| Author | Message | ||
     rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 1 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
PLEASE SIGN THIS PETITION: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/watchtower-hitler/ Tell holocaust memorial museums all over the world they should stop hiding the truth about the Watchtower Society’s decades-long anti-Semitic/pro-Hitler stance. While individual Jehovah’s Witnesses were suffering at the hands of the Nazis, its mother organization was outspokenly supporting Hitler and demeaning Jews. Tell the museums to add the Watchtower Society’s own publications to their archives. Right now, some museums only include the Watchtower Society’s whitewashed version of its history. Museums should include both, and let its patrons decide for themselves what to believe. Museums should preserve the facts so humanity doesn’t repeat its past mistakes. All these publications can be obtained free from http://bible.ca/jw-hitler: 1. Watchtower Society’s letter to Hitler, June 25, 1933 2. Watchtower Society’s “Declaration of Facts” - Berlin 1933 3. 1934 Yearbook of Jehovah’s Witnesses, published by the Watchtower Society 4. Watchtower Society’s “Declaration of Facts”, Trost, October 1943 | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 1 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
You sure have your facts wrong. This is not the first time people have taken things out of place and have used bits and pieces of several other parts, to make it fit into one's own personal agenda. For a different take on this, please see the documentary "Knocking" (website: www.knocking.org) that will air on PBS on May 22, this month. Wow, I must tell you that if you know "anything" about JW's then you should know their only allegiance is to the Kingdom of God, which they believe to be a real and active Government today that will soon destroy the likes of all human governments (Daniel 2:44) that oppose it! I will simply add this to the already long list of the JW’s sacrificing their sons and daughters by knifings to demons at their secret meetings; charging 10K a baptism; that they are cannibals; that they do not believe in medicine—(Oops that one may have been taken from the Scientologist) etc. etc. etc. Hey this statement, if properly dissected by you, will indeed allow you to actually take bits and pieces from it and re—work the statements and misquote me here, as your “truth” about the JW’s, and use this post as a reference point for the same!!! Ya gotta love it! I wonder? Are you a member of that group that denies the holocaust ever took place? | ||
| inkorrekt New member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 18 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.1 |
Truth is anathema to JW's as they are all brainwashed to believe the Watchtower society's lies,reinterpretations and misinterpretations. E.G: JW's are such experts in greek that they have created "a" "god" from, "The God". | ||
| arron Member Username: arron Post Number: 97 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.119.34.187 |
why do the jw"s continue to eat fat when the bible say thou shalt eat no fat or blood. since they are so down on blood tranfusions | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 2 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Inkorrekt: If you provide me with your email, as I am unable to add attachments here, I would be more than happy to send you copies of pages dealing with this on point, from a University Text Book, (Published by University Press of America) entitled, “Truth in Translation-Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament” by Jason David BeDuhn, a scholar and professor from Northern Arizona University, that examines several controversial biblical passages in eight popular Bibles. FYI: Professor BeDuhn, requires that those taking his course only use one of two Bibles of which the NWT is one! First regarding this you should know that JW’s are not the only one that choose to translate this passage in John 1:1 differently than the traditional KJV of 1611, as other translations use phrases like “..the Word was Divine”, “…was Godly” as “The same was in the beginning with God” etc. thereby showing that the translating of this is not as “open and shut” as you presume. Now if you can’t get your hands on the textbook above, then perhaps you can get a hold of “any” Greek interlinear while I here give you my poor response as compared to the “Professor” on this subject here below: In the Greek; if you have a Greek interlinear, please feel free to follow along as I do this from memory, and will spell it in the English (Greek Equivalent) Characters phonetically to the best of my “limited” ability; In the beginning was The Word (Ho Logos) and The Word (Ho Logos) was with God (Thon Theon) and The Word was God (Theos). Please know that there are several ways in Greek to say our equivalent “The” in English, and so therefore, “Ho” and “Thon” are our “The!” Now the question fairly and truly is: How do you translate this phrase from Greek into English as “Thon Theon” and “Theos” is not the same entity nor phrase (Take a look at the Greek and you will clearly see it) nor thing!!!! Thon Theon means in English “The God” and “Theos” means “God”. That is why there is Bible translations that use different words in English, other than “…was God…” as they attempt to show the difference between these two; without theology getting in the way! This is a fact that cannot be denied and therefore when translating from Greek into another language, like English, there should at least be a “footnote” or something showing that there is a difference, and you do not need to be a Greek Scholar like BeDuhn etc., to clearly see this in “any”text!!! Now to understand this difference from the standpoint of other scriptures, one simply needs only to go Isaiah 9:5 where the “Messiah” that was to come would is shown to be called by several names, and one of them would be “Mighty God” and this would be compatible with the fact of why in the Greek there is a distinction between the Thon Theon and Theos! As my son and daughter is from the same substance, (humankind) or source as I am; and therego the Messiah would naturally be of the same substance as God especially when he was to be called a “Mighty God” among other things! Also, please keep in mind that there is just so much more available today in the form of Greek Manuscripts etc. not only from the Bible but from other classical sources, that was not available to the “translators” of the KJV 1611, (where most other Bibles seem to get their flavor from) that help us truly get the sense of how to translate phrases like these. Keep in mind the KJV is called a the “King James VERSION” for a reason, it is not a “true” translation from the Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek, but rather it is a “Translation” from the then known “Latin” and other language manuscripts!!! Kinda like a version of a version of a version!!! These are simply the facts!!! Tata, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 3 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
arron: The same set of questions can be put to Noah and his family after God gave them the commandment to eat meat (a new thing not done before) though he was to pour out the blood on the ground and not eat the blood itself! I suspect Noah would express, that by pouring out the blood and not eating it, that he would not be violating God’s law, (as it cannot contradict itself) to eat meat even though some “traces” of blood would obviously be in the meat itself. It was and is the act of not eating the blood and treating it as sacred that is the issue, not eating the meat itself! P | ||
| prschuster New member Username: prschuster Post Number: 1 Registered: 1-2006 Posted From: 72.255.4.63 |
What's so special about blood? It's no more than a specialized form of connective tissue, having cells, fluids & proteins similar to those of other tissues in the body. The cells have the same DNA as other body cells. So what's the difference? | ||
| rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 2 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
Of course I am not part of any group that has any activities related to the holocaust. What a ridiculous comment. I am simply asking the museums to add the watchtower's own publications to their archives. Is that somehow worrisome to you? | ||
| bear New member Username: bear Post Number: 14 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.247.157.3 |
Hello to all, As to John 1:1, prat. is correct. However, having some training in Greek, there is a problem with the NWT use of "a god". The absence of the def, article is not sufficient. If that rule is to be applied to verse 1, it must also be applied to verses 6 and 12. The translation "the word was divine" is good. A better translation is "what God was, the Word was". This verse simply describes the nature of the Word, not that the Word and God were one and the same being. It must be noted that almost all of the translations used by the WTS as proof texts for John 1:1, noted in several of their publications, have been proven unreliable by Greek scholars worldwide; both Chrisitian and secular. One, by J. Greber, is truly disturbing. It takes a person well versed in the Koine Greek to properly translate. Classical Greek has a different system of grammar, and the knowledge of classical Greek does not qualify one as an expert in Koine Greek. Fred Franz, a past WTS President, was the leader in the translation of the NWT; it was his "baby". Many JW's have written that he was well versed in Greek through scholastic scholarship. His college transcripts are available online, and it should be notied that he does not have a degree in Greek. He took a few classes in Classical Greek, under 30 credits, and that number alone hardly qualifies one as a scholar. It must also be noted that he only took one, 2 credit hour, class in biblical Greek; an introductory course. | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 4 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 207.237.152.165 |
To Bear and All here: Therego the point: it is not as easy and clear cut as one would like to think it is with John 1:1. I repeat part of what I state above, “If you provide me with your email, as I am unable to add attachments here, I would be more than happy to send you copies of pages dealing with this on point, from a University Text Book, (Published by University Press of America) entitled, “Truth in Translation-Accuracy and Bias in English Translations of the New Testament” by Jason David BeDuhn, a scholar and professor from Northern Arizona University, that examines several controversial biblical passages in eight popular Bibles. FYI: Professor BeDuhn, requires that those taking his course only use one of two Bibles of which the NWT is one!” This publication is worth of consideration as you will note he mentions that the issue is NOT with scholars “TODAY” but rather with those who desire to fit their theology into translation. He also masterfully points out (with other scholars of today agreeing) that what is known and available today as compared to what was known when scholars of years ago is in effect “light-years” apart in thought and therefore again request that those interested in this subject secure his book on Amazon etc. In the end it is; what it is; not as clear cut as once thought! P | ||
| rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 4 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
According to Internet forum etiquette, it is proper to start a new thread if you want to discuss a different subject. Doing otherwise is known as "threadjacking" and this thread is a good example of it. Cultists typically change the subject when faced with questions difficult for them to answer. If you want to prove that is not the tactic you're using here, I suggest you start a separate thread for each topic you want to discuss. John 1:1, the NWT, blood issues, etc. have absolutely no relevance to this thread and continuing to threadjack is impolite. | ||
| arron Intermediate Member Username: arron Post Number: 149 Registered: 11-2004 Posted From: 68.119.34.187 |
same palce where it says dont eat meat with the blood it says dont eat the fat the the fat and the blood are forbidden to be eaten why do the jws still eat fat/ | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 6 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 207.237.152.165 |
rebel8: As to your negative inference, in your post 4 above, (before I get onto a plane) I just simply want to state that prior to making my post number 2 above in this link, inkorrekt’s post number 18 just prior to mine made this an issue in this link, and therefore I responded accordingly, my apologies for not following the rules of construction that you refer to as internet forum etiquette. I guess if I would have ignored it then I could be accused d of ignoring it due to hiding etc. You are good at making a dammed if you do dammed if you don’t scenario---my compliments…. Cheers P | ||
| bear New member Username: bear Post Number: 15 Registered: 4-2005 Posted From: 24.247.157.3 |
Praetorian, I have to agree with you considering John 1:1. Also, we can not just take what scholars of today may say, but research the scholarship of the past. In my 15 years of study on the trinity, I have seen a different scholarship than that held by many Hardcore trinitarians. I am inclined to use the translation "and the Word was divine", or "what God was, the Word was". The syntax of the verse points to a comparison on the words divinity with that of God, and not that the Word is actually God. I do believe that the NWT use of "a god" does not hold up to the strongest segments of modern or historical scholarship. Please feel free to e-mail me the information. | ||
| rebel8 New member Username: rebel8 Post Number: 5 Registered: 2-2005 Posted From: 72.43.232.70 |
"You are good at making a dammed if you do dammed if you don’t scenario" What a strange thing to say, with no basis in fact. Doesn't your religion prohibit making false accusations? | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 8 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Reberl8: (Part 1 of 2) This will serve to reply to yours of: (1) Post 2, May 22, 2007, 3:46PM and: (2) Post 5, May 24, 2007, 10:46PM as I believe I addressed all of your posts on this string (and other strings) as I want to make sure I replied to them all, and therefore state clearly here, that if I inadvertently missed one or two etc., please feel free to point this out to me, for a response. Also, I do not excuse the tenor of my response to you below, as it befits the manner in which you started the engagement! (1). I understand your statement “Of course I am not part of any group that has any activities related to the holocaust. What a ridiculous comment”; what a coincidence! I will grant you the blind courtesy that your statement is true; a courtesy which I doubt I will receive in return! My post was a reply to yours on this matter and your statements are considered by me to be equally “ridiculous” in line with what you posted about the JW’s and their view of Jews etc! This sword of absurdity cuts both ways!!! I wonder, what you are using as a “divining” rod to tell which one of our positions is more indeed more ridiculous; you’re poorly tampered with exhibits, or the facts themselves. In the end, if God himself were to appear to you and say; REBEL THE JW LETTERS YOU REFER TO ARE NOT CORRECT YADA YADA……. IT WOULD SERVE NO PURPOSE. If If you were shown the correct ones; what would you do? Become one! Stop the insanity silly! Let me know when you are being considered for the prospective post of museum curator and are considering adding the subject matter as an exhibit thereby needing some help with this!!! Duh! Your further “ridiculous statement that you are; “…simply asking the museums to add the watchtower's own publications to their archives. Is that somehow worrisome to you?” is not an issue as what you have posted is so far from the truth I am beginning to wonder if you are on the same planet! Continued Below: | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 9 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Your final “ridiculous” position on recommending this to museums’ in general also insults the intelligence of every party involved in these museums starting with the Jews, as your condescending statement clearly implies that they are stupid and incapable of figuring these things out for themselves and that the converse is true…..that you are not! Hey, do you think they just throw these things together or something kinda like (maybe you do) the way people do who live their lives that way (full of drama and rush to judgment and trigger finger decisions etc.) and think others do to!!!! My dear lady, this is part and parcel of one’s due diligence, validation and verification process into anything like this, which would be done well BEFORE adding exhibits to museums; let alone something as serious and sensitive as this subject matter! I guess you simply know more than those folks—huh! Hey, better yet, just wait for them to become “enlightened” like you; I trust when your discovery is uncovered they that this will a sensational bit of news, about their “enemies” TO THE WORLD” the JW’s!!!! Don’t hold your breath (or do) as your life span in this world will truly be short, as I am sure you can think of betters ways to pass off this earthly scene! (Part 2 of 2) In the end, you and those like you, will believe what you want to believe. (2) My dear girl, I am entitled to my opinion just as you and those on this board are! My statement which you chose to quote, and then interpret as to having no fact behind it, is simply that, an opinion, just like our noses! How do you know that my nose isn’t better looking than yours? Sorry, I forgot, you have this “divining” rod that tells you these things, that you believe as fact! I cannot compete, as I don’t have one of those, nor do I desire one! Hey cutie, you don’t know what my religion is you are assuming; please know that there are “attorneys” and other “professionals” that have intimate dealings with JW’s in matters required by law etc, that simply know more than you do about them! You after all left them, did you not! Did you leave a husband too, or did he leave you or wrong you in some way, in order for you to be so scornful! Tata, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 10 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 2) Your final “ridiculous” position on recommending this to museums’ in general also insults the intelligence of every party involved in these museums starting with the Jews, as your condescending statement clearly implies that they are stupid and incapable of figuring these things out for themselves and that the converse is true…..that you are not! Hey, do you think they just throw these things together or something kinda like (maybe you do) the way people do who live their lives that way (full of drama and rush to judgment and trigger finger decisions etc.) and think others do to!!!! My dear lady, this is part and parcel of one’s due diligence, validation and verification process into anything like this, which would be done well BEFORE adding exhibits to museums; let alone something as serious and sensitive as this subject matter! I guess you simply know more than those folks—huh! Hey, better yet, just wait for them to become “enlightened” like you; I trust when your discovery is uncovered they that this will a sensational bit of news, about their “enemies” TO THE WORLD” the JW’s!!!! Don’t hold your breath (or do) as your life span in this world will truly be short, as I am sure you can think of betters ways to pass off this earthly scene! In the end, you and those like you, will believe what you want to believe. (2) My dear girl, I am entitled to my opinion just as you and those on this board are! My statement which you chose to quote, and then interpret as to having no fact behind it, is simply that, an opinion, just like our noses! How do you know that my nose isn’t better looking than yours? Sorry, I forgot, you have this “divining” rod that tells you these things, that you believe as fact! I cannot compete, as I don’t have one of those, nor do I desire one! Hey cutie, you don’t know what my religion is you are assuming; please know that there are “attorneys” and other “professionals” that have intimate dealings with JW’s in matters required by law etc, that simply know more than you do about them! You after all left them, did you not! Did you leave a husband too, or did he leave you or wrong you in some way, in order for you to be so scornful! Tata, P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 11 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
oops sorry for the double post... | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 12 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear arron and prschuster: (Part 1 of 2) Arron I now think I better understand the point you were making, that I did not grasp in your first post on the matter of blood and fat, which is also mentioned by Prschuster, which I will attempt to do here, knowing full well that while you may not agree, it should serve to give you an answer. In this vein let me express what the Bible’s view point is on this matter, and all of us are always free to disagree on this matter as well! In the Bible, the soul is said to be in the blood because blood is so intimately involved in the life processes as the Bible plainly says it this way: “For the soul of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have put it upon the altar for you to make atonement for your souls, because it is the blood that makes atonement by the soul in it.” (Le 17:11) The Bible also says: “The soul of every sort of flesh is its blood.” (Le 17:14) Both of these scriptures have application to what is referred to as the Mosaic Law so, therefore according to these verses we find that the Bible treats both life and blood as sacred; and I hope you agree. I will get back to the fat here a little later on. The Bible also states, that after the Flood, Noah and his sons, were commanded to show respect for the life and the blood of fellowmen. (Ge 9:1, 5, 6) Also, God kindly allowed them to add animal flesh to their diet. However, they had to acknowledge that the life of any animal killed for food belonged to God, doing so by pouring its blood out as water on the ground. This was like giving it back to God, by not using it for one’s own purposes.(De 12:15, 16,23,25, and 27 [especially verse 27]). The verses in between these in all of De 12, and in particular verse 27 shows that but for the blood, all the meat could be eaten which would obviously include the fat! Now according to the Bible, there was only one use of blood that God ever approved, namely, that for sacrifice. He directed that those under the Mosaic Law offer animal sacrifices to make atonement for sin. (Le 17:10, 11) This later became a fitting symbol for and was in harmony with God’s will that His Son, Jesus Christ, offered up his perfect human life as a sacrifice for sins.—Heb 10:5, 10. Continued Below: | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 13 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
(Part 2 of 2) Now, I believe the issue may lie in the fact that under the Mosaic Law there was a law regarding “fat.” In the 3rd chapter of Leviticus, God gave the Israelites instructions concerning the “use” of fat in communion sacrifices. When offering cattle or goats, they were to make the fat around the loins and intestines and that over the kidneys, as well as the fatty appendage upon the liver, smoke upon the altar. In the case of sheep, the entire fatty tail likewise was to be offered. The Law specifically said, “All the fat belongs to God…You must not eat any fat or any blood at all.”—Le 3:3-17, again keeping in mind that this was instructions for the use of “fat” in offering up sacrifices to God! Fat would burn fiercely and would be quite thoroughly consumed upon the altar. Any fat offered on the altar was not to be left over until the next morning as it was likely to spoil or corrupt and become offensive, something very unseemly for any part of the sacred offerings.—Ex 23:18. After the Flood, when permission was given to Noah and his family to add flesh to their diet, nothing was stated regarding fat itself! (Ge 9:3, 4) However, and noteworthy of mentioning was that fact that the eating of blood was prohibited, keeping in mind that this was stated well before the entire body of the Mosaic law was written or for our discussion specifically mention in Chapter 3 of Leviticus. More to the point, this was stated to Noah about 850 years or so before the Mosaic Law covenant, with its prohibitions against the eating of both blood and fat, that was made specifically with Israel. Now therefore this is how the JW’s feel; they are not Jews, but rather Christians (that is another subject for those JW Hate Mongers etc out there,) and therefore they look to instructions given in the first century C.E. by then governing authority of the Christian congregation, which served to confirm the prohibition against blood (not fat) as remaining in force for Christians. (Ac 15:20, 28, 29) Therefore it is their view that as in the case with Noah and his family that no prohibition was stated concerning the eating of fat and therefore having no effect on them as Christians. In conclusion the law against eating fat in connection with worship/sacrifice was given only to the nation of Israel and not to Christians. I hope this helps! P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 14 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Bear: I am scanning several of the pages of the book to send to you via email asap, and I believe you will receive and review it with the same enthusiasm that I did! Be aware that this professor along with others, have came to agreement with other scholars, that some of the older traditional scholars made some simple, fundamental errors in judgment in their conclusions that are so widely held to today. I look forward to your comments! Best regards, P | ||
| inkorrekt New member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 23 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Who is a Christian?Is he someone who studies the bible? Is he the one who talks about God all the time? What is the true definition of a christian? | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 19 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Inkorrekt: You answer part of your own question in the questions posed! Remember when Pilate asked Jesus, if he was a King? And what was Jesus reply? ‘You yourself are saying I am King!’ Tata P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 20 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Inkorrekt: You answer part of your own question in the questions posed! Remember when Pilate asked Jesus, if he was a King? And what was Jesus reply? ‘You yourself are saying I am King!’ Tata P | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 21 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
oops sorry about the double post...fingers move to fast between other tasks...P | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 27 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Wrong example once again. The question is Who is a Christian? I never asked you "Are you a christian? I only asked you to define who is a christian. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 28 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Wrong example once again. The question is Who is a Christian? I never asked you "Are you a christian? Why are you Deflecting the question? I only asked you to define who is a christian. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 29 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Wrong example once again. The question is Who is a Christian? I never asked you "Are you a christian? Why are you Deflecting the question? I only asked you to define who is a christian. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 30 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Wrong example once again. The question is Who is a Christian? I never asked you "Are you a christian? Why are you Deflecting the question? I only asked you to define who is a christian. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 31 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Wrong example once again. The question is Who is a Christian? I never asked you "Are you a christian? Why are you Deflecting the question? I only asked you to define who is a christian. Can you define or not? | ||
| praetorian New member Username: praetorian Post Number: 22 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Dear Inkorrekt: I went to www.dictionary,com and looked up Christian and came up with all of the below that I am in total agreement with: Christian–adjective: 1.of, pertaining to, or derived from Jesus Christ or His teachings: a Christian faith. 2.of, pertaining to, believing in, or belonging to the religion based on the teachings of Jesus Christ: Spain is a Christian country. 3.of or pertaining to Christians: many Christian deaths in the Crusades. 4.exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity. 5.decent; respectable: They gave him a good Christian burial. 6.human; not brutal; humane: Such behavior isn't Christian. –noun 7.a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity. 8.a person who exemplifies in his or her life the teachings of Christ: He died like a true Christian. 9.a member of any of certain Protestant churches, as the Disciples of Christ and the Plymouth Brethren. 10.the hero of Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. 11.a male given name. Inkorrekt I don’t know what you are looking for; however this is my answer! Cheers! P P.S. Do you want me to send you the information, my reply on the Holy Spirit, then please send me an email to: praetorian_g@hotmail.com for me to do so as it is much to large to post here. | ||
| inkorrekt Junior Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 37 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 208.54.15.129 |
Thank you for the pains you have taken to give the definition. Only no.4 comes very close to the true definition. But, the true definition is beyond this. what is it? | ||
| praetorian Junior Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 28 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
inkorrekt: I have given you my answer, I can do no more or no less, as whatever I say, you will find fault with, so tell ME PLEASE and elaborate on 4 above, that comes close! I am listening (notice I did not say hearing). Also, what are you afraid of, by not providing me with your email address in order for me to send you the research I painstakingly prepared for you on the subject of "Holy Spirit". I would very much like to send that to you as it is quite exhaustive and is about 16 pages, in word, and is simply much to large to post here. I would truly welcome your comments on the research I did for you! P | ||
| crawly Member Username: crawly Post Number: 70 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.81.45 |
praetorian, your wicked gov body of jws is guilty of demeaning the jews, and supporting hitler at the beginning of ww 2 just like it shows in the original post on this thread. the wicked gov body of jws thought that would be a good idea......... but later, they denied it all, when it all came back. they are very good at the "denying it all part". lying false prophets usually are good at the lying part. matt 24;24.... 2 thess 2;2 | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 235 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 P.S. Rince lather and repeat, as you do, so will I, my repetition is as good as yours, and is better when you drink! | ||
| crawly Member Username: crawly Post Number: 95 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.253.69 |
notice how preatorian-jw trys to change the subject...... but the origial post at the top says it all. jw leadership know all the tricks. | ||
| lauramarie Junior Member Username: lauramarie Post Number: 28 Registered: 6-2007 Posted From: 75.177.94.213 |
what if you were number 144,001. You might get a little bummed out that someone you know got "in" and you felt they weren't any better than you. That was my first thought when my neighbor told me she joined the JW's and tried to explain a little about it. She told me she KNEW she wouldn't be one of the 144,000, but was content with remaining here on the earth doing whatever it is they are taught they're supposed to do. Too bad. NOT what Jesus taught at all. | ||
| inkorrekt Intermediate Member Username: inkorrekt Post Number: 174 Registered: 11-2005 Posted From: 71.237.125.180 |
"PRAETORIAN" as well as all the JW leaders have no idea of what will happen to the 144001st person. I was myself involved in another cult which also taught that they were the only chosen 144,000. | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 257 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
7. Now the Greek word translated into English as spirit, comes from the Greek word pneuma, means, wind, force, and in fact in John 3:8, (NIV) they translate pneuma as “wind”. FACT. Sorry to disappoint!!!! What no answer? Lauramarie: I have a few questions for you to see where you are coming from? Who or what do you believe 144K are? The Bible makes mention of there being priests and kings, in the coming future so who will these be? When Jesus stated the Meek shall inherit the earth, what did he mean by this? If Adam and Eve did not sin, where would they be today? If God does not fulfill his original purpose toward this earth that he started with Adam and Eve, allowing for people to all go to heaven, what would you say God did? Looking forward to your answers. P | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 258 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Lauramarie: Please ignore the first paragraph above your name, as I inadvertently added in error a piece of a previous reply in error. Sorry if I caused you any confusion. P | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 259 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
inkorrekt: Just because counterfeiters print false bills does not mean everyone will throw out their real money! You speak about the 144K as though it is not in the Bible! Not disagreeing is one thing, to make an issue over what is stated in the Bible is another! P | ||
| praetorian Intermediate Member Username: praetorian Post Number: 260 Registered: 3-2005 Posted From: 70.89.75.242 |
Craw: Duh! | ||
| crawly Intermediate Member Username: crawly Post Number: 111 Registered: 8-2007 Posted From: 4.240.81.238 |
preatorian is promoting the fake representatives of jesus. they beat their fellow slaves with lies about a fake return of jesus that somehow appointed them to rule, first in 1874....... ummmm ooops. the real body of christ would never claim he already arrived, and appointed them to rule over all other christians..... only the fakes do that. they are the wicked slaves that jesus will throw away when he arrives. |
