by DocHouse 245 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
to DorkHouse:
"The freest anyone ever is occurs when they care enough about their integrity to search for the truth.
The most enslaved anyone ever is occurs when they are constrained enough to announce they've found the truth and, to protect their pride, stop the search."
Cofty in harmony with that second point you made about christians belonging to Jesus, note how the presumptuous and blatantly erroneous insertion of "Jehovah" into the NWT's rendering of Romans 14:8 obscures this point:
"for both if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. Therefore both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah."
Here the NWT replaces kyrios ("Lord") with "Jehovah". But it is very clear from the next verse (Romans 14:9) that the "Lord" mentioned in verse 8 is referring to Jesus and not Jehovah, for verse 9 actually justifies/explains verse 8 by saying (see the highlighted portion):
"for both if we live, we live to Jehovah, and if we die, we die to Jehovah. Therefore both if we live and if we die, we belong to Jehovah. 9 For to this end Christ died and came to life again, that he might be Lord over both the dead and the living."
The phrase in verse 9 "Lord over both the dead and the living" is really a restating in different words, of the point being made in verse 8 and the fact that verse 9 opens with the word "For" shows that it is an explanatory continuation of the point made in verse 8. Therefore the Kyrios of verse 8 has to be the same Lord over the dead and the living mentioned, and explicitly identified as Christ, in verse 9. The insertion of Jehovah into Romans 14:8 utterly corrupts the meaning of Romans 14:8-9 causing the explanation given in verse 9 to no longer connect logically with verse 8. The NWT is falsely attributing the lordship of Romans 14:8 to Jehovah when it really should be attributed to Jesus as clearly indicated by the context of verse 9.
DorkHouse's potential retort:
'Well, WT got "most of" Romans 14:8 correct, so just ignore the "baloney"/"absurd"/bulls**t parts.'
DocHouse, I notice that you've spoken quite a bit about 'Churchianity' but nothing about Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Why is this?
Those religions are complete fabrications.
"Creationnist propaganda" comes from Churchianity- not science- as that article is fron Discover magazine- the top left paragraph mine.
"Creationnist propaganda" comes from Churchianity- not science- as that article is fron Discover magazine- the top left paragraph mine.
Ps 100:3 Is certainly part of the discovery article too....
what I call "Creationnist propaganda" is all you add at this article...
Faith- REAL Faith- begins when SEEING the design it all nature.
It ends when you ignore it.
Ps 100:3- Know ye that Jehovah, he is God: It is he that hath made us, and we are his; We are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
Yes- it IS 'part' of the article. But few SEE it.
MisFit- thanks for your kindness.
I look at myself and others as those in ancient Israel who had to endure foolishness (and oft evil) in their king and/or priests....
Yet, they ARE my brothers and sisters.
Those religions [Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam] are complete fabrications - but isn't 'Churchianity' fabrication, too?. I don't think you've given this much thought,TBH.
"Creationnist propaganda" comes from Churchianity- not science - are JWs creationists or scientists?
DocHouse, I notice that you've spoken quite a bit about 'Churchianity' but nothing about Hinduism, Buddhism and Islam. Why is this?
DH: Those religions are complete fabrications.
Which makes the title of this thread even more hilarious:
Still pointing your Finger when having a Rafter in your eye?
Hey, DorkHouse: are you the kettle or the pot?
