04 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf I accepted a Jehovah's Witness as a spiritual adviser, I would be going
Actually in view of the following text, i think i can help you, to readjust your thinking on the matter.
(Hebrews 10:24-25) . . .And let us consider one another to incite to love and fine
works, [b]not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as some have the
custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as you behold the u can Pm me for private consultation regarding
spiritual matters any time, regards Robbie.[/b]
DOWN the wrong path. Sorry, I must decline and stay with the Holy Spirit.
04 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI believe I understand why you asked me if I went to church Sunday.
Actually in view of the following text, i think i can help you, to readjust your thinking on the matter.
(Hebrews 10:24-25) . . .And let us consider one another to incite to love and fine
works, [b]not forsaking the gathering of ourselves together, as some have the
custom, but encouraging one another, and all the more so as you behold the ...[text shortened]... u can Pm me for private consultation regarding
spiritual matters any time, regards Robbie.[/b]
You think it is a "sin". Right? I bet you think it is a "sin" not to
tithe 10% of your earnings to the church, also. Isn't that right?
And you wanted to catch me "sinning" so it would make you feel
superior, right?
Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before stumbling,
it is better to be of humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the
spoil with the proud. (Proverbs 16:18 NASB)
04 Jul 11
Originally posted by RJHindsI told you earlier: 499BC. Also, I offered you in detail the sources but you don't pay attention🙂
It doesn't appear to have anything to do with the Christian Trinity, but
what is your date and how do you know?
And you appear to be unable to understand for the time being what exactly an archetype is, and how the differ theologies all around the dial were developed based on previous, older archetypes by means of using meta-concepts in the frame of the culture of the society from which they finally emerged
😵
04 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsbut look how i have put you straight on two matters already
If I accepted a Jehovah's Witness as a spiritual adviser, I would be going
DOWN the wrong path. Sorry, I must decline and stay with the Holy Spirit.
1. Your propensity for calling others idiots, in violation of Christ words making you liable for Ghenna i brought to your attention
2. Bringing to your attention the matter of gathering together with fellow Christians when you have adopted the custom to do otherwise, giving you a somewhat cold disposition.
you certainly do need guidance in the Christian way, for obviously in these matters the holy spirit was left to grieve, how else are we to account for shortcomings? as for tithing? its part of the Mosaic law, which is no longer binding on Christians. There are never collection plates passed at the gatherings of Jehovahs Witnesses, let me repeat that, never! You see in assuming that there was, you have fulfilled your own prophetic words taken from the book of proverbs.
04 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindssigh more feeble attempts, you trinitarians ever produce any new ideas?
"I AM" is another name used by Jesus, the Son of God, to descibe Himself.
"Jehovah" or "Yahweh" is translated to mean "I AM" (the self-existing one).
So it was actually the pre-incarnate Jesus, the Son of God, that talked to
Moses and told Moses that name and not God the Father.
RS reads: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am [Greek, ego eimi].. (NE, KJ, TEV, JB, NAB all read “I am,” some even using capital letters to convey the idea of a title. Thus they endeavor to connect the expression with Exodus 3:14, where, according to their rendering, God refers to himself by the title “I Am.&rdquo😉 However, in NW the latter part of John 8:58 reads: “Before Abraham came into existence, I have been.” (The same idea is conveyed by the wording in AT, Mo, CBW, and SE.)
Which rendering agrees with the context? The question of the Jews (verse 57) to which Jesus was replying had to do with age, not identity. Jesus reply logically dealt with his age, the length of his existence. Interestingly, no effort is ever made to apply ego eimi as a title to the holy spirit.
04 Jul 11
Originally posted by black beetleBy the 4th century CE the Trikāya Doctrine had assumed the form that we now know.
I told you earlier: 499BC. Also, I offered you in detail the sources but you don't pay attention🙂
And you appear to be unable to understand for the time being what exactly an archetype is, and how the differ theologies all around the dial were developed based on previous, older archetypes by means of using meta-concepts in the frame of the culture of the society from which they finally emerged
😵
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trikaya
As wikipedia points out it was not until the 4th century CE, that is the same
as AD, not BC. Anyway, it does not matter if it was originated by Satan in
4000 BC it does not have anything to do with the Trinity Doctrine of the
Holy Bible.
Isaiah knew of the Triune God in his vision in 740 BC, when he sees the
Seraphim and hears them call out one to another, "Holy, holy, holy, is the
Lord of hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory." (Isaiah 6:1-13)
Let me explain the three Holies are for the three persons, God the Father,
God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. The angels knew the truth.
04 Jul 11
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobiedefinition of Lord= God
LORD in place of capitilized YHWH is a like for like representation of the ancient text
How anyone can make this statement with any integrity I cannot say. If you can stop bitchin, for just a second, please tell the forum, how it is a like for like representation. You may wish to add the following,
Warning: This post includes references and studies.
definition of Jehovah= God
source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Jehovah
source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/God
game, set, match
04 Jul 11
4 edits
Originally posted by Dowardwow thats so convincing, the meaning of Allah in Arabic is God, according to you
definition of Lord= God
definition of Jehovah= God
source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Jehovah
source: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/God
game, set, match
Jesus is God, therefore Jesus is Allah, the same divinity that the Muslims worship,
according to your logic. Incontrovertible and unassailable logic, to be sure.
Lord is a title, it is not a name, FACT. Jehovah is not a title, it is a name with
meaning, FACT.
if you would just stop trying to win arguments for its own sake, you may actually
learn something about the divine name.
Jehovah [the causative form, the imperfect state, of the Hebrew verb hawah
(become); meaning “He Causes to Become”]. what was it that your online
dictionary was saying . . . . . .Jehovah = God, well actually, it should read, the
personal name of God meaning, he causes to become.
04 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you are interested in the truth of how John 8:58 should be translated
sigh more feeble attempts, you trinitarians ever produce any new ideas?
RS reads: “Jesus said to them, ‘Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am [Greek, ego eimi].. (NE, KJ, TEV, JB, NAB all read “I am,” some even using capital letters to convey the idea of a title. Thus they endeavor to connect the expression with Exodus 3:14, where, ...[text shortened]... xistence. Interestingly, no effort is ever made to apply ego eimi as a title to the holy spirit.
from the Greek into English, I recommend the following book:
Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus Christ, & the Gospel of John by Robert M.
Bowman. Jr., Copyright 1989 by Baker Book House Company,
ISBN: 0-8010-0955-3
It gives both sides in great detail of the scholarly debate over the
translation of both John 1:1 and of John 8:58 that the JW's are so
concerned about.
I will quote only one small portion of this book on John 8:58.
Jesus therefore said more than that He preexisted Abraham. He chose
the term that would most strongly contrast the created origin in time of
Abraham with His own timeless eternality, the present tense verb eimi.
Thus, had Jesus wished to say what JWs understand Him to have said--
that He merely existed for a long time before Abraham--He could have
said so by saying, "Before Abraham came into existence, I was," using
the imperfect tense emen instead of the present tense eimi.
My question to you is why after Jesus said this did the Jews pick up stones
to throw at Him? Merely stating that that He was older than Abraham was
not an offense deserving of stoning, however, blasphemy would be.
John 10:30 reports that Jesus told the Jews, "I and the Father are one."
The Jews took up stones to stone Him. Jesus answered them, "I showed
you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning
Me?" The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we did not stone you,
but for blasphemy; and because you being a man, make yourself out to
be God." (John 10:31-33 NASB)
I believe it would be good for you to reread the Gospel of John while
trying to keep an open mind and maybe you will discover the real Jesus.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
04 Jul 11
The "real Jesus" is not to be found in a single verse, or a single Gospel. In fact, it is elusive to be found in the entirety of Biblical writings; be they orthodox, Septuagint, Apocryphal, or Gnostic. If the "real Jesus" were to be found, it would not be so open to wild interpretations that would appear to cover the spectrum of personal belief as opposed to finding a perspective of the "real Jesus" in exegetical or literal form.
05 Jul 11
Originally posted by robbie carrobieWhere in scripture is your reference for Jesus forbidding believers from
but look how i have put you straight on two matters already
1. Your propensity for calling others idiots, in violation of Christ words making you liable for Ghenna i brought to your attention
2. Bringing to your attention the matter of gathering together with fellow Christians when you have adopted the custom to do otherwise, giving you a somew ...[text shortened]... ing that there was, you have fulfilled your own prophetic words taken from the book of proverbs.
calling and idiot an idiot. You don't know enough about me to know what my
customs are. You will not be the judge to determine that I am liable for
Ghenna. You just don't like the fact that I am exposing the lies of the JWs.
If you and other JW's don't tithe or collect money for the organization, how
do they pay their electic and water bills and the rent for their buildings and
other expenses to operate such a large publishing house to print their
propaganda. I think I may have caught you in another lie. He! He!
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
05 Jul 11
Originally posted by RJHindsMatthew 5: 21-22
Where in scripture is your reference for Jesus forbidding believers from
calling and idiot an idiot. ...
‘You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, “You shall not murder”; and “whoever murders shall be liable to judgement.” But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgement; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, “You fool”, you will be liable to the hell of fire.
Clear as a sunny day.
05 Jul 11
Originally posted by BadwaterI don't see anything against calling an idiot an idiot in that.
Matthew 5: 21-22
‘You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, “You shall not murder”; and “whoever murders shall be liable to judgement.” But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgement; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, “You fool”, you will be liable to the hell of fire.
Clear as a sunny day.
It is talking about calling a brother or sister, "You fool" not idiot.
And besides I was not addressing a brother or sister anyway.
Also to say the truth should not be considered an insult, but a help.
But if my understanding should be wrong, I apologize and ask for
forgiveness.
05 Jul 11
Originally posted by RJHindsRobert M. Bowman. Jr. ?????? So who is this guy? A man with an opinion?
If you are interested in the truth of how John 8:58 should be translated
from the Greek into English, I recommend the following book:
Jehovah's Witnesses, Jesus Christ, & the Gospel of John by Robert M.
Bowman. Jr., Copyright 1989 by Baker Book House Company,
ISBN: 0-8010-0955-3
It gives both sides in great detail of the scholarly debate over the
t ...[text shortened]... f John while
trying to keep an open mind and maybe you will discover the real Jesus.