please. As to making the JW’s his family, no one can take the place of your family, however with that said, the Bible makes clear that your fellow believers, are your family as well, and also, I trust there are at least two different opinions on this personal matter of yours, I wish you, his mom and he well, in working these things out! Sincerely, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 4 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear inkorrekt: The position you take here (which is somewhat of a repeat of a previous posting) has been completely responded to here on this board, under the thread “Really, what kind of a mind becomes a JW” specifically under your post number 903, dated April 11, 2007 at 4:24 AM; below and above this thread! Again, not only do you have a poor memory, but the stand you obviously take in repeating certain similar elements, coupled with the words you use in both posts, (or all of your posts for that matter) show clearly, that you assume the reading audience of this particular thread (and others) are stupid, unless they in fact agree with you or are indeed YOU; the only one that seems to have all the answers despite being provided with things that make sense (especially Biblical sense) to the contrary is YOU! Your insulting people with your immense hubris is clearly shown for what it is, as when you make statements, only to later avoid having to address the responses, while blaming others, for not agreeing with you, is a sham! You know it and anyone else with a half logical mind, and an 8th grade reading level that reads your posts with replies, will know this also! P | ||
| confused32 New member Username: confused32 Post Number: 2 Registered: 4-2007 Posted From: 166.82.229.251 |
Thanks so much for everyone's replies!!! praetorian, Here are some of my questions, I'm completely open, so it doesn't matter if I agree with your anwers or not, I just appreciate your willingness to help me! I read that in the past, there have been alot of false prophecies made within the JW organization concerning the beginning of Armageddon. The Bible speaks of false prophecies and my question is, since these prophecies didn't happen, does that make what they are teaching false? The next thing is, does the watchtower society, "control" the members? Why don't they encourage kids to go to college after highschool? What is the whole thing about the WTS being the "faithful and discreet slave"? Is the NWT an accurate translation of the scriptures? | ||
| jlb New member Username: jlb Post Number: 2 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 216.193.176.132 |
Thank you praetorian, for writing such a nice lengthy answer. My grandson did come from a home where his father (my son-in-law) is not always a nice person. He is not nice to my daughter ,but she chooses to stay in the relationship. The grandson of whom I speak of is the oldest--now 25.There are three other boys 21----17---- and 9. The oldest left at around age 15 to live with one of his aunts from his fathers side . She had two boys of her own and came to me to see if I could take him since she found it hard with another boy.It was while he lived with me that he met a JW girl in high school. He really didn't actually date her , but they would talk on the phone and share times together talking and he gtarted going to "The Hall' Like I say he wants to live a clean life. The first girl he likes ended up getting married to someone else ,but he met another JW in a different Hall. They got married about a year in a half ago.Actually I enjoyed the service at the wedding. It was the way he chose to invit family members. He did invite his direct family. He invited me and was hesitante on inviting my other children, his aunt and uncle and a deceased daughter's husband and all their children (6 in all). First he told me he would not have room for them. He said he only could invite 100 people. Actually the JW's put on the reception for him. He rented the place they held the reception in and they provided the food and the band. I am surprised that they were quite into dancing. Somehow I thought that would not be accepted.Our families all gave nice money gifts , but no one recieved any thank yous. As for not being able to get together on Thanksgiving to give thanks to our GOD for all that he has provided for us--I can not understand.(He used to look forward to getting together with the family ) There are about 20---25 that come.It is the only time we all seem to be able to get together. Ephesians 5:20 says GIVING THANKS ALWAYS FOR ALL THINGS UNTO GOD AND THE FATHER IN THE NAME OF OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST. Another thing about JW's. Everything is "Johovah" not any thing mentions "Jesus ,God, Holy Spirit" Do they not believe in the trinity? I somehow think they do not.The bible make it clear that the trinity exists. My graandson even brought me a King James version of the bible . (I already do have one.) And tell me do JW's not salute the flag? I think he once said it was a form of worship???? This , to me is mixing respect with worshiping. Everyone should be grateful to live in this great country and to be able to set aside this one day (Thanksgiving)To be able to gather together (with friends and family)to give thanks to God for all we have.And if JW's --or any of us were in another country we might not be able to worsip as we wish. So if JW's think gathering together in (HIS) name is sinful with family ---I CAN NOT UNDERSTAND. This is very hurtful. I have talked with him concerning this ,but if he chooses not to mingle--then so be it.I know many in the family are very hurt. He only got this way after becoming a JW. Just have to quote---- JOHN 3:16 FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD THAT HE GAVE HIS ONLY BEGOTTEN SON, SO THAT WHOSOEVER BELIVETH IN HIM SHALL NOT PERISH BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LIFE. Do Johovah's believe this? P.S. Are you a JW ? Actually the ones I met at the wedding were very nice people. It is just some of the beliefs--especially with family that I don't understand.There is some influence there that prevents my grandson from mingling with his family since he always did before. The family hasen't changed --he has. P.S. Our family is not a bad family (not perfect) but ordinary people. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 5 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Confused32: (Part 1 of 4) Please pardon the tardiness of the reply. Please also accept my apology in advance for the lengthy reply. I very much appreciate your opening statement and willingness to discuss things with me as well, and this of course works both ways, as Proverb 28: 17 states, (with some variations)”By iron, iron itself is sharpened. So one man sharpens the face of another.” Thank you for this comment! Please know that JW’s or anyone claiming to be a Christian does not have the Biblical “right” to issue “prophesies”, (according to the scriptures the last Prophet was the Messiah Jesus) and as such JW’s have NEVER made “prophesies”, in that sense of the word. With that said, I trust you are speaking about their well published view and understanding surrounding the year 1914 as this has led to multiple, endless unfounded other dates and criticisms etc. Please know that when the “Bible Students” began as a group, (Now known as JW’s) they came from all walks of life, though more importantly, from all sorts of Religions. For prospective, let me just state (to give the setting) that back in the late 1800’s (well into the early and mid 1900’s) the Catholic Church was saying Mass in Latin, and for the most part it’s members had NO CLUE what was going on, to some degree the same can be said of Protestant Churches (In this discussion, I use Protestant to mean anything not Catholic or JW claiming to be Christian). As these Bible Students came across things in the Bible (and Russell was just one of several, though he seems to get most of the historic and media attention) primarily using the King James ‘Version’ 1611, [a translation of a translation-that is why in it’s name it is called a ‘Version’; which would make by definition and in all practicality the ones that sprang from it; A Version of a Version of a Version etc.,] though Catholics primarily used the Vulgate-in Latin of course etc.) that did not make sense with what was being taught in main stream religions, they questioned their ministers, priests, etc. only to find themselves greeted with few that wanted to pursue these matters and learn more, though mainly were aggressively fought and opposed by those who did not want to deal with what was being (for a lack of a better phrase) ‘discovered’; therefore this type of thinking and questioning (not of the Bible but of what was being taught as coming from (Continued below) | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 6 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Part 2 of 4) the Bible) for the most part was met with great opposition from Church leaders, to say the least, and for many of these Bible Students, caused the ousting of these Bible Students from “their” Churches, etc. [Comment: Please know that it is interesting to note that in the Bible Book of Daniel, Chapter 12:3,4, with some variations, states in 4, “And as for you, O Daniel, make secret the words and seal up the book, until the time of the end. Many will rove about, and the true knowledge will become abundant.” (Also look at verses 9 and 10]. Someone or Somebody’s must fit this descriptive fulfillment in today’s, as it is not written simply for nothing! Now two among the innumerable things they ‘discovered’ were 1. The “Chronology of the Coming of the Messiah; the 70 and 69 Prophetic Weeks of years mentioned in Daniel 9:24-27 and; 2. And the Chronology of Seven Times spoken of in Daniel, (The End of the Gentile Times). Both of these originate in Daniel. (Should you wish me to go into the Chronology of both I will, in another email, as I wish to stick to the main point in this reply to your specific queries). With regards to 2, the End of the Gentile Times (Seven Times) the Chronology took the then Bible Students to the year 1914 (again I will show this in another email). It should be noted that they were not nor are the only ones that “knew” about this Chronology, though some argue that it is 1913, etc. and not 1914. (Most of these discrepancies take place over the fact that there is no Zero year, when going from 1BC (or BCE) to 1CE (or AD). The JW’s were convinced that this was the “year” that would see the “end of the gentile times” and that therefore Armageddon would have to take place as well. Well we all know what happened here, with regards to Armageddon, however, the Chronology, (like that of the 70 Weeks of years) is indeed sound, but again that is for another discussion. This disappointment and failure of the understanding the Armageddon, led to the heating up (if you will) of the already criticized and unpopular Bible Students (JW’s) by others expanding this criticism to include “anything” and “everything” they did and said to discredit, what the Bible Students, were “discovering” in the Bible that was not being taught in the Churches of Christendom. Thus, this has continued down the years, (and has, like any lie expanded into multiple years, stories etc.) as evidence that the JW’s cannot be teaching or believing the “Truth” since they have made “so many” mistakes, and God’s People just cannot make mistakes as this is “Proof” that God is simply not with them. In this matter, I would like to point out, that God’s people, the nation of Israel, and the first century Christian Congregation (that replaced and supplanted the nation of Israel) experienced with the making of mistakes as contained in the Biblical record. Continued below | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 7 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 3 of 4) Regarding “truth” and mistakes, rather notorious innumerable miserable failings and gross on going’s, one needs to look no further than the Bible itself. If one were a Jew under a Bad King (The King in effect “Sat” on God’ earthly throne) in Israel (and nearly most were) who were known to be horrifically notoriously bad; one would have many real issues. (Keeping in mind this is God’s chosen people) First you would walk into God’ Temple in Jerusalem, only to find several phallic symbols (large penis’, etc.) in and about the walkways, temple prostitutes, males and females, most of them the sons and daughters of the Priest’s of God! One back then could have easily concluded, (and your logic would appear to be sound) that this could not possibly be God’ s Chosen People, (Church) as look at the clear cut “evidence” of mistakes and horrible activities! Interestingly JW’s have never done or seen anything like that, but mistakes, yes, embarrassing ones, big ones, etc. call it what you want, yes, they have indeed made. Was it any less an mistake for King David when he took a census against “explicit” instructions God gave him to the contrary? Was it any less a mistake, indeed an embarrassment when King David’s actions with Bathsheba was exposed, as dirty laundry for all the world (non Jew’s as well) to see? Can you imagine being a relative, or parent of Uriah, when it was revealed that David in effect ordered the “hit” on his life to take his wife! (I will save space here and not discuss the Apostle Peter, denial, hypocritical actions thereafter, and other disciples etc, etc etc,) They were “ALL” God’s People and used by God, none the less!!! Therefore from a Biblical standpoint, it is not fair to conclude that because the worshipers of God make mistakes, that they cannot be God’s people or have the “truth” for that matter! Regarding your concern of the WBTS controlling its members, this is simply not true. Those making these claims and others, are usually former members, who in all fairness cannot be perceived as providing fair and unbiased information, as they often have an ax to grind etc. I am sure you can agree that disgruntled people often do make the best source on which to base an opinion. Concerning their view of higher education, this is often misquoted or misunderstood, as there are among JW’s worldwide, Physicians, Attorney’s Judges, Accountants, Teachers, etc. etc. etc. the list is endless, therefore this is simply not so. And from this mix, there are several that grew up as JW’s, rather than those who became one! With that said, they have often warned on what occurs to many people, not just JW’s but all those who consider themselves Christians, in that, when some do move on to “higher education”, they often become atheistic, agonistic, (I will avoid my University days of drugs, alcohol, immorality etc.) not wanting anything to do with God at all etc. and as you know JW’s are famous for printing literature on a variety of Bible and non Bible (i.e. Awake Magazine) issues, often warning about how the pursuit of higher education, (among many things) has been a reason behind some leaving Christianity, and the warning is valid. The JW’s view is to try to present a balanced view, while giving God first place in the lives of Christians as God deserves! In the end, the JW’s emphasis on placing God first in their life (Matt 6:33 though there are many, many more) is often viewed by others as unreasonable, impractical and improper! Continued below | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 8 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 4 of 4) Concerning the “faithful and discreet slave”; In Matthew 24: 1-3, you will note Jesus disciples (Apostles) approach him and ask some questions (some call it a composite question), as it was “one” question with “three” distinct parts [NIV} 1. “When will this happen; 2. “What will be the sign of your coming and; 3. The end of the age”. Jesus’ answers to these questions are found in the remainder of Chapter 24, and all of Chapter 25! With that said, keeping in mind the setting of the answers, Jesus goes on to express in Matthew 24: 45-47, (and the parallel account in Luke 12:44) that in He Jesus the Master would be appointing a “faithful and discreet slave”, “Stewart” “Manager” that would be in charge, over Jesus belongings (obviously here on earth) to dispense spiritual food etc. Thus, in line with this text the “Faithful and Discreet Slave” is the designation used to denote those JW’s that have the responsibility of oversight in dispensing “spiritual food” to Jesus followers (belongings) of which they themselves, benefit from. In other words, just because someone in responsibility has “oversight” of something does not mean that they themselves do not benefit from what is being dispensed. In the end, “someone” or “somebody’s” must be this “Manager” as the scriptures cannot be nullified! As to accuracy of the NWT, I always like to say, that opinions are indeed like noses; everyone has one! Please feel free to pick up a University text book, that you can get on-line, or order at a Barnes and Noble, or College Text book store etc. , by the name of “Truth in Translation: Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament”, by Jason Debuhn”. Debuhn is a Professor in Northern Arizona University, whose discipline (among others) is Ancient Greek translation, who examines bias in 8 of the most popular Bibles in use today, and his results might surprise you! In the end, the students in his course can only take his course, if you use one of two Bibles, and the NWT is one of them! In conclusion, I have done my best to address your queries to date, to the best of my ability in the hopes of providing answers or at the very least food for thought, to ponder over. Christian Regards, P P.S. My email is praetorian_g@hotmail.com as it easier to send these replies without the bite limitations. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 9 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Jib: I am sorry I have not had the opportunity to read and address your post. Please accept my apology, as I look forward to doing so early next week. Sincerely, P (Please take note of my email as well in the post to Confused32 above) | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 10 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Jib: (Part 1 of 2) I was able to make some time today, to respond after all. I want to thank you for your kind and candid response regarding your Son in law, as it took courage to express that. Your comments about JW’s dancing etc., were amusing, and please remember that JW’s are people too! You do in fact describe your grandson as someone who did something with his life where he is happy, and good for him! As to the no thank you’s from the gifts at the reception, I have experienced this from non JW’s and JW’s alike. People tend to forget and or miss things in the excitement of things, like the wedding, though you are right, it is appropriate to send out thank you’s and he should have known better! If you want me to explain why JW’s do not celebrate Holidays like Birthdays and the like, I will do so, just let me know! I agree wholeheartedly with your quote of Ephesians 5:20, and please know that all people should and must give thanks to their God. Giving thanks takes on various forms and I hope you do not mean that those who do not celebrate the “Thanks Giving Holiday in the US” (as it is a national US Holiday) are not giving thanks to their God, because that stance is not fair and is also more of a personal opinion than that of one dealing with the Bible or JW’s etc. With that said, the JW, avoids “anything” that smacks of pagan or governmental political origin, not for personal reasons, but for Biblical ones, whether you agree or disagree. However, in the end, as mentioned by me before in a previous post above, families of JW’s that are not JW’s often work around these things, for the purpose of “getting together” on times that can be made for “all” family members to appear like at a barbeque or gathering without these elements attached to it. It is a matter of being flexible something we all need to be! You are incorrect if you believe that with the JW, everything is Jehovah only and nothing is with Jesus. Any student of the Bible, JW or anyone claiming to be a Christian knows full well that if one does not know or acknowledge Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior has no life in them! This issue you make over this seems more connected to the Trinity and as to this, you are indeed correct, JW’s do not believe that Jehovah and Jesus are the same by any stroke of the imagination. Please know that no Bible contains the word Trinity. As to this Jib, please do me a kindness, and look under the string “Really, what kind of mind becomes a JW” (the string under this one) and please see the post, which is the fourth one down, Post 41, on Thursday, March 8, 2007, 3:14PM, and please let me know your thoughts on the same. I would really like to know how you feel about what is written there! Please know that even though JW’s do not salute the flag of any nation, this does not mean that they disrespect it or the nation they live in! JW’s do indeed respect the flag not just of the US, but JW’s in Italy do so for Italy and so on, of whatever country they live in, and they show this respect by obedience to the country’s laws! For example, JW’s do not cheat on paying their taxes etc. They never engage in antigovernment activity of any kind. In fact, JW’s believe that present human governments constitute an “arrangement of God” that he has temporarily permits to exist. In fact, they consider themselves under divine law to pay taxes, tribute and honor to such governmental or “superior authorities.” (See Romans 13:1-7) As to why JW’s do not do this, please know that they believe the flag salute to be an act of worship. Also just because JW’s do not believe in this, they do not discourage others from saluting the flag! A little research on this subject on “flags” in encyclopedias and the like will support this! | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 11 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 2) Also regarding this I must tell you a story of a school teacher here in the US (similar things have happened to JW’s around the world), that instructed a young man to come up to the front of the room and told him to “spit” on the flag, and that he would not get into any trouble for doing so! The boy did it! The teacher then asked a young girl who was a JW in her class to come to the front of the room and do the same thing. The little JW girl flatly refused and replied, “while I don’t believe in it, but I respect it!” Which one of these children showed respect for the flag? JW’s who live in the US, very much appreciate this country, however so do the Russians, Italians, Brit’s etc., countries that likewise allow you to worship in freedom! Truth be told, nationalism, race, color and status all divide people in the US and all over the world. JW’s are color blind, do not see race, do not have issues with nationalism (My country is better than yours etc.) they do not have generation gaps, and do not have issues with wealth or status! And this is very much a living fact! Like them or not, disagree with them all you want, this is, what it is! I am sorry that the JW’s or rather more to the point, your grandson’s not doing some of the things you approve of hurts you! Have you thought about his feelings in the reciprocal, as to how this works both ways! Please know that this can be said of people and families that are non JW’s equally around the globe! You may want to again approach your grandson by expressing your feelings and letting him know that you would be willing to work with him and that needs to be willing to work with you, within the confines of respecting each others views! People do this everyday, and when love or strong affection is involved, all the more so! In the end of your post, you asked if JW’s believe in what is stated in John 3:16, and my answer to this is a Resounding Absolute YES! They believe this and live for this and do their individual best to help people know this, and also with the entire Bible as well! As to what I am or what I believe, I choose not to address this here, however, I do consider myself an avid Bible reader and student of it, and approach it with a passion, unlike other passions I have in my life! I found your ending PS, to be true of most all of us! Welcome to the human race! Take care and best regards, P | ||
| rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 3 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
You might want to refer to Awake 6/8/1986, which says each jw is a prophet. That should answer your question. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 5 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 207.237.152.165 |
I am out of town on business at the moment and will be traveling home tomorrow and will be most glad to respond upon finding the magazine you refer to. It would be most helpful if you could provide the name of the individual article and page. Regards, P | ||
| rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 6 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
I do not have the page or article name any more because I burned my literature years ago. The quote says, "You will be interested to learn that God has on earth a people, all of whom are prophets ... Jehovah's Witnesses.” Maybe you can find those words in the magazine. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 7 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear rebel8: Thank you for the information as I was able to find the article you referenced in line with the quote you refer to in your post, on page 7 of the June 8, 1986 Awake; The article is entitled: “Would that All Were Prophets!” Please note what the first paragraph of the article states below setting the theme for the article itself which is at issue here: QUOTE: “POPE John Paul II addressed the following message to a gathering of Bible-loving Catholics: “I send cordial greetings to those who are participating in the General Assembly of the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate and I assure them of my spiritual closeness. I am happy to be informed that this assembly has found inspiration for its theme in the words of Moses, ‘Would that all were prophets’ (Num 11:29), and that it has applied this expression to the tasks that it will undertake.”—L’Osservatore Romano, August 24, 1984.” For the sake of brevity I now quote the first two sentences of the third to the last paragraph (which itself is a quote) of this article along with the last two paragraphs in their entirety and please, carefully note what it states here below: (3rd the last paragraph two sentences only) “The New American Bible correctly states: “Prophet means ‘one who speaks for another,’ especially for God. It does not necessarily mean that he predicts the future!” Pope John Paul II said: “The ‘prophetic office’ of the People of God must be consciously exercised as a true service of the Word.” (Second to the last paragraph in it’s entirety) “In its final declaration, the World Catholic Federation for the Biblical Apostolate expressed the need for Bible education, particularly among the young and the poor, for inexpensive Bibles and Bible education literature, for Bible translations and Bible translators, and for full-time workers. It further stated that all Christians should preach and teach, live by the Bible, and “discern the signs of the times.” (The last paragraph in it’s entirety) “You will be interested to learn that God has on earth a people, all of whom are prophets, or witnesses for God. In fact, they are known throughout the world as Jehovah’s Witnesses. Out of love for God and his Word, they are carrying on a universal Bible educational work among old and young, rich and poor. They have hundreds of thousands of full-time voluntary workers, some of whom translate and print Bibles and Bible educational literature that is distributed inexpensively, or even free of charge. They are assisted by millions of part-time workers. Any of these will be happy to help you “discern the signs of the times” and embrace the wonderful hope contained in God’s Word, the Bible.” The above quote can indeed be expressed by any sincere person, group or entity that truly believes that they worship God in Spirit and Truth! You will note that the setting for the phrase “prophet” is laid out in the first paragraph of this article as to how it is being utilized by the JW’s and indeed others! Unfortunately, this quote and others like it in the past and present have been taken out of context and many times even twisted to be re-stated as “fact” and used against the JW’s (others experience this too) on several subjects (like when you posted in another string under Hiding the Truth, that they are against Jews etc.) thereby perpetuating lie as truth in order to further ones personal agenda or besmirching campaign etc. Rebel8, it has been my experience that people “believe what they want to believe” when they are “for”, or “against” something, without taking the time to truly get to know “all” of the facts! Your thoughts? | ||
| inkorrekt New member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 24 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
If the word prophecy does not necessarily mean predicting the future, how do you explain the WTS's pronouncement of the end of the world? When nothing happened, why did they change the dates 3 times? If this is not prophecy, what is it then? What about Isaiah 53 and 57 where the birth of Jesus was predicted several centuries before the event occured? | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 2 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. It seems to me as if you are confusing many peoples minds with your soft and tender comments. I do not wish to attack you in any way, but rather ask you and meet some of your comments. Do you really think it is natural for a person, who is defending a stand/faith/or other thing, to just stop the correspondence because of the reason that the questions are entering an area of uneasyness? The bible says that all christians should be able to answer people about their faith.(1 Pe 3:15,16, Col 4:6) If someone would ask me an honest, tricky question, of which I do not know the answer, I would tell that person that I don't know the answer but will get back to him/her as soon as I had studied it, or asked someone about it. That is a human, natural response. Is it not true that there is doctrines amongst the Jehowahs' Wittnesses, that people in the JW's are not aloud to meet with their family and other people that are not in the JW's? Especially people who will ask and confront them about their faith? Please enlighten me, if I am wrong. I might be. May God bless you. /Martin | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 15 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Inkorrekt: The actions and failings of others, including JW’s does not in any way change the meaning of the word or term “prophesy” nor how the JW’s apply this term to themselves. The reply I made was directed at the mistaken position taken by others, of JW’s claiming to be “prophets” in the sense as used in the Bible! Now, this matter you bring up is another subject. The JW’s have never claim to be “inspired” and they have clearly made mistakes that they have admitted; that is all one can expect of a failing; an admission of the failing and correction and adjustment thereto. What should be done with them: Shoot them! They still maintain their belief that the Bible states we are living in the last days and hold to the position that the Bible chronology used to determine the dates, most notably, 1914, (interestingly they were not the only ones holding to this chronology) is when, they sincerely believe that the Kingdom or Government of God at the Hands of God’s Son Jesus Christ was established in Heaven to later in these so called last days, to allow for God’s will to be “done on earth as it is in Heaven.” Ok so you don’t agree, and you don’t like their failings; join the club--- as failings and errors can be found in anything and everyone. As to Isaiah 53 and 57; I note that Isaiah 53 does speak to regarding the Messiah, though I am not sure what you mean by referring to 57. Please know that JW’s like you, totally respect what the Bible states in this regard and truly hold to it as God’s infallible word, and as such JW’s nor any person or Group can compare to God nor his Son! I am not sure where you wanted to go on this other than to think that you refer to this to show the accuracy of God’s pronouncements or prophesy which always come true as compared to the failings of miserable imperfect humans, that JW’s certainly a part of! Sincerely, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 16 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear MartinBook85: Thank you for your reply-post. My answer to your question in your paragraph two is no. And I concur with what you express when you say that “…all Christians should be able to answer people about their faith” as well as with what you express in the remainder of your third paragraph and simply state, that you well expressed it!!! Now concerning your fourth paragraph; it is critical to note that JW’s are people too, in line with what you describe above and that they get uneasy as well—it is only “natural” to feel that way! As such, the JW’s do not have what I call or refer to as “doctrines” that they are not, as you put it, “aloud [sic] to meet with their family and other people that are not in the JW’s?” and also, “Especially people who will ask and confront them about their faith?”; for this simple reason; How else would people become JW’s (when not raised as one) if such discussions would or could not take place! The issue you are referring to is this: While they believe in discussing their beliefs with others, (as one must do this to in order to preach the word of God) “most” simply choose to refrain from arguments and or outright knock down drag out fighting over their beliefs, which is what many people want from them! Now I say “most” as depending upon the individual JW’s background, education, personality experience etc. you will find some that WILL FIGHT and go the distance on matters like these, owing to the fact, that this in the end, is a personal decision each JW as a Christian chooses to make! Now it is true that their Bible based journals and literature discourages them not to engage in such fighting types of debates, but the fact is that some do! When taking the information in this paragraph and holding it out to scrutiny, one comes down to simple human nature found in all people, religions and settings; indeed in all walks of life!!! My goal here is not to “enlighten” anybody as I am human as you are, and that area belongs solely to God and his Son as found within the pages of his written word the Bible, though it is to reply to the best of “my” ability to your query. Thank you for your kind words and blessings and May God also Bless you and yours! Numbers 6:24-26! Sincerely, P | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 3 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. My question was not whether one should answer "outright knock down drag out fighting over their beliefs"-questions, or not. The bible actually states that we should not emerge into non-good discussions, but then it states that it is because of the reasons that the hearers might be affected by it. My question was if they should not answer an honest question? As it seems to me, "confused32" was asking an honest question, not trying to knock down the person she asked, but wanting to know. When asking such a question she was left alone. All of the three JW's that were in contact with her stopped contacting her about the time she asked those questions. Why? Your answer is: It is because of natural human reasons. My answer is: No it is not! There is something more to it. People sometimes ask me, as a Christian, how I can be a Christian, since Christendom and religion has caused so many bad things. They quite often mention the Cruisades and other things. I am not a Catholic and feel no responsibility for the Cruisades. But if someone would ask a question about my church or something of that kind, I would perhaps feel somewhat uneasy, especially if it is true. But if it is true, there can be nothing of which I am ashamed. I would not then hide the truth, but speak it. Sometimes when people ask things about my church I just laugh, because it is so far from the truth. Sometimes people might say: "But your church is thus, and thus, and thus." My answer can only be: "Come and see for yourself, it isn't." I believe in the bible, my church believes in the bible. I am not ashamed, I need not to mask it, or hide it. If someone does need to be ashamed of their church(or organisation), they try to hide it. There is no other reason. If a person is free to say and do whatever he wishes, then that person will not hide the truth, but speak it. I do not mean that Christians should gossip about eachother, but if something is really wrong, no person is supposed to hide the truth, but speak it. It is my opinion that all Christians should study the bible. Everyone should study the bible in its context and not out of it. All Christians should study the bibles doctrines, not the doctrines of elders, preachers or others. It is one word, one Spirit, and if we have got the Spirit living in us, and if we are reading the bible, we will come to the same conclusions. Of course we need teachers in the faith, but those teachers should lead everyone to Christ and all teachings should lead to Christ. He is the mediator between God and man. The teachings should not lead to a society or any human organisation. The teachings should not lead a person to lojalty towards man, but towards God. The lojalty toward man can never be higher than the lojalty towards God. I believe that we both agree. We need to ask ourselves if it is so. Are we being lojal towards God, or towards men? Do I own life in God? Not only doctrinally, scripturally, but truly? Jesus said: "I have come that they might have life and might have it in abundance."(John 10:10) Life is not only knowing the Scriptures, it is to be in comunion with the Lord Jesus Christ. Life is to know Him, not know about Him. "so as to know him and the power of his resurrection and a sharing in his sufferings, submitting myself to a death like his"(Phil 3:10) Glory of glories. To know Christ. Blessed be my Saviour and Lord Jesus Christ. May God bless you and lead you. /Martin. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 36 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Martin: The Crusaders have done terrible harm to the cause of christianity. Unfortunately those crusaders were not true believers in Christ. They did what they wanted to do driven by their own passions under the bannmer of Christianity. Why? what they did is in total contrast with what Christ taught us. No matter what the facts are, Crusaders are an embarrassment to every believer in Christ.We must live with this. So, what do we do? All we can do is to love our enemies and even those who persecute us. We are also told that we must be prepared to answer any question anyone has. That means we all must be equipped to answer questions, challenges and even criticisms. You are absoloutely right. When you challenge a JW, he / she will run from you because they do not have the answers. They will try to 1)deflect the question 2) read a scripture to you from their own bible (totally irrelevant quotations) 3)give you some explanation that has nothing to do with your question 4) tell you whatever they have been told like a gramaphone record which will repeat itself. When you still insist on answer, they will run from you. Bottom line is they are scared of you trying to convert them into Christianity. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 4 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Inkorrekt. May I ask you for your e-mail? Mine is martin.book@juhlins.se May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 23 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martinbook85  Post 1 of 2 could be 3) In your post of Friday May 25, 2007 you ask three questions which are quoted below in the following two paragraphs which I will number below to avoid confusion and mention here, that I addressed these in my reply below yours of Friday May 25, 2007. 1:08PM. 1. “Do you really think it is natural for a person, who is defending a stand/faith/or other thing, to just stop the correspondence because of the reason that the questions are entering an area of uneasyness? [sic]” and: 2. “Is it not true that there is doctrines amongst the Jehowahs' [sic]Wittnesses, [sic] that people in the JW's are not aloud to meet with their family and other people that are not in the JW's? Especially people who will ask and confront them about their faith?” The answer I gave to your first question in paragraph numbered 1 above is “No.” The answer I gave to the numbered paragraph 2 above I repeat here: Now concerning your fourth paragraph; it is critical to note that JW’s are people too, in line with what you describe above and that they get uneasy as well—it is only “natural” to feel that way! As such, the JW’s do not have what I call or refer to as “doctrines” that they are not, as you put it, “aloud [sic] to meet with their family and other people that are not in the JW’s?” and also, “Especially people who will ask and confront them about their faith?”; for this simple reason; How else would people become JW’s (when not raised as one) if such discussions would or could not take place!” Now it appears that you have an issue with the way I chose to express myself in my next paragraph, and use the “phrases” ..outright knock down drag out fighting over their beliefs…” which has apparently missed it’s point altogether. I was trying to state, in line with your “own” comments about “human nature” that JW’s are people too when it comes to their choosing to or not to respond to any questions posed to them on an individual basis, due to their own personal experiences, education, knowledge etc., that was it, no more no less! You then go on to ask a different question than what you posted (though stating you did in fact ask these questions) as referenced above quoted here: “My question was if they should not answer an honest question.” I ask you fellow, to read your own post (I quote your three questions above) and point out where within that; this “new” question is posed? Now, my answer to this “new”, not asked question is; presuming you mean “they” as “JW’s” (which should and can be asked of anyone of any discipline) is that they (the JW’s) like anyone else, should indeed answer “honest” questions. Now who decides if a question is “honest” or not? The one posing the question, or the one to whom the question is posed? In the scriptures, Jesus made it clear that the one to whom the question was “posed” should decide this, as many times he chose not to reply to questions, either by avoiding them and or ignoring them in their entirety! Since he is an exemplar, those imitating him are in good company! Remember Pontius Pilate, if you and or some of these on this board, were to ask Jesus, “What is Truth” how would you have handled him, when Jesus chose not to respond!!! Fellow, with ‘what do you use to reason?’ | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 24 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Post 2 of 3) Fellow, you now go on to discuss matters not pertaining to you and so therefore I was going to refer you to these two scriptures as a reply (1 Thessalonians 4:11, and 1 Peter 4:15) however, because your comments can be easily shown to be in error I respond by referring you to the following posts on this string, all addressed to “confused32”; Tuesday April 24, 2007-5:00PM; Friday April 27, 2007, of four parts, with the following times, respectively; 3:38PM, 3:41, 3:42 and 3:44PM. We then exchanged emails that you were not privy to so; therefore you are indeed correct that “confused32” did not “…try to knock down” anyone, and as you said, “..but wanting to know.” So what is your point? Fellow no one has “stopped” anything, as people stop for various reasons (car accidents problems, circumstances etc,) so again, what is the point you are driving at? You are correct indeed that there is something more to it, (look and read my replies and her ‘email exchanges’ with me---oops you were not a part of that so you ASSUMED!!!) My answer to you fellow about “human nature” has nothing to do with the replies by me to her! Therefore 1 Thessalonians and 1 Peter do indeed apply to you, as quoted above with love, as those scriptures were inspired with spirit and love, but are needed at times to make a point! So again what really is you point here? Thank you for expressing how you handle people when your faith in Christianity is at issue! Ok, and you are not alone. However, how individual Christians respond to the same issue at hand will be different, (as inkorrekt points out to you about the Crusaders) because we are different individuals. Some responses are better than others, who judges this, you? You are no better than anyone on this board are you? Your other comments about shame, etc. well then good for you! What is your point? Is there a question that it to be deduced from your statements on how you handle things; fellow be clear about this! I have addressed any and all issues put to me on this board in all strings; I am not saying that the replies in and of themselves, because they are replies, are “acceptable” to you or anyone; that is why one can choose to agree or disagree! However, there has been no hiding here fellow! | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 25 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Post 3 of 3) I wholeheartedly agree with your statements, “It is my opinion that all Christians should study the bible. Everyone should study the bible in its context and not out of it. All Christians should study the bibles doctrines, not the doctrines of elders, preachers or others. It is one word, one Spirit, and if we have got the Spirit living in us, and if we are reading the bible, we will come to the same conclusions. Of course we need teachers in the faith, but those teachers should lead everyone to Christ and all teachings should lead to Christ. He is the mediator between God and man.” AGREED!!! However, the issue is; that those who “claim” they do the very things you mention here, that I quoted; see and do things differently! Now what? How do you correct this? Case and point: if the Bible states in near 800 hundred places that the “soul dies” and as a Christian you believe it does not, but yet claim to do as you well put it above; which Christian truly has God’s Spirit? Two scriptures here only for the point is Ezekiel 18:4, 20; you can go to a concordance to find the other nearly 700 plus times, it is used to support this!!! What should one do; stop believing this thought in favor of the bible or not? You say in the quote above, “Of course we need teachers in the faith, but those teachers should lead everyone to Christ and all teachings should lead to Christ” so how is this to be done; in other words, these “teachers” are they a church, group, etc. that does this? Your statement here contradicts your later statement when you express, “The teachings should not lead to a society or any human organization [sic]” because where do your “teachers” come from fellow? Again, “…so how is this to be done; in other words, these “teachers” are they a church, group, etc. that does this?” You then go on to express, “We need to ask ourselves if it is so. Are we being lojal [sic] towards God, or towards men? Do I own life in God? Not only doctrinally, scripturally, but truly?”; so how did this work when worshipping God was under Moses? From “my” reading of “any” bible, those who were at issue with Moses, God made clear, had issues with God! God uses humans as “teachers” (you say so yourself) so loyalty to God was shown in loyalty to Moses, and the religious “teachers” after them! Now we have the Messiah, Jesus Christ, and also have as you put it “teachers” so are we to respect these “teachers” you speak of? Back in Jesus day, and after his human life on earth the bible clearly shows that those who did not respect the then first century Christian arrangement by not respecting the “older men” or “teacher” were in effect not respecting God! (Let me know if you need examples of this) So again what is your point as it seems to contradict itself? In conclusion, I thank you for your words of blessing and send the same in return! P | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 26 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
inkorrekt: As to your latest post above, you are indeed correct, that JW's do not respond to "challenges" however, they are very agreeable to engage in discussions about what they believe, as this is how they perform their ministry. They also respond to "honest" and "legitimate" questions, that in the end, are decided on by the one to whom the question is posed! I can tell you that some JW's would/will run from you and some will not! I trust this is true of anyone you meet as you so clearly indicated before that you are a proficient arguer, (remember your statement about arguing with Nobel ‘Peace’ prize winners etc; now there is an oxymoron for you) People do that from time to time, as part of their own decision making process when encountering folks like you! As to your other statements: 1. They will use “your” bible and not their own (your ignorance is showing). 2. Give you explanations that you do/may not agree with so therefore since you are the "judge" of them (and apparently others) they are wrong to you, as you "judge" them to be incorrect. 3. What was your question here? 4. They have used and will use whatever means possible (gramophone--you are truly showing your age; and what is that saying: 'you can't teach an old dog new tricks.') 4. How grateful everyone must be to have you on this board to set the record straight for everyone! You Go 'Water Boy!' P | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 42 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 75.166.54.182 |
It is no longer gramaphone record. It is a DVD set to autoreplay. You are wrong again. JW's have their own New World Translation where "The GOD", is a god.This is the only bible they will read from(mostly the wrong reference) to silence the enquirer.This serves 2 purposes. 1) To show the enquirer that JW's "Know their Bible" 2) this will also deflect the enquirer as the scripture read has no relevance to the questions asked. Yes. attack the messenger.You can call me childish. This does not answer the questions. Do not answer the questions. Typical example of a JW.Thanks for your reference to dogs. You are actually referring to the conniving JW propagandists. Actually the JW's are like dogs under training. I guess, during the week, they must report to the Elders about their activities (To Earn Brownie points).The elders correct them about their approach (Actually, they teach NEW TRICKS to the Old dogs). These tricks do not work with those of us who know exactly how the JW theology is a total perversion of authentic Christianity, their deceptive techniks posing as "Christians" and their pleasant manners. I hate to say this. But this is the fact. JW's are wolves in sheep clothes. I met an EX JW.in a FACTNET COnference. She has written an incredible book, OUT OF THE CUCKKOON,which is posted on the FACTNET homepage.You should read this. Of course you will not. | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 30 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Inkorrekt: What does your post-reply have to do with the price of bananas??? I have told you several times before when you reach this stage that you can’t handle the truth and or stick to the issues that you insult the intelligence of everyone on this board, as a simple side by side reading (or in order reading) of my posts with yours, will clearly show anyone, with a simply 8uth grade reading level-comprehension, that you clearly evade the issues and resort to insulting when you cannot hand deal with matters as presented. Tata P | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 31 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Inkorrekt: What does your post-reply have to do with the price of bananas??? I have told you several times before when you reach this stage that you can’t handle the truth and or stick to the issues that you insult the intelligence of everyone on this board, as a simple side by side reading (or in order reading) of my posts with yours, will clearly show anyone, with a simple 8th grade reading level-comprehension, that you clearly evade the issues and resort to insulting when you cannot handle or deal with matters as presented. Tata P P.S. If you 'desire' I will in fact address your post item by item...just let me know, as I felt the above works! | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 5 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. (There might be a few posts) In my first post I wrote: "Do you really think it is natural for a person, who is defending a stand/faith/or other thing, to just stop the correspondence because of the reason that the questions are entering an area of uneasyness? The bible says that all christians should be able to answer people about their faith.(1 Pe 3:15,16, Col 4:6) If someone would ask me an honest, tricky question, of which I do not know the answer, I would tell that person that I don't know the answer but will get back to him/her as soon as I had studied it, or asked someone about it. That is a human, natural response." I wrote this with two posts in mind: The first one written in this forum and your reply to "jib". I quote: "I agree with your opening statement, that so long the JW’s has a listening ear, they will respond, teach etc. and when the situation is reversed, they do not. The reason for this is simple: They come from all walks of life, including many from your faith as well, so when someone stops listening, and then tries to present views, most of which they formerly believed, (meaning they came from a place where you are now from) the issue between them and you ends. This is not hocus pocus or mystical in some way, as it is what it is! People do this in everyday life! This is no different than if you chose a new career, after leaving one you have been in for years, especially when you find yourself discussing it with someone, who is in your former career and is successful at it, when you were not! This is simple human behavior and is also a reasonable reaction!" I would like to continue stating that I asked the question I said I was asking. The problem, however, with my question was that my thought were at one place and yours at another. A question that makes one uneasy can still be honest, can it not? As I said, I wrote my first post(#2) with the first post in mind, the one that opened the forum. You ask: Who decides wether or not a question is honest. Tough question to answer, but a more interesting question, in this forum, is if "confused32":s question was honest or not. It is around her and her situation these questions were asked and are supposed to be asked, isn't it? She truly wanted an answer that she wouldn't get.´ (Will be continued) | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 6 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
When it comes to Jesus not answering questions I can only think of some moments when this occured, but I agree that He was somewhat hard to handle. When it comes to Pilate's question about truth it is not said that Jesus wouldn't answer his question, is it? I think that this is something that you assume. We can read in NWT: "Pilate said to him: 'What is truth?' And after saying this he went out again to the Jews and said..." He didn't even give time for Jesus to answer. It is not written: "Pilate asked Jesus: 'What is truth'. And since he didn't answer him he went out..." No it is said: "Pilate said unto him... And after saying this he went out." The only passage I can think of right away, that would give you a point, is the passage where Jesus is asked about his right to preach in the temple. He is somewhat avoiding the question by asking what they think about John. Please show me other passages about this. Jesus has already answered the question about what is truth. "Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Jesus is the truth. (Will be continued) | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 7 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Why is it not pertaining to me? This forum is open and I have been accepted by the moderators. The person asked a question, and others have asked other questions and you answered in a way that made me feel obligated to ask you some questions, and the main issue is the one at the top, isn't it? What I am wondering is why those three people stopped contacting her if there was nothing more to it than personal problems of contacting at the time, uneasyness and the like? Something smells fishy. She didn't get in contact with an organisation, she got in contact with people in that organisation. She got to know someone and then two other people. There is a responsibility. If "confused32" has gotten back the contact with those people I rest my case. If she reads this I would like her to tell us about this, because it ends the forum if they have got the contact up working. She started the forum and she should end it. Otherwise there is nothing behind your words to support them. What I am trying to sort out is if it is true that there was nothing else to it than some problems of theirs. It seems odd to me that three people stop contacting someone in the same area of time. I am not saying that my way of reacting is better, but if three people stop contacting someone at the same time, that makes me question your reliability. (Will be continued) | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 8 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
In a bible-study-tool on my computer I searched for the words "soul" and "die" in the same entry, the number of verses found was 7. Please give me more scriptural directions in order for me to study this. When it comes to Ezekiel it is quite easy for me to respond. The swedish translation is actually more clear. The hebrew word, which is translated soul, actually means "breathing creature". Do you agree that breathing creatures die? I do. If one wishes to listen to what it is that God wants to tell us in this passage of the scripture it is that every man is responsible for his own sin. I will die because of my own sin and not my father's sin. Have you got a better passage, which is more clear on this teaching? I told you about teachers, and Jesus Himself says that we should call noone a teacher, but Jesus himself. Paul says in atleast two places(1 Cor 12:27-28, Ef 4:11) that God himself has ordained the teacher, He himself has appointed them. God appoints them, the church tries them. When I say church I don't mean a church building, I mean the congregation, the assembly. Everyone called by God. Pleasy study the teaching about the church in the bible. What it is and what it is supposed to be. We are all supposed to try all that is taught. (Rom 12:4-8, 1 Cor 14:29, 1 Th 5:21) What about moses? It was not Moses the people were to follow, it was God. But as Moses proved faithful it was to follow God to follow what Moses told them. Moses didn't inforce this upon them, God did. God clearly spoke to Aron and Mirjam.(Numbers 12) Moses once said: "Are you jealous for me, I would like to see all of God's people as prophets."(Numbers 11:24-29) All of Israel could see the glory of God at mount Sinai. (Ex 19:16 and forth) If Moses would have disobeyed the Lord, our God, they had been faltering in following him. It is true that God uses people, but even a person that is used by Him is without fault. What that person teaches should be tried. What I want to say is: Yes, we should submit to teachers and elders, but I am wise enough to know that not all people that call themselves teachers are appointed by God. This makes me causious when it comes to whom I will submit myself to. When it comes to Moses and the first century church it was quite evident who was the head of them. Is this true of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society? Is it clear that the head of WBTS is God? I don't think it is. I believe it is not, because their techings are false. What teachings? Answer: Teachings about the trinity, death of the soul(let me study that one will you) etc. Done... May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 9 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
In a bible-study-tool on my computer I searched for the words "soul" and "die" in the same entry, the number of verses found was 7. Please give me more scriptural directions in order for me to study this. When it comes to Ezekiel it is quite easy for me to respond. The swedish translation is actually more clear. The hebrew word, which is translated soul, actually means "breathing creature". Do you agree that breathing creatures die? I do. If one wishes to listen to what it is that God wants to tell us in this passage of the scripture it is that every man is responsible for his own sin. I will die because of my own sin and not my father's sin. Have you got a better passage, which is more clear on this teaching? I told you about teachers, and Jesus Himself says that we should call noone a teacher, but Jesus himself. Paul says in atleast two places(1 Cor 12:27-28, Ef 4:11) that God himself has ordained the teacher, He himself has appointed them. God appoints them, the church tries them. When I say church I don't mean a church building, I mean the congregation, the assembly. Everyone called by God. Pleasy study the teaching about the church in the bible. What it is and what it is supposed to be. We are all supposed to try all that is taught. (Rom 12:4-8, 1 Cor 14:29, 1 Th 5:21) What about moses? It was not Moses the people were to follow, it was God. But as Moses proved faithful it was to follow God to follow what Moses told them. Moses didn't inforce this upon them, God did. God clearly spoke to Aron and Mirjam.(Numbers 12) Moses once said: "Are you jealous for me, I would like to see all of God's people as prophets."(Numbers 11:24-29) All of Israel could see the glory of God at mount Sinai. (Ex 19:16 and forth) If Moses would have disobeyed the Lord, our God, they had been faltering in following him. It is true that God uses people, but even a person that is used by Him is without fault. What that person teaches should be tried. What I want to say is: Yes, we should submit to teachers and elders, but I am wise enough to know that not all people that call themselves teachers are appointed by God. This makes me causious when it comes to whom I will submit myself to. When it comes to Moses and the first century church it was quite evident who was the head of them. Is this true of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society? Is it clear that the head of WBTS is God? I don't think it is. I believe it is not, because their techings are false. What teachings? Answer: Teachings about the trinity, death of the soul(let me study that one will you) etc. Done... May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 33 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin: (Several Posts four or less) To your post of/on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 12:49 pm: I must admit I am confused about this post as I was a little lost trying to follow what you quote and what is not quoted etc. in the form of replies, and I am not sure what point you wish to make or discuss. Sorry if I did not get it. I express myself differently than you and visa versa, and what more I can add to this I do not know! I agree with the scriptures you quote in (1 Pe 3:15,16, Col 4:6) and I believe I have done my best to address your questions and comments above as well as of those of others! You state, and I quote; “I would like to continue stating that I asked the question I said I was asking. The problem, however, with my question was that my thought were at one place and yours at another. A question that makes one uneasy can still be honest, can it not? As I said, I wrote my first post(#2) with the first post in mind, the one that opened the forum”; you will have to forgive me here, as I am having a touch time following this however, think I can say, that I agree that a question that is uneasy can still be honest yes! You gloss over or rather do not give import to the question I raised, (not meant in a bad way) and instead substitute a “better question” from your standpoint, though please know that I feel the former is a Key to many of these discussions and reactions of JW’s and or others! As to honesty of one poster over another, I do not believe this forum allows for that to “truly” take place, as you must take each poster at their “post” value, so the only thing one or anyone else can do, is choose to address the question or not as a deceiving one, especially scripturally is short lived at best! If you are asking me if I approve of people being ignored, I do not, and I express so above! I feel that I reply to everything asked of me here, and you are free to agree to disagree! As to your post of/on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 1:11 pm: I am not sure what you are speaking to here, as it is unclear! I am here not trying to score points with you or anyone else; I just did my best to state simple facts, scriptures and replies! Dear fellow, Jesus did not answer Pilate on the matter of “what is truth” and your going to another conversation (scriptural discussion) to pull up the answer for this, as to what truth is; as truthful as that may be, this is not what Jesus did in his non reply to Pilate in John 18:38, nor is it the same as Jesus discussion with his disciples in John 14:6, as this simply was not the same discussion! How you can do this is simply not fair nor reasonable, again not as to what truth is but as to Jesus not replying to Pilate’s question of What is Truth; it is that simple, no more no less! As to your post of/on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 1:22 pm: I was trying to place this matter into prospective and if my choice words expressing this to you are at issue, please accept my apologies as you are indeed correct that this is an open forum! You keep going back to confused32, I have nothing further to say on this as my posts speak for themselves and again as stated above in this and my other responses, and I do not agree with a person not completing their responsibility. Ok, what more can I say to this other than what was already said! I am sorry you feel the way you do, concerning reliability and you are indeed entitled to your opinion as I am. Continued Below: | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 34 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Continued from above: As to your post of/on Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 1:56 pm: Which I find you repeated twice, as it is easy to do that here; I respond as follows: With all due respect, one has to look at each occurrence, as to how a word is being used because the bible does not always use the word soul and die together, however it will often use words, like destroy, dying, kill, sword, suffocation and so on! By way of an example as to how many times the word “soul” is found I ask that you go to the webpage below and start at the beginning and choose (for example) the “King James Bible” and insert the word “soul” to see the entries for soul, in fact if you go to the webpage below: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=soul&version1=9&searchtype=all&limit=none&wholewordsonly=no And under listing 10, choose “More Results from King James Version” you will find 498! There are another 70 for souls, bringing this to nearly 670! Now, if you go to a library and get a hold of a concordance (exhaustive preferably) of any kind you will find several more; and if you get your hands on a Hebrew Interlinear Bible, and as well as a Greek one, you will find nearly all 800 of uses of the term soul or souls as penned by the bible writers! For instance I know you must be familiar with the fact that the word soul was applied to animals and fish, in Genesis 1:20-24 before God it was applied to humans! Yes? As for the other references you requested, I have several below however I would like I to refer you to, starting out, with one in the King James Bible that states in Matthew 10:28 that God “can destroy both soul and body in Hell” showing that the soul can be indeed be destroyed! However it should also be noted that the translating of “Hell” in this instance from the Greek word Gehenna is simply not accurate and is not opinion it is simply incontrovertible!!!! As the Greek word Hades and Hebrew word Sheol is accurately translated as Hell. My point is here that many religious doctrines are based on these mistranslations and it behooves us all to take a better look!!! What would one be afraid of when it comes to the truth about these matters, I will never know! It is also interesting to note that in this verse above (Matthew 10:28) the soul does not refer to something immortal or indestructible. There is, in fact, not one case in the entire Scriptures, Hebrew and Greek, or Aramaic in which the words for soul (Heb. nephesh or Gr. ps•kh) are modified by terms such as immortal, indestructible, imperishable, deathless, or the like. If you do find just “one” please be sure to let me know! Continued below: | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 35 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Continued from above: Here are some of the other texts in the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures that speak of the soul as mortal and subject to death (Ge 19:19, 20; Nu 23:10; Jos 2:13, 14; Jg 5:18; 16:16, 30; 1Ki 20:31, 32; Ps 22:29; Eze 18:4, 20; Mt 2:20; 26:38; Mr 3:4; Heb 10:39; Jas 5:20); as dying, being “cut off” or destroyed (Ge 17:14; Ex 12:15; Le 7:20; 23:29; Jos 10:28-39; Ps 78:50; Eze 13:19; 22:27; Ac 3:23; Re 8:9; 16:3), whether by sword (Jos 10:37; Eze 33:6) or by suffocation (Job 7:15), or being in danger of death due to drowning (Jon 2:5); and also as going down into the pit or into Sheol (Job 33:22; Ps 89:48) or being delivered therefrom (Ps 16:10; 30:3; 49:15; Pr 23:14). I very much like and agree with your Swedish translation, (I often use other language translations, as they tend to have less bias, but find the Hebrew and Greek with the lexicons to be more to the point) and also concur with the expression “breathing creature” as the meaning for the word soul! The bible also speaks of dead souls at Leviticus 19:28; 21:1, 11; 22:4; Numbers 5:2; 6:6; Haggai 2:13; and feel free to compare it with what it says in Numbers 19:11, 13. In the end, I agree with what your Swedish Bible says however, this is where I differ from you, when you now decide to “interpret” what these passages mean when you state, “If one wishes to listen to what it is that God wants to tell us in this passage of the scripture it is that every man is responsible for his own sin. I will die because of my own sin and not my father's sin.” I appreciate your opinion, but you will note I have not veered from what the scriptures say here which in the end, (and when I do I state so and show the difference), means, that the soul is mortal and dies, which is contrary to what is taught in main stream Christianity that the soul(s) continues to live in Heaven or Hell; the doctrine of the immortality of the soul and the scriptures shown here above along with the one I quoted you from Ezekiel clearly speak to the contrary! I agree when you speak of Jesus as the teacher, in fact he is the Greatest Teacher that ever lived and he left a pattern for others to be teachers like him in and throughout the gospels! I understand you used the word church not to mean an inanimate building and I think a re-reading of my previous post shows that I did not do this! I agree with what you express about Moses. In fact his role as prophet and mediator between himself and the people foreshadowed what the Messiah would be as well! No doubt he enjoyed a very special relationship with God, being put in charge of God’s people and God himself said to Moses that he Moses was made to be “God to Pharaoh” (Exodus 7:1). Continued below: | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 36 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Continued from above: I could not agree with you more, when you state “What that person teaches should be tried” and add, it should be tried in line with what the Bible says as stated in 1 John 4:1 letting the Bible be the final matters in these things and not human opinion! I am not sure what to make of your last paragraph and so I will quote it here to avoid misunderstandings: Quote: “What I want to say is: Yes, we should submit to teachers and elders, but I am wise enough to know that not all people that call themselves teachers are appointed by God. This makes me causious when it comes to whom I will submit myself to. When it comes to Moses and the first century church it was quite evident who was the head of them. Is this true of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society? Is it clear that the head of WBTS is God? I don't think it is. I believe it is not, because their techings are false. What teachings? Answer: Teachings about the trinity, death of the soul(let me study that one will you) etc.” I agree with your first statement and realize that I am not as wise as you, and therefore must completely depend upon the bible for guidance. Being cautious is good and is also biblical and I agree! I agree that it was evident that while Moses was alive it was indeed clear who was the head of them! You then ask: “Is this true of the Watchtwoer Bible and Tract Society?” but do not go on to finish the question! If you mean do we believe that Moses was the head, of the system of worship then yes! You now say, “I don’t think it is”; think what is? This was and is not clear and a simple and honest re-read of this yourself will tell you this. Ok, you believe their teachings are false, and you are indeed entitled to your opinion just like anyone else on this board! As to teachings I will simply say this: 1. Trinity, the word is not mentioned in the bible, in fact you must go outside the bible to mesh or blend it with scripture in order to believe this; this is a fact as it is not plainly stated without someone interpreting (outside source) the scriptures! Death of the soul, I have shown you many scriptures here starting with Ezekiel 18:4, 20 and several more above and your reply is simply that I am wrong! OK, but remember, don’t use this line of reasoning in a court of law, as it will get you no where! I will stick to the holy scriptures inspired by God only and not your or anyone’s opinion! I wish you and yours well! End of Post Reply P | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 10 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I have no time for the moment to answer your post, but I will do so as soon as possible. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 11 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I was only answering questions that you had asked. I am sorry that I did not quote your question. You asked what I and others here would do or say to Jesus when He wouldn't answer our question about what truth is. To that question I answered that Jesus has already told me what truth is. Jesus is the truth. If I will follow Him and keep to Him, I will know the truth, and the truth shall set me free. The statements I had about Pilate's saying(question) still stands without response from you. May God bless and lead you. /Martin. P.S. (I will respond other things later.) | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 44 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martinbook85: Thank you for your reply and no need to apologize! I know what you mean when you express "no time for the moment" as it is a difficult thing to find today, especially as we are all busy people! I am sorry that I missed the issue to address, so can you please isolate it for me so I can digest it or them in a post by itself, as it will greatly assist me in better understanding what it is you wish to get my view on! Thank you for your well wishes, and in return, May God's Blessings and leadings be with you and yours! I look forward to your other comments as well! P | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 12 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
QUOTE:(praetorian; Monday, May 28, 2007 - 1:35 pm) "In the scriptures, Jesus made it clear that the one to whom the question was “posed” should decide this, as many times he chose not to reply to questions, either by avoiding them and or ignoring them in their entirety! Since he is an exemplar, those imitating him are in good company! Remember Pontius Pilate, if you and or some of these on this board, were to ask Jesus, “What is Truth” how would you have handled him, when Jesus chose not to respond!!! Fellow, with ‘what do you use to reason?’" END OF QUOTE QUOTE:(martinbook85; Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 1:11 pm) "When it comes to Jesus not answering questions I can only think of some moments when this occured, but I agree that He was somewhat hard to handle. When it comes to Pilate's question about truth it is not said that Jesus wouldn't answer his question, is it? I think that this is something that you assume. We can read in NWT: "Pilate said to him: 'What is truth?' And after saying this he went out again to the Jews and said..." He didn't even give time for Jesus to answer. It is not written: "Pilate asked Jesus: 'What is truth'. And since he didn't answer him he went out..." No it is said: "Pilate said unto him... And after saying this he went out." The only passage I can think of right away, that would give you a point, is the passage where Jesus is asked about his right to preach in the temple. He is somewhat avoiding the question by asking what they think about John. Please show me other passages about this. Jesus has already answered the question about what is truth. "Jesus said to him: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Jesus is the truth." END OF QUOTE QUOTE:(praetorian; Tuesday, May 29, 2007 - 5:55 pm) "I am not sure what you are speaking to here, as it is unclear! I am here not trying to score points with you or anyone else; I just did my best to state simple facts, scriptures and replies! Dear fellow, Jesus did not answer Pilate on the matter of “what is truth” and your going to another conversation (scriptural discussion) to pull up the answer for this, as to what truth is; as truthful as that may be, this is not what Jesus did in his non reply to Pilate in John 18:38, nor is it the same as Jesus discussion with his disciples in John 14:6, as this simply was not the same discussion! How you can do this is simply not fair nor reasonable, again not as to what truth is but as to Jesus not replying to Pilate’s question of What is Truth; it is that simple, no more no less! END OF QUOTE QUOTE:(martinbook85)"I was only answering questions that you had asked. I am sorry that I did not quote your question. You asked what I and others here would do or say to Jesus when He wouldn't answer our question about what truth is. To that question I answered that Jesus has already told me what truth is. Jesus is the truth. If I will follow Him and keep to Him, I will know the truth, and the truth shall set me free. The statements I had about Pilate's saying(question) still stands without response from you." END OF QUOTE Awaiting answers... May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 13 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I believe that most of those verses you wrote me should be read in a figurative way. In Ezekiel it is very clear that the thing meant is not: “That soul shall die”, but: “That soul shall die.” Meaning only: “That person shall die.”(himself, not enforcing punishment on anyone else.) Do you believe that nefesh can only be translated “soul”? According to Strongs’ Hebrew and Greek dictionary, it is not so. I will quote it here: neh'-fesh From H5314; properly a breathing creature, that is, animal or (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental): - any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead (-ly), desire, X [dis-] contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart (-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortality, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-) self, them (your) -selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it. To some of these verses I would like to add that a person can be alive in two different senses. I believe that you do not believe that, but the bible does. Jesus says to Nikodemus that: “Unless anyone is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”.(John 3) It is also said in Acts 11:18, “repentance for the purpose of life”, which must mean that a person who does not know God is without life. That person, though, is still alive. The matter was not about this, though. The matter was if a soul can die or not. The answer is no. A person can die, which also all these verses say. That a soul can be alive for ever is shown in Daniel 12:2 – “And there will be many of those asleep in the ground of dust who will wake up, these to indefinitely lasting life and those to reproaches [and] to indefinitely lasting abhorrence.” We can see by this passage that the dead are sleeping in the ground. It is shown that some of the dead are tormented whilst others are not in Luke 16:23. One must ask oneself, is this not hell? Why has those souls not died? They are alive, both Lasarus and the rich man is alive, one in the kingdom of heaven and one in the kingdom of death. There is another passage speaking about eternal punishment in Mat 25:32-46. “Be on YOUR way from me, YOU who have been cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels.” And: “these will depart into everlasting cutting-off, but the righteous ones into everlasting life.” It is said that all the nations will be gathered before him and that some will be thrown into “everlasting fire” and will be a part of an “everlasting cutting-off”. Continued | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 14 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
It is also said in the book of revelation that: “And I saw the dead, the great and the small, standing before the throne, and scrolls were opened. But another scroll was opened; it is the scroll of life. And the dead were judged out of those things written in the scrolls according to their deeds. And the sea gave up those dead in it, and death and Ha´des gave up those dead in them, and they were judged individually according to their deeds. And death and Ha´des were hurled into the lake of fire. This means the second death, the lake of fire. Furthermore, whoever was not found written in the book of life was hurled into the lake of fire.” This is by Jesus referred to as an everlasting punishment or cutting-off. Those souls did not die, they all came back before the throne and the only thing that mattered when it came to this was that their names were written in the book of life. About this lake of fire it is said that the devil, the wild beast and the false prophet were all thrown there and that they were to be tormented day and night, for ever and ever. Jesus says that this is to be so of all who are thrown there. I believe that these two occurrences are the same. When Jesus spoke about His judgment and John about this final judgment, the bible, I believe, speaks about the same thing. Everlasting means forever. As to my Swedish translation, I am from Sweden and still live here, which makes it quite normal for me to have a Swedish translation. I do, however, read different translations. I have the KJV, the German Luther Bible, a Danish Bible, Greek New Testament, Hebrew Old Testament. I do also like to read different translations of the bible. What I love to do is to find out what God really meant by writing something down. I really do not enjoy these types of discussions since they are serving no good purpose. To be able to show some weakness, I will do so here. These types of discussions tend to lead nowhere but to disputes and controversies. I can tell you that you are wrong, but you will not listen, so I start to pray: Dear Lord, grant repentance to this poor deluded sinner. But I will also wish you the best, the blessings of God and let you remember that I myself also is a poor sinner who need the mercy of God. May God bless you in your doings. The question I asked about the WBTS was: Is it true of the WBTS that it is evident who is its head? I can say that it is not, at least not in the same manner as it was with Moses. Unfortunately that is also true about much of mainstream Christianity. The trinity. No the word is not in the bible. But the teaching is. God said: “Let us make man in our image”. Moses said: “Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God, the Lord is one!” We are as Christians not allowed to worship many Gods. Christianity and the bible stand for monotheism. God is one. But then we say that there is someone/something called God, which is indeed referring to God almighty, but at the same time mentioned alongside with God. “The word was God”(or “a god”) There is some kind of split. How can this be understood? God is one. Our Lord is one! But at the same time we say that there is “a god”, whom we also call our Lord. The first commandment forbids us of this. “Thou shalt have no other God, beside me.” But there is not a little god. Jesus is of the same being as God is. May God bless you and lead you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 57 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin: I will be able to look at this tomorrow for a response! Cheers! P | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 15 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I feel as if I have sometimes been rude to you in my postings. I have also sometimes been disrespectful, especially in my last post. Please accept my apologies. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 16 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I forgot to underline some words in my post of Thursday, May 31, 9:17 am. This is how it should be: "I believe that most of those verses you wrote me should be read in a figurative way. In Ezekiel it is very clear that the thing meant is not: “That soul shall die”, but: “That soul shall die.” Meaning only: “That person shall die.”(himself, not enforcing punishment on anyone else.)" In Christ. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 58 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martin: I now to address each one of your posts starting here with yours on Thursday, May 31, 2007 - 3:26 am: (This will also apply to your recent two posts above as well not mentioned in any of my posts by date and time, as one is an apology and the other is a clarification I address in the following posts) I think I now better understand part of what is going on here between you and I, and that is; English is not your primary language, and therefore you think in another language while you read English, and then translate your thoughts back into English in order to address things in my native tongue! I am not saying this as a criticism, as it simply is what it is, but it adds a whole new dimension to me at least, when it comes to these exchanges. Your first paragraphs’ are complete paragraph quotes from our exchanges above, and I am not sure what you are driving at, as the point remains the same and other than for me to tell you this (keeping in mind the language exchange that is going on between us) again, let me try a different way. I was simply trying to state, that at times, a person can choose not to reply to a question they feel will not get anywhere. I pointed to one example to show that Jesus did in fact choose not to make a reply to Pilate on the question of truth. With that said, I do not mean that Jesus never answered “a” question about truth because we know he did, by saying He himself was “truth” and so on. Martin, we have no conflict here. I understand the point you made, and I now realize I may have poorly expressed what I was trying to say to you on this matter, on more no less. I agree, that we all need to follow Jesus, as he is in fact the Truth and the Light, our Lord, Savior and Master that indeed has set us free! I would never discourage anyone from doing or thinking this! P | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 59 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
This serves to reply to your post on Thursday, May 31, 2007 - 9:17 am above: (Part 1 of 4) I think it is important to repeat my opening paragraph to my first post, reply to you above! “I think I now better understand part of what is going on here between you and I, and that is; English is not your primary language, and therefore you think in another language while you read English, and then translate your thoughts back into English in order to address things in my native tongue! I am not saying this as a criticism, as it simply is what it is, but it adds a whole new dimension to me at least, when it comes to these exchanges.” Your first sentence states” I believe that most of those verses you wrote me should be read in a figurative way” and please know that I do not agree with you. You then state: “In Ezekiel it is very clear that the thing meant is not: “That soul shall die”, but: “That soul shall die.” Meaning only: “That person shall die”; now stop here please and think about what you are you saying to me, as this appears to be literal by you (correct me if I am wrong): Notice, that if you agree that the “soul” dies, of a specific person here, meaning specifically the “person will die” then again please stop. This is a point I want to make. If you truly believe this, then it appears you believe this, while believing that other souls do not die. Now think about this: If we can agree that this position is true, as I quote your words, then how would this possible? As this would make the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, half right and half wrong, with a bad or sinning soul that dies, and those that don’ t sin or are righteous do not! This makes no sense. You then go on to ask me: “Do you believe that nefesh can only be translated “soul”? my answer is no, and I concur with what you quote from Strong’s Concordance as to souls being used to mean, fish, animals, people etc. Your next paragraph begins with “To some of these verses I would like to add that a person can be alive in two different senses and futher, [sic] “I believe that you do not believe that, but the bible does”; in this regard you indeed correct, to understand that I do not agree with this nor that the Bible teaches this! Now, to make myself clear, I am in agreement that one can be “alive in two different senses” in the sense of becoming aware of a condition or hope however, not as to a person now having something divine placed into a person (soul) as another part or something in or to their soul, that was not originally there to begin with! (Sorry about the way I expressed this, as I do not mean to confuse you or anyone, as I do not know another way to say this). I discuss what I mean by this further below. However, I want to truly try to understand this from your standpoint. For your support that the Bible teaches that a “person can be alive in two different senses” (not like the soul or sinning person that the Bible says can indeed die) you refer to Jesus discussion with Nicodemus where Jesus among various things mentions the term “born again”. Now if I understood you correctly, you believe that a person (soul) because he or she is now “born again” receives something different, in their person/soul, that would no longer allow that person (soul) to ever die. (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 60 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 4) If I am correct in the way I understand you, then you must know that this thought, (dogma) is against current existing scriptures that say the soul (that is a sinner) still dies! However this does not appear to be supported by what you refer to in the conversation between Nicodemus and Jesus. In fact the point of being “Born Again” is better explained by the Apostle Peter himself (rather than you and I) at 1 Peter 1:3, 4, where it states, “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, for according to his great mercy he gave us a new birth to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an incorruptible and undefiled and unfading inheritance. It is reserved in the heavens for YOU”; so according to this scripture, the act of being Born Again, refers to a “new birth” that is to yet take place, not something that takes place now today in a physical sense! However, with that said, I do agree that it does take place in a spiritual sense today! Now let us take for the moment, that you feel it takes place today, then, in a “sense” this however, cannot mean that the person (soul) has been added to with something else, as this is NOT supported in scripture! The words themselves “Born Again” imply (without interpretation or adding to it) that it is another or additional act, more a kin to a spiritual one! This act is complete, when one dies and is clearly resurrected to heavenly glory, not to something given today into our bodies, as person (soul) as a new birth in the heavens as so clearly stated by Peter! I agree with you when you say, “…that a person who does not know God is without life” in a sense, as they may be alive as a person/soul but not alive as to his relationship with God. You then mention “That a soul can be alive for ever is shown in Daniel 12:2 – “And there will be many of those asleep in the ground of dust who will wake up, these to indefinitely lasting life and those to reproaches [and] to indefinitely lasting abhorrence” and then you clearly say, “We can see by this passage that the dead are sleeping in the ground” please….STOP and READ what you stated quoted by me more carefully especially due to the language situation. The scripture you refer to clearly says, that people who are dead (asleep) in the ground of dust will “WAKE UP”. If they are dead, and have to be woken up, then where is their soul especially if the soul is the person? If you believe as you say you do, that the soul is a person, then the scriptures in Daniel truly make sense, as a dead person (soul) will in fact be woken up by a resurrection, a separate action, that is required to bring back the person (soul) to life, whether to heaven or on earth, meaning also that they have to wait for this to take place! Please reason on this!!! Also if the person (soul) were never to die, why would there be a need for a resurrection? As the person (soul) would instantaneously keep living thereby eliminating the need for having a resurrection in the first place! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 61 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 3 of 4) Now, to make sure that we understand that “those asleep in the ground will wake up” please recall Jesus discussion with his disciples about Lazarus, and also his discussion with Lazarus’ sister’s, Mary and Martha which is found in John Chapter 11. Note what is said by Jesus and his disciples in verses 11-14, “He said these things, and after this he said to them: “Lazarus our friend has gone to rest, but I am journeying there to awaken him from sleep.” Therefore the disciples said to him: “Lord, if he has gone to rest, he will get well.” Jesus had spoken, however, about his death. But they imagined he was speaking about taking rest in sleep. At that time, therefore, Jesus said to them outspokenly: “Lazarus has died”; note that Jesus agrees with the inspired writings of Daniel when he compares death to “sleep” as Daniel refers to them as, “asleep.” Now please note verses 24-26, “Martha said to Jesus: “I know he will rise in the resurrection on the last day.” Jesus said to her: “I am the resurrection and the life. He that exercises faith in me, even though he dies, will come to life; and everyone that is living and exercises faith in me will never die at all.” Note what Mary who knew Jesus personally said about this, as she exclaimed “I know” he will rise in the resurrection on …..NOTE THIS PLEASE….. “the last day!” Why would she say this if it were not true? She could express this because this is what Jesus taught her and all of his disciples! He then proved this was possible as all the other miracles and risings from the dead Jesus performed, not one of them as dead as long as four days like Lazarus! PLEASE THINK AND REASON ABOUT THIS: Now conspicuously missing from the account of John, about Lazarus’ resurrection, is what should and would be expected, had Lazarus gone to heaven at his death, (as I trust his person-soul was righteous and worthy of being given the gift of life in heaven) as he came back to life (as he was in the ground using Daniel’s words, supported by other Bible inspired texts) as a person (soul) again and no such mention of his experience in heaven is recorded why: Because he was asleep, and because when you die, it was compared by Jesus as sleeping, because when you sleep you are not cognizant of what you are doing! Therefore it is a perfect analogy used by Jesus to express what takes place to us when we die! You then refer to Luke 16:33, as a “real account” supporting your position that that souls do not die (even though the Bible clearly states they do, you said so, though you believe this is not literal but figurative) and go on to state that this account bears out the existence of Hell so therefore, you reason feeling that despite scriptures that contradict, souls live and never die, because they are tormented forever in Hell! Let’s look at this account, for a few moments: Luke chapter 16 picks up with Jesus going onto a new set of parables that he is expressing in Luke Chapter 15, such as the “Lost Sheep”, “Lost Coin” “Prodigal Son” and so on; and now we pick up in Luke 16: 1-8, where Jesus speaks the illustration of a “Stewart”, then in verses 9-13, discusses making friends by means of unrighteous riches etc., and then note verse, 14, “Now the Pharisees, who were money lovers, were listening to all these things, and they began to sneer at him” why? [Read verse 15] Because he was speaking these things about them and with them in mind in front of the crowds and those who thought like them! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 62 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(OOPS It is actually Part 4 of 5 pages here-sorry) Now we move onto the next three verses, 16, 17 and 18. Here Jesus plainly helps his listeners to appreciate that the law, and prophets were until John, (John of course led the people to Jesus); about how nothing in the law, found in the Bible fails or is ever wrong (which includes the laws with it’s many references and uses on souls dying) and then verse 18, he speaks about divorce, and then immediately after this in verse 19, the parable (which you believe to be Jesus speaking about a true story, real event) takes place! This serves to provide you with the setting here which cannot be denied. Now let us look at these verses more carefully: 18 identifies, a certain man/Rich Man, named Lazarus (This is NOT to be confused with the man Lazarus that Jesus resurrected and I won’t go into the history of the use of that name as it was plainly used [as other writings of that time demonstrate] that the name “Lazarus” is what we use here in the US as “John Smith” even though their are people actually named John Smith, as this point it is irrelevant). The same verse 18, says the man was rich and took good care of himself, enjoying himself very much etc. Verse 19, speaks of Lazarus as a beggar, and would beg at his (the Rich Man’s) gate desiring to eat the things falling from the table of the Rich Man. NOTE: It does not state the Rich Man was bad, evil or that he refused to give anything to Lazarus, as “Lazarus” Jesus friend himself was a rich man! NOTE: This Lazarus is not spoken of as righteous either! ANY attempt to describe or add to this story is simply that, an “addition” to Jesus own words that is unfounded and is not in the inspired account! Now, verse 22 states that the beggar died, and was carried off by the angels to the bosom position of Abraham! And it continues through into verse 23 that the Rich man died and in Greek Hades (Hell) he clearly existed in torments. Verse 24 relates that the Rich man, is able to call out to Abraham, from Hell, (apparently close enough to have a conversation with folks in heaven, as the account does not have him yelling etc) and asks for mercy to allow for Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger into water in order to cool the Rich Mans tongue. Now Stop here please. If this is true, this means that Heaven is close enough to the “Hell” you believe is a place of torment so that again, conversations could be had! Also, that Lazarus would have to gain access into “Hell” to place the water on the tip of his the Rich Man’s tongue! And that this would in effect “cool” him despite his being tortured in fire, FOREVER! Now verse 25, Abraham, denies the request of the Rich man, and notes the reason why: because the Rich man (Note: was not described as bad or evil) had good things in his life, and Lazarus did not! Stop please: This means without adding to it, (if this is a real event) that rich people that are Christians are at risk to go to this “Hell” you believe in, because they are rich and have good things!!! I hope you have no money! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 63 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 5 of 5) Now verse 26, Abraham lets us know that there is a chasm between this heaven and “Hell” so that those who “WANTING” to go to “Hell” from “Heaven” (and visa versa which would make sense) cannot go!….HELLO….Who in heaven would want to do that so much that there must be a thing (chasm, division) like a wall or something preventing those in Heaven to go there if they want to go and leave heaven and God! (You must have forgotten that Free Will thing some where here). Now verses 27 and 28, the Rich man then asks another request from Abraham, to allow for Lazarus to be sent (meaning he would have to down from Heaven to do so) and speak to his family that is not with him in “Hell’s torments.” Now verse 29 Abraham says no because he states they have “the law and the prophets” and that they need to listen to them! In verse 30, the Rich Man, then responds that if Lazarus was sent, his family would believe! Now, for the ending in verse 31, (and point of the illustration) that if his family (or others) who have the “law and the prophets” (the then Bible and now Jesus) do not believe in them or him, then neither will his family (and those who think like them) be convinced if someone were to be raised from the dead! You will recall that Jesus was raised from the dead and in the end only had 120 disciples after this, despite prior to his execution, his raising people from the dead, performing miracles, feeding thousands etc. This is the point, and he threw this at the crowd with the religious leaders as his aim, that wanted to kill him and eventually did! Now you believe Jesus relates a real true story, this while in and among the other illustrations, and I do not! Therego! John 3:13 states clearly “Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but he that descended from heaven, the Son of man!” So how would you explain this contradiction if the story were truly a real event. Keep this in mind fellow; if you expect people to believe that God is going to Bless Satan the Devil with endless life, (as he would have to do so in order to keep and maintain “Hell for all of eternity) when this one deserves his life being taken away, or destroyed forever; then know this clearly now, that this is not the GOD I worship, as this makes no sense!!! The same as your belief in this as a true story makes no sense!!! It is this type of unreasonable and fanatical thinking that is “NOT BIBLE BASED” that causes some people to not believe in God! Also, I will save you the trouble of detailing the meaning of the word Hell from the actual original Greek and Hebrew which simply means the GRAVE OF MANKIND!!!! Now what I discuss here above fits well within all that you quote about people in the dust, grave, that it is compared to sleeping and awaiting a resurrection! End of reply to this post. P | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 64 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin This will address your on Thursday, May 31, 2007 - 9:18 am.(Post 1 of 4) I repeat here the opening in my previous posts, I think I now better understand part of what is going on here between you and I, and that is; English is not your primary language, and therefore you think in another language while you read English, and then translate your thoughts back into English in order to address things in my native tongue! I am not saying this as a criticism, as it simply is what it is, but it adds a whole new dimension to me at least, when it comes to these exchanges. “ You now begin to support the positions in the your posts above, by quoting the book of Revelation, however, it should be noted that before you do this, what it states in the very first verse of Revelation 1:1, “A revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him, to show his slaves the things that must shortly take place. And he sent forth his angel and presented [it] in signs through him to his slave John”; thus setting the stage for this book that it is “figurative” as it was presented in signs etc! Now I find this some what ironic as you make an issue over the plain words in the Bible that I referred you to concerning the “soul” as to your feeling that these are “figurative” uses (your post on Thursday, May 31, 2007 - 9:17 above) and yet there is no mention of the “soul” by any Bible writer that uses it when it comes to dying, being destroyed etc. as being “figurative” as you have to add this in, in order to show that your dogma does not conflict with those scriptures! In this way we are very different, as I do not add or take away anything from the Bible, the Holy Scriptures, and I allow the scriptures to interpret themselves!!! With that in mid I continue the reply to your “figurate” references of Revelation! After your quoting Revelation 20:11-15, you then state: “This is by Jesus referred to as an everlasting punishment or cutting-off. Those souls did not die, they all came back before the throne and the only thing that mattered when it came to this was that their names were written in the book of life.” This makes no sense and is contradictory against itself (this may have to do with the language issue I raise early on in all of my replies to you) You refer to everlasting punishment or cutting off, meaning they are “forever” punished, and cut off, no more and no less. You then state, that these souls do not die; therefore this alone is a clear contradiction in terms! If persons (souls) have to come back, to stand before God to see if their names were written in the book of life, then why, from your standpoint come back from an eternal, forever punishment, cutting off, to only be brought back to be told if their names are in the book of life to go where…..back to where they came from to pick up on the eternal cutting off thing? If this sounds confusing, please know that it is!!!!! It makes no sense! You cannot have it both ways; either they are being punished or cut off forever, or they are not: Figuratively or literally speaking!!! Interestingly the scripture, figuratively speaking, is stating that Death and Hell etc. are thrown into the “lake of fire.” Do you know the Greek word used by John here and what it means? With or without knowing this, the verse interprets itself by stating what the “lake of fire” means, when it states that death and Hell (the grave) are thrown into (as you are not saying the Hell the fiery place is thrown into another fiery place are you?) means the “second death” which will complete God’s promise to humankind of making death and Hell (Mankind’s grave) no more, forever!!! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 65 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 4) Fellow my God does not torture anybody for any reason, but lovingly as Divine Justice demands, ends their life, existence. We humans call this type of treatment torture whether it is by man or God; it is simply not humane, or righteous by any standard of justice, let alone Divine Justice, to torture forever bad and wicked people. You truly believe that the worst person (soul) in the world who is wicked his entire life, of say 100 years or more is to be dealt with by a just punishment that will be torture in a burning fire, for all of eternity? This is not justice it is overkill that can be compared to sentencing person to death for stealing bubble gum! The punishment does not befit the crime fellow! (NOTE: Interestingly, I checked with a Red Letter Edition (meaning these are of the words of Jesus) King James Version, regarding your statement “This is by Jesus referred to as an everlasting punishment or cutting-off” when you speak of Revelation 20: 11-15, and it may surprise you to know that did not have the words in red, though has several of the initial chapters of Revelation in Red) As to your Swedish Bible I was not criticizing, I was giving you a compliment, and it is the statements like you make here, that cause me to think about the obvious issues we may be having with our posts, due to thinking and translating of thoughts from one language to another! I am glad to know that you have an abundant source of resources at your disposal regarding your study of God’s Word! You state, “What I love to do is to find out what God really meant by writing something down. I really do not enjoy these types of discussions since they are serving no good purpose”; so why are you doing so here! No one is forcing you to do this! You state, “These types of discussions tend to lead nowhere but to disputes and controversies. I can tell you that you are wrong, but you will not listen, so I start to pray…”; this is not why I do this, and if you feel this way, so be it. However, now you make this personal; how dare you, fellow, make assumptions about me, when you do not even know me or if I a JW, Buddhist, Catholic, Muslim, married to one, a JW, etc. etc. etc., that has taken issue with you (and others on this board), over what you post about JW’s on these strings! This is not only rude, but presumptuous!!! Who do you think you are? Now you take this to another level, buy presuming even further to the highest degree, and “pray” for me!!! Where do you get the unmitigated gall to do this! Fellow, no matter how much I disagree with you, or find your posts to be non-desirable, I would NEVER assume to presume to tell you, that I am going to pray for you, as this is your right to believe what you choose to believe! It is patently clear, that you and I do NOT worship the same God, as yours approves of the torture of people for a non ending infinite term as justice to 100 years or so of a wicked human life! My God is God and does not torture people! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 66 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(OOPS this is 3 of 3 one page less than anticipated) Now, you go back to more appropriate forum comments, and state, “The question I asked about the WBTS was: Is it true of the WBTS that it is evident who is its head? I can say that it is not, at least not in the same manner as it was with Moses. Unfortunately that is also true about much of mainstream Christianity.” I do not understand what you clearly mean to question, with that said, other than to make a best efforts reply, that Jesus Christ is their Head meaning the JW’s! As to Moses, he indeed prophesized about God raising up a prophet greater than he, clearly referring to Jesus as our Lord, Savior and Head whether you are a JW or not! Therefore I am not sure what the last sentence is expressing, so I have no comment about this concerning mainstream Christianity. You then mention “trinity” and agree and admit, the word itself is not mentioned in the Bible however you then go on to use as support for this word, that is not in the Bible, God said: “Let us make man in our image” and “Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God, the Lord is one!” Fellow, the fact that you mention that God has made man in our (God’s Image) image, this proves nothing of the sort, as the words can also apply with greater force that he God, was talking to someone else! (Not to himself). The scriptures say this someone else is his Son, whom we know as Jesus Christ! Why do they have to be the same “person” when it just can easily be his Son? Is this that bad a thought? It is that horrible to think that God has a Son, and has many other spirit and human Sons? To say, our God is “one” God, this indeed fact and true. However how would you view this thought with the scriptures found at Isaiah 9: 7, 8; a prophesy that is absolutely about the Messiah Jesus Christ and states: For there has been a child born to us, there has been a son given to us; and the princely rule will come to be upon his shoulder. And his name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace. To the abundance of the princely rule and to peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom in order to establish it firmly and to sustain it by means of justice and by means of righteousness, from now on and to time indefinite. The very zeal of the God Jehovah of armies will do this.” Now if the Messiah was to be called among many names, “Mighty God” how does this relate to your point of contention? This scripture is no contradiction and is quite compatible with both the scriptures above, and the entire Bible as a whole, as God, whose Son is like him, a God, or if you don’ t like this expression, use Isaiah words Mighty God, (and if this is not Jesus then who is this Mighty God, that Isaiah prophesied would come) so therefore this person God’s Son, is the one God spoke to about making mankind in “their” image, and who is himself both a Spirit and a Mighty God, like his father, as your son is like you but he is NOT YOU! If you have a son and he is like you, would you say he is split? No, he is of your same substance, but not you! Where is the conflict in this? This is monotheism and there is no conflict with the commandment “Thou shalt have no other God, beside me.” Why, is there no conflict; because God’s Son is God like, a Mighty God (or again who is the Mighty God that was supposed to come if not Jesus) like a son is humanlike to his parents! And if you feel what is expressed above is in conflict with scriptures, then feel free to take it up with the one who inspired Isaiah to write these things since you apparently speak to him directly and know all these things! Enlighten us? Sincerely, P | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 47 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.1 |
PRAETORIAN: Where did I mention bananas? You are the typical example of deceptive propagandists as most of the JW Evangelists are. You can call me somebody with 8th grade understanding. Why are you not responding to me at all? Tomorrow morning, as soon as you wake up,stand in front of the mirror, point your fingers at the man in front of you and scream and yell at him,"You have an 8th graders brain and you are a MORON" This will make you feel lot better and you will have a wonderful day. Then you will be more successful in indoctrinating weak and non practising Christians (those who are religious just like you)against authentic christianity. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 17 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. Death of a soul? I do not believe that souls can die. People can die. Does this word mean “breath” of a creature or is it meant to mean “soul”, in the way that we use the word? In Swedish we have a word that means something like “lifespirit”, which is used in the meaning of “natural life”. I would like to tell you my view on this: There is natural life: that of a breathing creature (any kind, human or animal), and there is spiritual life: that of the relation with God. A cat cannot be in relation with God, but a human can. This word “nefesh” means “natural life” or as I said: “breathing creature”. It seems, though, as “nefesh” also can mean “soul”. This actually makes me somewhat confused. Do animals have souls? I believe they don’t. They have life, maybe they even have feelings, but they do not have souls. They do have “nefesh”, but their “nefesh” can never get in contact with the “Rooach” of God (Spirit of God). Our “nefesh” can. There then must be a difference between our “nefesh” and the “nefesh” of an animal. In those verses that you have given me to study, most of the places would mean this animal “nefesh” in a human. I mean that it probably means “natural life” rather than “soul”. I believe that we are speaking different languages in this matter. Even though we both use the English language for this discussion you have your set of imaginations and I have mine. I actually tend to think that the problem here is that there is a confusion of terms. Daniel 12. When it comes to this passage and sleep I would say that Daniel then teaches that the grave only is a resting chamber. The people there are dead (their natural life is gone), but their soul is only asleep. When Jesus speaks about Lazarus in John 11 I would say that He is speaking figuratively, in accordance with Daniel. Both Daniel and Jesus refer to death as a sleep. Does this mean that a person who is dead is only asleep? Yes. It seems to be this way according to scripture. The dead are at a later point made awake, either to live forever in punishment or to live forever in glory. Completely in line with other scriptures and what both Jesus and Daniel says. (Will be continued) | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 18 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
(continued from above) Pilates’ question: As to Pilate, I believe that I have yet not gotten you to understand what I am saying. I understand that you understand that Jesus has answered the question about what truth is. The thing that differs our thinking is whether He answered Pilate or not. I would say that it is an assumption to say that He didn’t. I’m sorry. The assumption is not that Jesus didn’t answer, the assumption is that Pilate ever wanted an answer. You’d say: “Why then would he ask?” Some people actually ask things, sometimes, of which they do not want an answer. The answer might hurt me. The truth is able to set me free, but if I don’t know that it can, it will terrify me. Then, what says that Pilate actually wanted an answer? Nothing, it actually seems the other way around: “Pilate said to Him: ‘What is truth’. After saying this he went out and said…” This text rather shows that Pilate never wanted to hear the answer. I am, however, assuming this, but we don’t read about Jesus at this moment just sitting there and not answering, we hear Pilate walking away right after posing the question. There are other places in this scene of the hearings where Jesus chose not to answer, until they would listen. But He did answer. Mark 14:53-65 Especially v. 60-62. “Finally the high priest rose in their midst and questioned Jesus, saying: ‘Do you say nothing in reply? What is it these are testifying against you?’ But he kept silent and made no reply at all. Again the high priest began to question him and said to him: ‘Are you the Christ the Son of the Blessed One?’ Then Jesus said: ‘I am; and YOU persons will see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of power and coming with the clouds of heaven.’” At first He did not answer because the accusations were false and the high priest knew it. How could he know? The testimonies differed from each other. But when the high priest asked Him directly He answered and did not keep silent. If you are saying that Jesus did not answer Pilate, then you must be assuming that Pilate wanted an answer. It is not said that way. The new birth: When it comes to the new birth it is said by Paul, in at least Romans and Galatians that the new birth happens here. Please read Romans 6(the entirety), 8:9-17, Galatians 2:19-20. I will quote some parts: “Never may that happen! Seeing that we died with reference to sin, how shall we keep on living any longer in it? Or do YOU not know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we were buried with him through our baptism into his death, in order that, just as Christ was raised up from the dead through the glory of the Father, we also should likewise walk in a newness of life.” (Rom 6:2-4) It is clear that it is about already today in verses 8-11 (especially v. 11) (continued) | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 20 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
I am sorry but there is no Luke 16:33, the rich man was not named Lazarus. If we would read this parable as it stands, we must read between the lines. There is a rich man, everyday living in joy and feast. He had all that he needed, and even more. At his gate there was a poor man who was named Lazarus, full of wounds. He longed to be filled with the things falling from the rich mans table. (But was not, if he would have been filled he would no longer have been longing to be filled.) End of this part of the story. It is also shown why the rich man came to this place in the last verses, namely verses 27 and forth. It reads: “Then he said, ‘In that event I ask you, father, to send him to the house of my father, 28 for I have five brothers, in order that he may give them a thorough witness, that they also should not get into this place of torment.’” The rich man was bad, and evil, in the sense that he would not help the poor man lying right outside his house. This is in line with the parable of the last day when it is said that those who had not given Jesus food, clothing, had not been visiting him and so on was to be tormented. Jesus says that those people not doing those things towards any of His little ones will go to everlasting damnation. This parable was told to people who tried to “serve both God and mammon”, people that loved money. The parable speaks of the law and the prophets, yes. What does the law and the prophets say about our relation towards poor people? End of respond to posts: Friday, June 01, 2007 - 6:08 pm, Friday, June 01, 2007 - 6:10 pm, Friday, June 01, 2007 - 6:12 pm, 6:18 pm, 6:20 pm, 6:22 pm. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 49 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.1 |
PRAETORIAN: You are a JW under disguise.If you are not a JW, I do not see any reason why you would respond with very long meaningless and boring Epistles of PRAETORIAN which have never addressed any of the issues except the Definition of a christian copied from Encyclopedia.Well people like you keep me laughing.Do not quit. Keep writing your Epistles. Thank you for the humor. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 21 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. This is interesting: We both believe that we read the Bible without adding to or drawing from, letting the Bible explain itself. However I would say that both of us are adding to and drawing from in one sense, since both of us have teachers in the faith. If you and I would stay away from all teaching for a year, then perhaps we coul speak about not reading the Bible with "dogmas" in our head. To explain what I mean with the word "figurative" I would like to ask some questions. I will wait for an answer to those questions before I will explain anything about them. Will you accept the challenge? 1. Was the sun at a standstill in Joshuas days? (Josh 10:13) 2. Are you able to speak to your soul? I would say that an eternity without God is punishment enough, but for the reason that there is something called hell, an eternal torture chamber, God who is loving has provided for a way out of this torture. There is no excuse for those heading in that direction, if they have heard the gospel. I did actually not believe it was Jesus' words in Rev 20:11-15. Sorry to confuse you. I meant that Jesus spoke about the same thing in: Mat 25:32-46. In that passage He quite clearly speaks about eternal, everlasting punishment. I am actually not assuming that you are a JW. You are very careful to write "them", "they" etc. But you are still defending their stands as scriptural, which lets me know that you believe in them, another possibillity is that you are an atheist, which is not probable since you are speaking about your beliefs in God. Another reason to think about God as triune is that the word God is translated from a word which means "gods", namely "Elohim". The same word is used in King Rehoboam's idolotry.(1 King 12:28) Jesus is also called "eteernal father" in Isa 9:6. The same word as used in John 1:1 meaning: "and the word was a god"(NWT) is used in 1 Cor 8:4, clearly meaning the only God, Jehovah. Then that word actually was God, Jehovah. Jesus is spoken of the be the word of life, which is meant here, He then is Jehovah. Otherwise this passage would read: "there is no a god, but one." When it comes to hell, I would like to draw your attention to the reality that you are actually going out of scripture to support your stand, when you are saying: "Fellow my God does not torture anybody for any reason, but lovingly as Divine Justice demands, ends their life, existence." If you believe that God wouldn't let people go to hell because of His justness, then you are not resting on scriptures, but on feelings. "In what way", you might ask. The reason is that you say this out of your own feelings about justness and not out of what scriptures post as just. If you would please give me scriptures that proves God's justness through letting people die. His justness is often proved by His punishment for sin. He is just, but He is loving and kind. This kindness and love made Him open a gate for man to enter into His presence. Those who are not willing to come, however, God accepts with a tear in His eyes. But He must accept their decision since He does not force Himself unto anyone. Christ was born, not created. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 22 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. This is interesting: We both believe that we read the Bible without adding to or drawing from, letting the Bible explain itself. However I would say that both of us are adding to and drawing from in one sense, since both of us have teachers in the faith. If you and I would stay away from all teaching for a year, then perhaps we coul speak about not reading the Bible with "dogmas" in our head. To explain what I mean with the word "figurative" I would like to ask some questions. I will wait for an answer to those questions before I will explain anything about them. Will you accept the challenge? 1. Was the sun at a standstill in Joshuas days? (Josh 10:13) 2. Are you able to speak to your soul? I would say that an eternity without God is punishment enough, but for the reason that there is something called hell, an eternal torture chamber, God who is loving has provided for a way out of this torture. There is no excuse for those heading in that direction, if they have heard the gospel. I did actually not believe it was Jesus' words in Rev 20:11-15. Sorry to confuse you. I meant that Jesus spoke about the same thing in: Mat 25:32-46. In that passage He quite clearly speaks about eternal, everlasting punishment. I am actually not assuming that you are a JW. You are very careful to write "them", "they" etc. But you are still defending their stands as scriptural, which lets me know that you believe in them, another possibillity is that you are an atheist, which is not probable since you are speaking about your beliefs in God. Another reason to think about God as triune is that the word God is translated from a word which means "gods", namely "Elohim". The same word is used in King Rehoboam's idolotry.(1 King 12:28) Jesus is also called "eteernal father" in Isa 9:6. The same word as used in John 1:1 meaning: "and the word was a god"(NWT) is used in 1 Cor 8:4, clearly meaning the only God, Jehovah. Then that word actually was God, Jehovah. Jesus is spoken of the be the word of life, which is meant here, He then is Jehovah. Otherwise this passage would read: "there is no a god, but one." When it comes to hell, I would like to draw your attention to the reality that you are actually going out of scripture to support your stand, when you are saying: "Fellow my God does not torture anybody for any reason, but lovingly as Divine Justice demands, ends their life, existence." If you believe that God wouldn't let people go to hell because of His justness, then you are not resting on scriptures, but on feelings. "In what way", you might ask. The reason is that you say this out of your own feelings about justness and not out of what scriptures post as just. If you would please give me scriptures that proves God's justness through letting people die. His justness is often proved by His punishment for sin. He is just, but He is loving and kind. This kindness and love made Him open a gate for man to enter into His presence. Those who are not willing to come, however, God accepts with a tear in His eyes. But He must accept their decision since He does not force Himself unto anyone. Christ was born, not created. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 78 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear inkorrekt: Regarding your on Friday, June 01, 2007 - 11:58 pm above: Ok, now what? You have the right to feel the way you do as do I. The problem with folks like you, as that you can't reason with them. I have tried. Take care, P | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 79 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear inkorrekt: Regarding your post on Saturday, June 02, 2007 - 6:57 pm: Your Welcome! I am glad to be of service when it comes to making people laugh, since as you know it is good medicine for the soul! You will believe what you want to believe about me, when you know nothing about me at all. I will however end this reply by quoting part of a reply to another here as it seems to fit quite well: “Fellow you accuse me of artful contrivance and use of semantics, thereby giving me too much credit, as I feel the answer truly lies in how simple it is to take apart what you express or quote as factual! If I had poor command of the English language you would throw that in my face to make your point, by expressing I truly don’t understand what I am reading! Come on!!! My expressions at simply that, mine, and not yours, and as such, it is not unusual for people in opposition, to point to things like you did, as a way to feel better about themselves or as for a reason as to not convincing the other person to their way of thinking! I am sorry, that I am not “totally stupid”, so you can run me over with your train!” “I do not need to defend them or anyone else (as they are not my clients etc…LOL) as to what they do, (as with others) stand for itself, as with any work! Again, I am still waiting for you and other others on this board, to enlighten me with the group on earth that is truly infallible so that I can go and learn the things you and others know! Tell me; teach me, I am all ears!” Really, inkorrket, please help and point me to that church as you seem to be the only one, with knowledge around here, that makes clear that unless one agrees with you, they are wrong! Hey folks on this board, inkorrekt knows all, just ask him? Hey inkorrekt, are you married? I trust she believes on every word that comes out of your mouth in order to have life! Go getem Water Boy! | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 80 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin: (Part 1 of 4 I think) This should serve to cover all of your posts above, and if I missed something feel free to point it out! I respect your view when you say that “I do not believe that souls can die” as I do not and believe they can as the bible says; and I have shown you several scriptures that clearly state that souls die! I choose to hold to what the bible clearly says on this matter and not interpret at all or follow those who want to do that for me. In this we have a difference of opinion. There is a different word for spirit and people often get this confused with soul and it is not the same thing. I very much appreciate “your” interpretation of things, but again, that is Martin’s, your interpretation and it is in conflict with scripture. Now you may believe that your interpretation is not, and this is your right, but again, I follow the bible strictly on this and not any man. I appreciate your being confused, and if the bible translators used the actual word, instead of expressions that mean the word, it would be easier on us all. In line with that, let me try a different approach here below: When one hear the terms “soul” and “spirit,” many believe that these words mean something invisible and immortal that exists inside us. They think that at death this invisible part of a human leaves the body and lives on. Since this belief is so widespread, many are surprised to learn that it is not at all what the Bible teaches. What, then, is the soul, and what is the spirit, according to God’s Word and without adding interpretation or meaning to it? First, consider the soul. You may remember that the Bible was originally written mainly in Hebrew and Greek. When writing about the soul, the Bible writers used the Hebrew word nephesh or the Greek word ps•khe. As I previously told you, these two words occur well over 800 times in the Scriptures, and the JW’s render it as “soul” to avoid confusion in their New World Translation of the Bible. A simple and fair examination of the way “soul” or “souls” is used in the Bible, it becomes evident that this word basically refers to (1) people, (2) animals, or (3) the life that a person or an animal enjoys. Let us consider some scriptures that present these three different senses. First with People: “In Noah’s days . . . a few people, that is, eight souls, were carried safely through the water.” (1 Peter 3:20) Here the word “souls” clearly stands for people—Noah, his wife, his three sons, and their wives. Exodus 16:16 mentions instructions given to the Israelites regarding the gathering of manna. They were told: “Pick up some of it . . . according to the number of the souls that each of you has in his tent.” So the amount of manna that was gathered was based upon the number of people in each family. Some other Biblical examples of the application of “soul” or “souls” to a person or to people are found at Genesis 46:18; Joshua 11:11; Acts 27:37; and Romans 13:1. (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 81 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 2) Second with regards to Animals, the Bible’s creation account, we read: “God went on to say: ‘Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.’ And God went on to say: ‘Let the earth put forth living souls according to their kinds, domestic animal and moving animal and wild beast of the earth according to its kind.’ And it came to be so.” (Genesis 1:20, 24) In this passage, fish, domestic animals, and wild beasts are all referred to by the same word—“souls.” Birds and other animals are called souls at Genesis 9:10; Leviticus 11:46; and Numbers 31:28. The third way, to note is, sometimes the word “soul” means one’s life as a person. God told Moses: “All the men who were hunting for your soul are dead.” (Exodus 4:19) What were Moses’ enemies hunting for? They were seeking to take Moses’ life. Earlier, while Rachel was giving birth to her son Benjamin, “her soul was going out (because she died).” (Genesis 35:16-19) At that moment, Rachel lost her life. Consider also Jesus’ words: “I am the fine shepherd; the fine shepherd surrenders his soul in behalf of the sheep.” (John 10:11) Jesus gave his soul, or life, in behalf of mankind. In these Bible passages, the word “soul” clearly refers to life as a person. You will find more examples of this sense of “soul” at 1 Kings 17:17-23; Matthew 10:39; John 15:13; and Acts 20:10. A further study of God’s Word will show you that nowhere in the entire Bible are the terms “immortal” or “everlasting” linked with the word “soul.” Instead, the Scriptures state that a soul is mortal, meaning that it dies. (Ezekiel 18:4, 20) Therefore, the Bible calls someone who has died simply a “dead soul.”—Leviticus 21:11. Martin the scriptures above will not simply go away just because we don’t believe what it says in simple plain language. Now let us consider the Bible’s use of the term “spirit.” Some people think that “spirit” is just another word for “soul.” However, that is not the case. The Bible makes clear that “spirit” and “soul” refer to two different things. How do they differ? Bible writers used the Hebrew word ruach or the Greek word pneuma when writing about the “spirit.” The Scriptures themselves indicate the meaning of those words. For instance, Psalm 104:29 states: “If you [God] take away their spirit [ruach], they expire, and back to their dust they go.” And James 2:26 notes that “the body without spirit [pneuma] is dead.” In these verses, then, “spirit” refers to that which gives life to a body. Without spirit, the body is dead. Therefore, in the Bible the word ruach is translated not only as “spirit” but also as “force,” or life-force. For example, concerning the Flood in Noah’s day, God said: “I am bringing the deluge of waters upon the earth to bring to ruin all flesh in which the force [ruach] of life is active from under the heavens.” (Genesis 6:17; 7:15, 22) “Spirit” thus refers to an invisible force (the spark of life) that animates all living creatures. (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 82 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 3 of 4) The soul and the spirit are not the same. The body needs the spirit in much the same way as a radio needs electricity—in order to function. To illustrate this further, think of a portable radio. When you put batteries in a portable radio and turn it on, the electricity stored in the batteries brings the radio to life, so to speak. Without batteries, however, the radio is dead. So is another kind of radio when it is unplugged from an electric outlet. Similarly, the spirit is the force that brings our body to life. Also, like electricity, the spirit has no feeling and cannot think. It is an impersonal force. But without that spirit, or life-force, our bodies “expire, and back to their dust they go,” as the psalmist stated. Speaking about man’s death, Ecclesiastes 12:7 states: “The dust [of his body] returns to the earth just as it happened to be and the spirit itself returns to the true God who gave it.” When the spirit, or life-force, leaves the body, the body dies and returns to where it came from—the earth. Comparably, the life-force returns to where it came from—God. (Job 34:14, 15; Psalm 36:9) This does not mean that the life-force actually travels to heaven. Rather, it means that for someone who dies, any hope of future life rests with God. His life is in God’s hands, so to speak. Only by God’s power can the spirit, or life-force, be given back so that a person may live again. How comforting it is to know that this is exactly what God will do for all of those resting in “the memorial tombs”! (John 5:28, 29) At the time of the resurrection, God will form a new body for a person sleeping in death and bring it to life by putting spirit, or life-force, in it. What a joyful day that will be! As to your our thoughts on Jesus answering Pilate or not, I don’t know what further to say on this, as I was addressing the fact that a person to whom a question is asked, can also choose to ignore it, and if that example is not a good one, then how about using the one that you use in your post: “Mark 14:53-65 Especially v. 60-62. “Finally the high priest rose in their midst and questioned Jesus, saying: ‘Do you say nothing in reply? What is it these are testifying against you?’ But he kept silent and made no reply at all.” Is another good example to show that one can choose not to answer and this was and is my point Martin, nothing more, nothing less! I do agree that the question posed by Pilate was rhetorical, meaning he did not want an answer, I was just again, (explaining this different way) trying to state that just because a person chooses not to answer a question does not mean that he does not know the answer! I do not think we have a disagreement on this! Concerning the “new birth” I am in agreement with you, about it happening now, in a spiritual sense and I stated so, however, not that something outside the body comes into it to make it so. And also, that yes, there is another part to this as stated in 1 Corinthians 15:50-57 that occurs at the moment when one dies for several Christians since as again, the Bible clearly shows that there while there is one salvation there are also clearly two hopes, heavenly and earthly! | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 83 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 4 of 4) I am sorry for the typographical error, and also I did my best to separate by comma and other punctuation, Lazarus from the Rich Man, if I did not do so some where, please pardon my error but the points remain the same. Now this is where we differ again, as you say, one must read between the lines, and then you called it a parable. It is either a parable or it is not. If it is, the point is made, it is a story, if not, and you believe it is real, then I don’t know what else I can say about this. If you believe it is a parable but that you must read between the lines, then again, we differ on this. With that said, I do agree that it must be “applied” the way Jesus meant most of his parables to be applied, and I gave you the setting on this that he was in conflict with the then religious leaders who seemed to have it all, while starving the people spiritually and materially as well! Your statement “The rich man was bad, and evil, in the sense that he would not help the poor man lying right outside his house” is not found in the bible and you are adding it, and this is where again we differ! That is not what the account says at all! Martin, I have done my very best to share with you views from the Bible without giving you my personal take on things, but instead have endeavored to let the Bible do the talking. In the end, you and I may not agree and therefore this is not a bad thing. It is what it is! I wish you and yours the best on your continued study of God’s word the Bible. May God Bless you and yours for doing so! P P.S. I just noted that you have a post on June 2, that these posts did not reply to, so I will attempt to do so tomorrow. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 23 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I wish to soon end this discussion since it does not lead anywhere. You tend to say all the time that I add to scripture in my answers. When it comes to the case about the rich man and Lazarus, do you mean that all things in a story is untrue because some parts are? What is true or untrue in the parable, or story (or what you would call it) in Luke 16:1-8? What parts of it does and what parts does not exist? Is there a thing called a steward? Can people be in debt? If there is not a place like hell, why would Jesus then even speak of it? Why would hell be a warning to people, if there is nothing called hell? The persons and the situation is a story, or parable, but the settings should be true, should they not? It is said about the man called Lazarus that he was laid at the rich man's gate. This lets us know that it was quite certain that the rich man loved his money and closed his heart towards Lazarus. How do I know? The poor man kept on lying there for some time. After a while he died. In the parable about the good samaritan it is said that we should do as the good samaritan did. This rich man did not, did he? If the rich man would have been a good man Jesus would have said that this good rich man did help the poor one. What was the point of the story, did you say? To show that one was to follow the law and the prophets? Why would one come to hell and one to heaven? Nothing (as you see it) is said about their moral standard. Why then would one be punished and the other not? Why would satan be tormentet forever when he has not committed sin for more than 49000 years or so? There is something more to "spirit" than only what you state. It is not merely a life-force. Luke 4:18 - "the "pnyoomah" of the Lord is upon me..." And this would be obvious if the Spirit of the Lord is only a life-giver. "Pnyoomah" is also used when it comes to bad spirits. Both the Holy Spirit and bad spirits(Luke 4:33) can occupy peoples minds and actions, as it is shown in many scriptures. I think about the man in Luke 8:26f, the boy in Luke 9:39, a bad spirit making a person dumb in Luke 11:14 and other passages. These are all the same word as used of a persons spirit in 1 Th 5:23 - "May the very God of peace sanctify YOU completely. And sound in every respect may the spirit and soul and body of YOU [brothers] be preserved in a blameless manner at the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ." You have never before in this conversation told me that you thought Pilate's question to be a rhetorical one. Now you do. Then you start by pointing at another verse, supplied by me.(Actually not me, but the bible. I mean that I brought it to your attention.) Why did you start to argue with a verse you knew was about a rhetoric question, not seeking answer? May God bless you. /Martin | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 84 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martin: (Post 1 of 6 I think-Should be done via email) Thank you for you post on Monday, June 04, 2007 - 1:35 pm; and agree with your statement that “This is interesting: We both believe that we read the Bible without adding to or drawing from, letting the Bible explain itself.” As to your next paragraph, even if you and I took a sabbatical from the world, this would have nothing to do with the manner in which we speak, or in this case, write, that reveals the manner in which we “think.” Please know that I am not influenced by anyone, other than the scriptures, meaning if you today were able to show me in the Bible, that God had three heads, and is living in New York City, then, regardless of how I felt personally against it, I would have to deal with this, and accept this. The Apostle Paul (and many like him) would have never become a “converted” to Christianity; better yet: the Disciples of John the Baptist would have never “converted” to the additional step, to go to Jesus, if they had been closed minded! Because of this, I never argue any discipline as “my” view is the “only” view, because all of are accustomed to making mistakes. All one can ask for, is that this type of open minded thinking can be had by parties who engage in exchanges like these. A closed mind learns nothing at all, ever, and is doomed to dying in ones error as they accept nothing outside of their own mind/view; thereby becoming a God unto themselves!!! With the above said, I firmly believe, from your readings, that you have been adding to things, to make them fit what you have been taught and or are being taught. I instead, have attempted (to the best of my ability) to draw on conclusions and to some, this may be look and feel the same, but they are in fact two different things. As one can look at a mathematical equation, therom, that is a not a completely proven principal and still work it out, though there is room for interpreting how the final result, of proving the therom will work! Whereas there are equations, that are clear cut and can be worked out a number of ways but will lead to only one conclusion, answer; and thereby leaving things open to discussion on certain aspects as to how the formula works out, though in the end, it only has one answer! So too with the Bible regardless of what may be in our collective heads as to dogma!!! Martin, I do not accept challenges however, I will do my best to comply with your request and experiment, by addressing your questions first, (and will ask you one of my own later on) before you begin to explain what you mean by the word “figurative.” (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 85 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 6) Your first question asks: “1. Was the sun at a standstill in Joshuas [sic] days? (Josh 10:13)” [Note: “sic” is an abbreviation that is used in English Grammar to denote that there is an error in spelling or in punctuation etc., in the quote itself. The “sic” is then placed into the quote itself, after the word that is spelled incorrectly to denote the error]. The short answer to this is; actually I do not know this emphatically speaking, however, it appears that it probably did not, standstill, in order for God to make that phenomenon happen and here is the long reason why I believe so. “Is anything too extraordinary for God,” the Creator of the heavens and the earth? (Genesis 18:14) If he chooses to, God can manipulate the movement of the earth so that the sun and the moon would seem motionless to an earthly observer. Or he can let the movement of the earth and the moon remain undisturbed while refracting the rays from the sun and the moon in such a way that the light from these two luminaries continues to shine. Whatever the case, “no day has proved to be like that one” in human history. Joshua 10:14. With the above said, I guess you have every right to use the terms here, “sun at a standstill” in a figurative sense; yes!!! Your second question asks: “2. Are you able to speak to your soul?”, and this is a completely different matter (than the question above) as first we need to agree on what the “soul” is, however I will respond as follows; One can indeed speak to oneself (soul) like speaking to yourself, as a person, as the word nephesh (soul) has been used in the Bible to clearly mean persons, animals, and also sometimes the word “soul” means one’s life as a person. For instance, as I informed you above, that “God told Moses: “All the men who were hunting for your soul are dead.” (Exodus 4:19) What were Moses’ enemies hunting for? They were seeking to take Moses’ life. Earlier, while Rachel was giving birth to her son Benjamin, “her soul was going out (because she died).” (Genesis 35:16-19) At that moment, Rachel lost her life. Consider also Jesus’ words: “I am the fine shepherd; the fine shepherd surrenders his soul in behalf of the sheep.” (John 10:11) Jesus gave his soul, or life, in behalf of mankind. In these Bible passages, the word “soul” clearly refers to life as a person. You will find more examples of this sense of “soul” at 1 Kings 17:17-23; Matthew 10:39; John 15:13; and Acts 20:10.” Thus in English, (as also used in the Bible) and I guess your language also, the word “soul” can be used in a “figurative” sense, like ‘Santa Claus is a jolly old Soul’, or that ‘James Brown is the God Father of Soul’, or ‘that man has soul’ and ‘poor soul’ and so on! However, this does not mean that the word “soul” itself in English, like nephesh in Hebrew, is somehow a completely different word, it is the usage of the word, from it’s basis meaning that has changed, not the word and meaning itself! So, yes, I believe that one can talk to yourself, or oneself (soul). (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 86 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 3 of 6) Now here you state, “I would say that an eternity without God is punishment enough, but for the reason that there is something called hell, an eternal torture chamber, God who is loving has provided for a way out of this torture. There is no excuse for those heading in that direction, if they have heard the gospel.” Martin, if I did not know what the Danish word “schoen” meant, I would use a lexicon to tell me what this word is in English, and I would get the word “shoe.” No more and no less. Now I can say, or express, ‘that my shoes are so comfortable, I feel like I am walking in heaven’, or again, ‘with those shoes on, I can fly.’ But while I am using these expressions, it does not change the word “shoe” itself into something that, when I put the “shoes” on, that “I am actually in heaven when I walk” or put them on, nor do I really “”fly” when I wear them! So too with the Greek (Hades) and Hebrew (Sheol) that is translated Hell in English! Now, I am certain you see the point of the “shoes” above and all I am asking you, is that you use the same power or standard of reason when it comes to the for Hell in Greek and Hebrew! Sheol and Hades simply mean the common grave of or for mankind period! Now, the fact that it has been used in various expressions in the Bible, so be it, but it does not alter the definition of the words in the language of Greek and Hebrew! It does not mean “torture chamber” or anything like this! Now, in history, outside the Bible, in many of the classical Greek writings this word, Hades, was used in many different senses, with many different meanings, one of them being, as in Dante’s Inferno, that Hell was used to specifically mean a place of torment, like a torture chamber, but this is not so in the Bible! If you do this, you take this into the area of pure dogma and simply, rather than to keep to the meaning of the words, and end up with one simple truth, as to its definitions. Now if you wish to add more to this than what the words mean, so be it, and that is why we have a difference of opinion, and so many different religions, because people refuse to accept the plain and simple definition of words, (especially the original Bible words) and then add to this the purposeful changes that are added into the Bible text when translating, that not found in the Greek and Hebrew, and you get differences of thought, thus differences in Religions etc. In the scriptures you quote, Matthew 25:32-46, where it states, in verse 46 in the NIV Bible, "Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life." The terms or words “eternal punishment” (other Bible’s express these as or interpret this as “eternal doom”, “everlasting punishment”, “everlasting cutting off” etc.) is not translated from the same Greek word Hades, but instead is translated from the Greek word, Gehenna; therefore one lexicon put it this way, as to the meaning of this different word: “Bauer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (revised by F. W. Gingrich and F. Danker, 1979, p. 95) gives the meaning “eternal death” with reference to this particular Greek phrase. It is not the same thing that you believe it is (as it is clearly not Hades) and also clearly does not refer to a place a torment either. That is not the meaning of the word in Greek! Now to this one can add their own bias, or dogma to it, in order to make it mean something else, but that does not mean you actually changed the definition of the word itself, no matter how hard you try, or how hard you believe something! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 87 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 4 of 6) Now, you go onto assume what I believe in or not; My beliefs in religion or not, have nothing to do with my replies to you (or anyone else on this board) nor is my speaking up on behalf of the JW’s as to issues, doctrines and other things, is not what is at issue here! As to this, you may believe as you wish, but know that I have in my life defended wrongs view of several disciplines, as it never ceases to amaze me how people make so many flippant remarks not only about the JW’s but others, out of total ignorance that are just plain wrong, and I have chosen on this board to speak out here about them under these strings about JW’s and their beliefs, for bad or good, it is what I have done, and will continue to do here, and elsewhere on other matters where people are patently ignorant about what they speak of!!! And Martin, please know that one can indeed be an atheist, and still know what the Bible, Quran and or other writings actually express, or to know the ‘plain truth’ about a subject matter or group of people! “You then state, “Another reason to think about God as triune is that the word God is translated from a word which means "gods", namely "Elohim". The same word is used in King Rehoboam's idolotry.(1 King 12:28)” You cannot jump the grammar from one language to another; in other words, use the same rules of grammer of one language and expect, or assume the same in another which is what you are doing! Martin, if you use a lexicon (dictionary) you find that the word Elohim was indeed applied to Almighty God and false Gods equally, and does not mean (dictionary wise) “trinity” at all, nor even does it remotely come close to the meaning to “trinity” the word!” The expression “Elohim” is in the plural, which is commonly done so in the Hebrew language (and others) to conform to the specific rules of Grammar, of the language. The pluralistic form of this and other Hebrew words, denotes, majesty or greatness, nothing more nothing less! Again, to thus, one would have to add their own personal dogma to make this mean something else, when it clearly does not mean this, in that (Hebrew) language! You then state, “Jesus is also called "eteernal [sic] father" in Isa 9:6. The same word as used in John 1:1 meaning: "and the word was a god"(NWT) is used in 1 Cor 8:4, clearly meaning the only God, Jehovah.” Martin, Sir, this phrase “eternal father” (from the Hebrew) is not the same or anything near what the Greek phrases are, that are used in John 1:1! It is not on the same plane or universe!!! Further, you cannot quote one part of this scripture, simply because if fits into your dogma and not the other part that calls the Messiah, a “Mighty God” (You cannot have it both ways! Also by title or term, this scripture allows for “another” God, a Mighty God rather than the Almighty God, to exist, as the scripture cannot be nullified! If the Messiah is Almighty God then why was the term “Mighty God” used instead! Martin, Almighty God, resurrected Jesus, as he was executed and dead, and brought back to life, who the Bible refers to as the Messiah, the “Mighty God”, which the scriptures call his “first born Son”, Jesus Christ! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 88 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 5 of 6, I think) Martin it may surprise you to know that many bible translate John 1:18 as “only begotten God” rather than Son, but it makes the same point as above! See website www. Biblegateway.com, enter for Bible “New King James” which should take you to webpage: http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201:18;&version=50; what does this mean to you? See also Colossians 1:15-20) which also states Jesus was “created.” (See Text Book, Truth in Translation, by Professor Jason BeDuhn for a clear explanation on this and other matters) Martin think of this; we all need to appreciate the role of the Messiah in the Bible, to better understand what is meant by the Messiah being both “Mighty God” and Eternal Father” etc. The scriptures state in Acts 3:22-26, though we will only quote part of Peter’s speech here if you will, in verses 22 and 23: “In fact, Moses said, ‘God will raise up for you from among your brothers a prophet like me. You must listen to him according to all the things he speaks to you” (with Peter quoting from as a reference to this, Deuteronomy 18:18). Never do we hear in Prophesy that God was unable to send anyone but himself to be Messiah, or that no else could be the Messiah but him or part of him! This is not Biblical. The Bible makes crystal clear (so crystal I won’t bother to make a reference to it here) that before Almighty God made the material universe, or earth, as we know it, he had a family, a spiritual family called angels! It is that hard to accept that God sent an angel to fulfill the role, of Messiah (instead of sending himself or part of himself personally) to be his one! Again if so, then why not state so scripturally, that God Himself is coming (clearly implying he has no one else to send by himself) or Part of him is Coming etc, to be Messiah. No, that is not what the scriptures state. Now I have a question for you, and I ask that you consider answering it as I did your questions. Question: In the Bible Book of Hebrews Chapter one (1), all of it, of whom does the inspired writer speak of? Comment or setting on Question above: Someone here must be the one who has become “better than the angels” and is also spoken of as “David’s Son”, and “God’s Son” etc.” There is no incompatibly with what I believe scripturally speaking, the conflict or incompatibility is with popular dogma! I clearly expressed to you my opinion on certain things like on the subject of Hell in general, that may be better expressed this way (Clearly my opinion): When a Government chooses a Warden of a prison, what characteristics do they look for? Certainly one would not expect the Government to look to the criminal population for the worst one to appoint as Warden, as this would make no sense, but instead, will look to someone of upstanding, righteous character to do so! It stands to reason that it would be someone that the Government officials would hold in high esteem in order to bestow such a weighty responsibility, implying that they would also associate with a person of that caliber! Therefore so too, if you believe these things about God leaving Satan in charge of Hellfire (as someone has to be in charge) was my opinion/point; It was to further demonstrate that in everyday life we do not accept certain things that are like these things, because we as imperfect people can feel (in our imperfect sense of justice) that this matter would just plainly be wrong (on this or other matters); again presenting my opinion here on life, on this matter of an Eternity of Hellfire as just punishment for a sinner who sinned for 100 years, as we, after all, are created in God’ s image! (Contined Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 89 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 6 of 6) Martin, you then state, “If you believe that God wouldn't let people go to hell because of His justness, then you are not rThe [sic] reason is that you say this out of you esting [sic] on scriptures, but on feelings. "In what way", you might ask. r own feelings about justness and not out of what scriptures post as just. If you would please give me scriptures that proves God's justness through letting people die.” As to the first part, I do not believe that God will send people to the Hell you speak of, that of Hellfire, for the reasons I have stated above and on other posts, as in the end, the Greek and Hebrew words that are translated Hell do not have that definition, meaning. I do believe all people who die go the Bible Hell, the grave, awaiting a resurrection. I have stated various things, that are indeed of my own originality and opinion, and I have stated so plainly, and separately to what I have pointed out to you many times is directly from the Bible, without hyperbole, or interpretation. If in the use of many words I have veered pr erred in this, then please accept my apologies as this is not my intent. And I do agree with God exacting punishment, but punishment, according to the scriptures is very different than what you and others tend to believe it is again, as I believe I have supported above! The ultimate punishment: God told Adam that he was made out of the ground. What pronouncement of punishment did God impose upon Adam; “from dust you are and dust you will return.” The question here is: Where was Adam before he was created by God. Answer: He was nowhere, he simply did not exist; he as simply not alive. That punishment is in fact enough, not be alive and away from God forever, but not in a place of torment that is simply not Biblical. Your last statement “Christ was born, not created” is addressed to, however, in line with what was addressed above in my referencing Hebrews Chapter 1, wherein Christ is spoken of, clearly as an Angel, who became the Messiah. This is incontrovertible; interpretation or not! May God Bless you and yours as well!!! P. P.S. Since the posts are getting rather long, it may be more appropriate, should you wish to continue them, that they be done via email in order to respect this website and service. I previously provided you with my email address and here it is again: praetorian_g@hotmail.com | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 90 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin: (Part 1 of 2) This will address your post above on Tuesday, June 05, 2007 - 8:38 am: wherein you stated, “I wish to soon end this discussion since it does not lead anywhere. You tend to say all the time that I add to scripture in my answers”; I have not only expressed this but have done my best to demonstrate it above as well. I believe that a fair minded person not attached to this exchange, will see that I have done my best to do so, as stated, demonstrate it, however in the end, we are both entitled to our opinions on this! I have indeed provided the answers to your questions here, above, by providing you with a verse by verse examination, of the account of the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus that clearly shows that you both interpreted and added to it in your replies, things that are not said in the Holy Scriptures and you clearly admitted so, but that you feel are implied in the account. Therefore the issue is, that I do not agree with your dogma or impression, but that does not mean that I do not accept what the scriptures clearly state on this, as I do, however, without your version of the events! I choose the scriptures over what you or anyone else believe and or need to explain or add to this! It is simply not a true story in any part, but a parable that Jesus used to teach a lesson! It is either a parable or a true story; it cannot be both in parts! Or you can state it is a story based on a true event, but again, you are interpreting this and or adding to the account that does not state this! Martin, you then state, or ask a series of questions: “Is there a thing called a steward? Can people be in debt? If there is not a place like hell, why would Jesus then even speak of it? Why would hell be a warning to people, if there is nothing called hell? The persons and the situation is a story, or parable, but the settings should be true, should they not?” 1.Yes the Bible makes mention of a Steward, however I am not sure where you are wanting to go from here. 2.Of course people can be in debt; though again I am not sure where you want to go from here, as one can be financially in debt and in debt to God or people as to sins. 3.Yes, there is a place spoken about as Hell in the Bible but, the Bible Hell is not the same as the Hellfire you have expressed it to be, from the simple definition in the Greek and Hebrew! 4.Jesus warned about not going to Gehenna, but the grave of mankind is where all humans go! Gehenna is not a place of torment, but rather a place of no return, non existence meaning in the Greek a place of “eternal death.” Adam was non existent before he was created and went back to the state of non existence, ‘from dust you are and to dust you will return.” Thus there is valid reason to warn people of God’s coming day of fury, and the loss of our lives forever! 5.I cannot answer your last question as it is a parable and we don’t agree on what it means, as you believe that parts of it are a true story, or that it is a parable based on a true story! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 91 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 2) There are no details like those you describe above regarding the Rich Man and Lazarus, you are interpreting or adding to the Biblical account, and this Sir is a plain and simple fact. We are not speaking to dogma here, but facts! You are now mixing the story of the Good Samaritan with this story of the Rich Man and Lazarus and this is confusing, what you are doing. You are doing this, no one else is. Ok, and on this we simply do not agree at all! And that’s OK! We both have this right!!! You then state, “Why would satan [sic] be tormentet [sic] forever when he has not committed sin for more than 49000 years or so?” and I have tried to use my power of reason from what I have learned about God from the Bible that He does not torture people or angels, and even disobedient angels, but rather, takes them out of existence for all of eternity. And Satan cannot be compared to humans who may be wicked for 100 years or so, to justify an eternity of torture for infinity! This is simply not justice but overkill, God or not! And again, this is not the God of the Bible! With regards to Spirit, I gave you words used in the Bible that have meanings, in the language that these were written in and definitions to them in their language that must be translated as such into any language. In this regard, I prepared a rather intensive, exhaustive reply that was meant for “INKORREKT” that he did not allow me to send him via email, that I would like to send you for your review and consideration that is too detailed to post here. Let me know if I can send this to you! Martin, on the matter of the question by Pilate to Jesus, we are beating a dead horse into the ground and so therefore let me apologize if I did not express myself correctly on this particular subject matter, as I did not argue or mean to argue, about the verse or setting as rhetorical, I was again, trying to express, that just because someone does not reply to a particular subject matter, does not mean that the non-reply can be taken as a sign of weakness or that the person is wrong on a matter! That’s all, no more and no less, and again please accept my apology if I expressed this subject matter poorly or used this as a wrong example to make this specific point! Sincerely, May God indeed Bless you and yours as well!!!! P | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 24 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. About hell: QUOTENow, in history, outside the Bible, in many of the classical Greek writings this word, Hades, was used in many different senses, with many different meanings, one of them being, as in Dante’s Inferno, that Hell was used to specifically mean a place of torment, like a torture chamber, but this is not so in the Bible!END OF QUOTE Do you believe that Jesus read Dante? About the trinity: QUOTE: You then state, “Jesus is also called "eteernal [sic] father" in Isa 9:6. The same word as used in John 1:1 meaning: "and the word was a god"(NWT) is used in 1 Cor 8:4, clearly meaning the only God, Jehovah.” END OF QUOTE I am sorry that I put these two remarks so close to eachother. I didn't understand that you had more problems with english than I. I will again quote myself more clearly. QUOTE: The same word as used in John 1:1 meaning: "and the word was a god"(NWT) is used in 1 Cor 8:4, clearly meaning the only God, Jehovah.” END OF QUOTE What I am saying here is that the word for gods in common sense also could mean "the God" in some places of scripture. Only because it does not say "thon theon" it does not mean that it is not speaking about the Supreme God. What I am saying, when reffering to Jesus as "eternal father" in Isa 9:6 is that God, Jehovah is called father. Jesus Himself says that we should call no one on earth our father since we allready have a father in heaven.(Mat 23:9) When it comes to the saying: "Mighty God" you yourself is adding. It does not say "a Mighty God", but "Mighty God". The word for "God" is here "ale" which is a word used for any deity. The interesting part is that this word was used about the "most high God" in Gen 14:18. Not even the NWT translates this to "a mighty god" but clearly states what is true: "Mighty God" with capital letters. This is stunning, huh? Col 1:15-20 does not say that Jesus Christ was created but says that He was born. There is a difference. A human-being can create plastic or cheramic mugs and the like, but a human can not give birth to such a thing, can they? I will need to continue this later... May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 New member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 25 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I do not agree that Christ is clearly spoken of as an angel in Hebrews 1. I would rather say the opposite. Even though it says that He has become better than the angels, it is not said that He was an angel. The opposite is rather stated. It says: "For example, to which one of the angels did he ever say: “You are my son; I, today, I have become your father”? And again: “I myself shall become his father, and he himself will become my son”?"(Heb 1:5) Yes, I wonder, to which one of them? You might like to answer: to the Messiah-angel, He did. But that is not what it says. This is a rhetoric question we are facing here. That is what is clear, and it is so by the things following. Heb 1:7 states: "Also, with reference to the angels he says:..." and "But with reference to the Son:.." clearly seperating those. I have to continue later. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| martinbook85 Junior Member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 26 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetoprian. You may send me e-mails about this. Since this kind of discussion does not fit in this forum I believe that would be more appropriate. martin.book@juhlins.se /martin [sic] | ||
| martinbook85 Junior Member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 27 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. There is, however, one thing I would like to ask you on this forum: Do the JW's know Christ? May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 117 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Martin: Thank you for supplying me with your email, which I will use, and of course I want or expect the same courtesy of a response, that you expected of me when you asked me a question; to my question on Hebrews 1, that you did not answer. Yes, JW's know Christ, though Perhaps not in the way you are thinking! P | ||
| martinbook85 Junior Member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 28 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear Praetorian. I am sorry, I never followed up my questions. Well, yes. Figuratively speaking the sun was at a standstill. But I would rather say that it was the earth that was at a standstill. I believe the scriptures. It says that the sun was up for that whole day, standing still in the sky. This was, however, from the human point of view. The other question was about if someone could speak to his/her own soul. If someone could tell his/her soul something the logic conclusion is that I am one thing, the soul another. I don't believe it is so. Anyway, what we really are after is the question: What is a soul? About your question when it comes to Hebrew chapter 1 it is clear that the one spoken of is Jesus, the Son of God. It is also clear that the inspired writer is seperating the angels from the Son. May God bless you. /Martin. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 123 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martin: (Part 1 of 2 also sent via email, leaving now) I want to let you know first of all, how much I appreciate your response as it goes to show that we can, and are indeed sharing thoughts and views between us as Christians they way we ought to, and people in general should as well even though we share different beliefs!!!! I totally agree with your point that the issue here is that there was light all day! I also concur with what you express in the first part of your paragraph. You then state, “What I am wondering is why this does not apply when someone says that a soul can die” and the answer to that is found in the usage of the word soul and context of the word soul, as no different than in our respective languages, as to the example I used previously about how I “feel” when I wear my “shoes, I can fly.” For instance, in using the word soul, first and foremost, we need to always keep in mind the actual and pure meaning (definition) of the word soul itself (like in my example of the shoes, remembering that they are actually shoes and that they do not “fly”; and with soul, it means people and animals and life as people and animals) as to how a word, in this case soul, is used. By doing this, we know when it is used in a figurative way or not, or when it is used outside the definition (keeping it separate of dogma) You see in daily life there is no dogma attached to the word shoe, so you clearly see and know that, when I express that I put my shoes on I “fly” that I do not really fly, why? Because I know the definition of the word, so no matter how confused I may be about the way a word is used, like shoe, a dictionary will set matters straight, and I will then know, that a shoe cannot fly, no matter how a matter is expressed with the word shoe in it. So, too with the Bible and it’s use of the word soul, when it comes to various expressions, hyperbole, parables etc.!!! Back to Ezekiel then, and scriptures like it, that say a soul dies, well then, sticking to the definition of the word (not dogma) a person, people animals die! There is nothing to suggest a figurative use here, other than dogma, as the scriptures when taken as is (like my shoes that fly) do not mean or imply that the soul is immortal and keeps on living after a person or animal dies. (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 124 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 3, oops one more page) Now you state, “Why does not soul in these passages mean: "oneself" or "that person". The same word is used. Want scriptures? Ps 104:1, 146:1.” First of all, I agree that it does, as the passage in Ezekiel we have both quoted, show the person that sins dies, that oneself dies and therefore this is not figurative as to people and animal dying. (The meaning of the word “Sin”, and its various Bible usages is another subject of which you may also be surprise to discuss) Now, when you refer to Psalms, 104:1 or 146:1, please keep in mind that there is no alteration of the meaning of the word soul in Hebrew and Greek, (the definition) therefore, these passages and those like them, must be as to usage, therefore, there is no contradiction why? Well just like my shoes that fly, (figuratively, or one can even personify a word or thing) a person, can express themselves in the first person, third person, plural, etc. Here in Psalms 104:1, the Psalmist is speaking about “himself”, blessing God, and also as with Psalms 146:1, as he encourages “others” as well as “himself” to praise God! Please remember, that the usage of the word does not alter the meaning of the word in any language. It is the dogma that alters or attempts to alter the meanings of the words, but the scriptures do not do that; which means the writers that were inspired to express themselves by using certain words, like soul, did do not mean that. The Psalmist and others state things like, “my soul is deeply grieved” when they mean (as the usage of the word does not alter its meaning) that “they” “themselves” are grieved. I know I have said this before but, when we speak of Santa Clause, being a Jolly Old Soul, we mean Santa is jolly as a “person”. When we express that James Brown is the Godfather of Soul, we clearly mean certain types of “music” for the word “soul.”! It is not the words that cause the problems here, it is the dogma that causes the problem, forcing one with the dogma in their mind, on a word or thought, to try and make things fit into what the person has in their mind, or want and believe the words to mean. But again that dos not change or alter the meaning of the word! What is critical to note, is that no where, in the Bible are the words for soul, ever linked being immortal, but rather mortal, as it dies! (Continued Below) | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 125 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Now, I am sure you have heard people express in your language as well, things like, a person they admired doing something for a “cause” like Justice etc. and while they express the person died, they can also state that his “Cause” Lives On; A cause or movement does actually “live” but the “cause” “Lives” on or keeps “alive”, because people keep the practice of it, on-going, but the “Cause” itself, as a word, does not live on, nor does the fact that the word “cause” is used here in this manner, alter the meaning of the word “cause”, as a thing, concept, effect, etc., that is now somehow alive! This is probably very easy for you people to see, as this has no dogma attached to it! Martin there is no scriptural problem or conflict (only with dogma) with the word soul (meaning a person or animal) as used in the Bible, that it dies and so on, but rather with dogma conflicting with the Bible! It is the dogma of many Christians that I find is at odds with the scriptures themselves, and so therefore there are two expressions in Latin that come to mind, that when roughly translated into English means; 1. Uni Falti, Tutti Falti, which means when there is one thing wrong with a document, the entire, or whole document is wrong; 2. And also, (Can’t spell this one in Latin) Repetition of error becomes truth! You state in conclusion, “About your question when it comes to Hebrew chapter 1 it is clear that the one spoken of is Jesus, the Son of God. It is also clear that the inspired writer is separating the angels from the Son.” Martin please think, he God had to “separate” his Son from the angels, then he cannot be God! Why, because the Son is “separated” as you put it, and is also “elevated”, which would not be the case if the Son were God as God does not need this, as He is the final authority and cannot elevated more than what He is already is, GOD! Now, if the Son, was “separated” from the angels, and “elevated”, than what was he, the Son, before he was “elevated”, and “separated” from the Angels. Please look at what the text expresses and not dogma, as I trust you are seeing this, that often what is taught in dogma is not what is plainly taught in the Bible! This text clearly compares, or calls Jesus, his Son an angel, because if the Son would be God, then the entire chapter and other parts of the Bible like this would make no sense in and of themselves! Look at verse 9, “your God” and “more than your partners” who is this referring to? Who are the Son’s partners? Please look at this without the colored glasses of dogma. May God Bless You and Yours! P | ||
| martinbook85 Junior Member Username: martinbook85 Post Number: 29 Registered: 5-2007 Posted From: 217.210.176.207 |
Dear forum readers. All three parts of Praetorian's previous post was sent to me by Praetorian by e-mail and they were also answered by e-mail. In order to get a hold of what the discussion is all about I want to type down the areas of our discussion: 1. What is a soul? (or rather "Death of a soul") 2. Pilate's question (or Jesus not answering questions) 3. Divinity of Jesus 4. Trinity In order for us not to mix things up I am up to dealing with one area at a time. The things discussed will probably be up here for review as long as it is possible. Perhaps all the lengthy replies will not be posted here, but conclussions will. I guess, dear Praetorian, that this is a thing you will support in order to keep our discussion open. Please post only your conclussions here in quite short terms(if possible), so that everyone is able to follow this discussion of ours. Our discussions can still be kept by e-mail, but all that is said is not important to everyone here. My conclussion about the soul matter is that there is no more clear teaching, in scripture, about the souls mortality than there is about its immortality. I believe, however, that there is a teaching in scripture about the soul still living when a person is dead. Please look up passages about hell in: Matt 25:31-46(41, 46), Rev 20:7-15(10, 15), Luk 16:19-31. There is also an interesting part shown in Daniel 12:2, it speaks both about hell/everlasting punishment and about death as a sleep. A person sleeping is not totally dead. Please look up these scriptures and decide for yourselves what to see as scriptural. This is my view on the death of the soul. What a soul is, cannot fairly be discussed here since it takes too much room. That discussion will, perhaps go on between me and Praetorian by e-mail, and if someone wants to know what I have said in those matters might e-mail me and ask me about it and I will send them(you) what I have written. My e-mail adress is: martin.book@juhlins.se Dear Praetorian, please don't answer my post in this forum, post your conclussion of the death of the soul here and anyone will be able to read and decide what to believe. You may answer my post by e-mail and if there is a need of clarification you may of course post it here, but let us make this as easy to read as possible. May God bless everyone on this forum and also you, dear Praetorian. /Martin. (Message edited by martinbook85 on June 12, 2007) | ||
| pilgrim New member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 19 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.129 |
Job 28:5 (KJV) 5As for the earth, out of it cometh bread: and under it is turned up as it were fire. Hell http://www.av1611.org/hell.html http://home.primus.com.au/kenshaw/page7.htm | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 126 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Martin: I have addressed all of your points, to the best of my ability, in a fair, logical, reasonable and scriptural manner, on all four topics above and below, which I repeat below with commentary. The bottom line is, that we both choose to believe differently on these matters, and that is OK! So be it. I do not believe that discussing anything further with you on the four items above/below will be productive in the sense, that we have nothing “new” or further to discuss on this, unless you feel differently, so I therefore recap below: 1. What is a soul? (or rather "Death of a soul") My Commentary: Addressed and replied to by me, many times above on this and other strings and you don’t agree. 2. Pilate's question (or Jesus not answering questions) My Commentary: Addressed, clarified and replied to by me, many times above and I think we finally put an end to this. 2. 3. Divinity of Jesus My Commentary: Addressed and replied to by me, many times above on this and other strings and you don’t agree. 4. Trinity: My Commentary: Addressed and replied to by me, many times above on this and other strings and you don’t agree. In the end you choose dogma and the scriptures that you believe support the same from the Bible, and I choose to use the simple definition of the words in the origin tongues of the Bible, in order to understand the way in which the word(s) should be used in the Bible today, in order to separate figurative uses from the actual meaning, letting the Bible do the teaching or interpreting, not the other way around. On this very matter, you feel that I am wrong, OK, so be it! You and I have exchanged emails on some of this however; I thought I would respond here, in response to your reply! Thank you for your usual kind endings, and May God Bless you and yours! P | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 127 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Pilgrim: You use the scripture in Job 28:5, for support to your belief that there is a Hellfire and websites of those who share your belief; however the verse you refer to, does not support your position, and further the words in the original Bible languages, that are translated “Hell” do not mean what you believe it is, no matter how much you or others choose to believe they do! In the end, you too can believe what you want to believe, however, I choose to stick to the simple definition of the words, from which we get Hell from in the Greek and Hebrew, and they simply do not mean what you and others would like it to mean. In the end, I respect your viewpoint and right to believe what you want to believe! Sincerely, P | ||
| pilgrim New member Username: pilgrim Post Number: 20 Registered: 9-2005 Posted From: 195.93.21.129 |
praetorian, I used Job 28:5 to show that they bible says that the under the earth was hot before human knew about this fact. I used the 2 websites with many verses from the bible to talk about hell. http://www.av1611.org/hell.html http://home.primus.com.au/kenshaw/page7.htm I invite everyone to read those two websites before they decide what they believe. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 128 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Pilgrim: I very much appreciate what it is you are expressing, however, let’s just make sure we are on the same page about the earth being “hot” as some people try to use this as a reference to support their beliefs that since Hell is hot then this scripture supports it! And since you immediately thereafter provide references to two WebPages (sites), on Hell, this bears mentioning here! Please read in any Bible of your choice, Job 28:1-11, to get the context for verse 5, and you will see that the specific discussion surrounds the earth’s treasures; For instance metals were probably found to some extent in rather pure forms on or near the surface of the ground. In time, underground or lode mining operations were employed. Shafts were sunk deep along rich ore-bearing veins. About 3,600 years ago Job described how miners had “sunk a shaft far from where people reside.” There “in the gloom and deep shadow” they searched, having swung down and precariously dangled to obtain the desired metals.—Job 28:1-11. So therefore the scripture does not support the idea of Hell fire regardless of what you believe or what these websites state. And again, this English word “Hell” as used today by many and on these websites does not correlate with the meaning of the original Bible words (Sheol/Hades). Pilgrim are you not bothered by the fact that the words in Hebrew and Greek from where we get “Hell” from in English (and other languages) does not mean a place of eternal torment? You should? Please remove the dogma and stick to what you do everyday when you do not know the meaning of a word. What do you do? You look it up in a dictionary, and then you know what it means, so that if someone tells you that a “rear-end is a “face” you know and can prove that they are wrong!!!!!! P | ||
| crawly Junior Member Username: crawly Post Number: 31 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.252.156 |
don't be confused. it is all very simple...... the jw leadership have no authority to claim they are "god's organization"! none at all!.......don't be afraid! they are just false prophets working the matt 24;24 scam that jesus warned about. take a look at their red rev book on pages 169 or so......... it is all about how they are the two prophets of rev 11, and they are causing fire to come down from heaven on christians because rutherford went to jail and then got out later. rev its grand climax at hand .... pages 167 or so. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 165 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Crawly: I guess from your stand point and those who think like you, they have no authority, but from their stand point, they do! Don’t be afraid of what, them or you! The scripture of false prophets applies to all people including you and your beliefs. Their red revelation book does not speak of the “two prophets”, on pages 169 or so, but instead the “two witnesses” and we have been down this street before, as your not representing the truth about your own claims! They do apply the scriptures and events to themselves as fulfillment of things prophesized! The believe they are the ones that Daniel speaks of in Daniel 12: 3, 4, 9 and 10 as well as Matthew 24:45-47 and Luke 12:41-44. These scriptures must apply to someone or some entity in the last days. I would like to know who you feel better fits this description. P P.S. I note that you post has nothing to do with the theme of the thread. | ||
| crawly Junior Member Username: crawly Post Number: 32 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.81.158 |
no, pratorian....... the scriptures about wicked men who dream up a fake coming of jesus apply to false prophets like the wicked gov body of jws who did that and continue to do it, not me. matt 24;24.... 2 thess 2;2...... num 16 everyone, look how pratorian trys to mislead you! their red rev book..... 'rev, it's grand climax at hand' is the book you want to look at......... look at page 166 and see the illustration of fire coming down from heaven onto christianity, from the two prophets that they claim represent the jw leadership.........and on page 167-168 its about how rutherford died, and fulfilled rev 11; 7-10 isn't it nice of them to claim to be the two prophets of rev 11, while at the same time denying it?.......it's a neat trick that jesus warned about. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 182 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Crawly: Since you are good at repeating things I thought I would repeat a little ditty, where in I provide my “Two Cents” that I have done here before as it well applies to “ALL” of your posts and trust you will agree with some or part of it and if not, oh well, it is what it is! One Penny: A kind woman who was known for never having anything bad about anyone, was approached by a person who said, ‘I know someone you cannot say anything good about’…..After a moment, she said, then I don’t want to know, and immediately the person said, ‘Satan The Devil’……And the women thought for a moment and said……’He’s a hard worker!’ Second Penny: If the general consensus is Christians believe that all or most roads lead you to God, and JW’s do not, then ponder; Under the belief systems of general Christians, JW’s are saved! Good and Bad are found in and among all people and belief systems, Christ himself had his own bad egg, Judas Iscariot, but that does not did not make Christ wrong or bad! If Judas had written a book entitled “Proof Jesus is not the Messiah, from a man who knows”, I can tell you that none of the other apostles or those that new Jesus and believed in him, would have bought or started to re-think what they knew of Jesus, as is suggested by the people of this board. I close my comments by quoting the words of a non Christian, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, in Acts 5: 38 and 39, “And so, under the present circumstances, I say to YOU, Do no meddle with this men, but let them alone (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown, but if it is from God, YOU will not be able to overthrow them) otherwise, YOU may perhaps be found fighters against God.” P | ||
| crawly Junior Member Username: crawly Post Number: 42 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.81.67 |
i just love the illustration on page 166 of the "revelation, it's grand climax at hand" book published by the wicked gov body of jws. it shows how the jw leadership are causing fire to come down from heaven onto christianity. yup, the self-appointed gov body of jws is wicked, and they are going to gehenna, the lake of fire..... matt 24;24 2 thess 2;2.......deut 18;20 | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 214 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Crawly: Since you are good at repeating things I thought I would repeat a little ditty, where in I provide my “Two Cents” that I have done here before as it well applies to “ALL” of your posts and trust you will agree with some or part of it and if not, oh well, it is what it is! One Penny: A kind woman who was known for never having anything bad about anyone, was approached by a person who said, ‘I know someone you cannot say anything good about’…..After a moment, she said, then I don’t want to know, and immediately the person said, ‘Satan The Devil’……And the women thought for a moment and said……’He’s a hard worker!’ Second Penny: If the general consensus is Christians believe that all or most roads lead you to God, and JW’s do not, then ponder; Under the belief systems of general Christians, JW’s are saved! Good and Bad are found in and among all people and belief systems, Christ himself had his own bad egg, Judas Iscariot, but that does not did not make Christ wrong or bad! If Judas had written a book entitled “Proof Jesus is not the Messiah, from a man who knows”, I can tell you that none of the other apostles or those that new Jesus and believed in him, would have bought or started to re-think what they knew of Jesus, as is suggested by the people of this board. I close my comments by quoting the words of a non Christian, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, in Acts 5: 38 and 39, “And so, under the present circumstances, I say to YOU, Do no meddle with this men, but let them alone (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown, but if it is from God, YOU will not be able to overthrow them) otherwise, YOU may perhaps be found fighters against God.” | ||
| crawly Member Username: crawly Post Number: 79 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.81.45 |
it's really not that confusing...... the jw leadership claim they can cause fire to come down on all of christianity, because they are the two prophets of rev 11. take a look at their red rev book pages 166 or so. the part about rutherford going to jail is really sweet. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 230 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Crawly: Since you are good at repeating things I thought I would repeat a little ditty, where in I provide my “Two Cents” that I have done here before as it well applies to “ALL” of your posts and trust you will agree with some or part of it and if not, oh well, it is what it is! One Penny: A kind woman who was known for never having anything bad about anyone, was approached by a person who said, ‘I know someone you cannot say anything good about’…..After a moment, she said, then I don’t want to know, and immediately the person said, ‘Satan The Devil’……And the women thought for a moment and said……’He’s a hard worker!’ Second Penny: If the general consensus is Christians believe that all or most roads lead you to God, and JW’s do not, then ponder; Under the belief systems of general Christians, JW’s are saved! Good and Bad are found in and among all people and belief systems, Christ himself had his own bad egg, Judas Iscariot, but that does not did not make Christ wrong or bad! If Judas had written a book entitled “Proof Jesus is not the Messiah, from a man who knows”, I can tell you that none of the other apostles or those that new Jesus and believed in him, would have bought or started to re-think what they knew of Jesus, as is suggested by the people of this board. I close my comments by quoting the words of a non Christian, a Pharisee named Gamaliel, in Acts 5: 38 and 39, “And so, under the present circumstances, I say to YOU, Do no meddle with this men, but let them alone (because, if this scheme or this work is from men, it will be overthrown, but if it is from God, YOU will not be able to overthrow them) otherwise, YOU may perhaps be found fighters against God.” P.S. Jesus was thrown in jail and executed and so were the apostles, I guess that was really sweet to, huh? Get another martini will ya! | ||
| crawly Member Username: crawly Post Number: 91 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.253.69 |
|
