Aguest--- That's quite a persecution complex you have there. I think I've heard enough of the FDS stuff from the watchtower you are an apostate guilty twisting the scriptures to your own end .The apostle paul had alot to say about a womans possition and as usual you have over looked many passages that clearly leave women out of celebrating the memorial supper. Women learning in silence , women not allowed to teach men spiritual things , the head of man is the christ the head of woman is the husband , women would be saved through faith , childbearing and sancitfication provided they have soundness of mind . I notice even the WTBTS overlooks these passages because they can manipulate women to sell magazines . I suppose you can start a cult if you want , makes no difference to me but since you went ahead and condemned me I thought I'd mention a few facts here . BTW I do think the bread should be done in a proper way and baked on the same day of celebration. Jesus often used parables about the weeds and the wheat and think his body should be symbolized by using unleven wheat bread . I actually have better things to do than argue more so HAVE A NICE DAY.
To those with "ears" to "hear"...
by AGuest 52 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Love_Truth
LittleToe,
Good question. I think the answer(s) can be obtained by examining the verses , especially verses 27-31:
27 Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. 28 A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep. 31 But if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment. 32 When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.
So, my answer would be that those who believe "once saved, always saved", even though they deliberatly practice sin afterwards (some "Born-Agains" I've known) make a mockery of "recognizing the body of the Lord" and rejecting the Lord's discipline.
None of us are truly "worthy" as we all sin (at least accidentally) and fall short of God's glory. But to trample on the value of the "free gift" by deliberately bringing dishonor to Him is what I believe the judgement is referring to, among others who have callous diregard for his sacrifice or it's meaning. We should alll take stock of ourselves and see if we feel we're doing our best at present to put faith in God, His Son, his sacrifice, and how well this faith is seen in fruitage of the Spirit and other visible manifestations of our faith.
You agree/disagree?
Look forward to your thoughts, Ross.
Cheers,
Love_Truth.
-
Rabbit
Heathen,
Sorry, MAN. I am obviously brain-dead. I gave you a Sex change operation without your consent...I will, of course stich 'it' back on for you...for free...providing of course, I can find the damn thing ! Somebody thought 'Aguest' was a man, so that's where it may be.
I was 'thinking' of 'Heather' another poster, when I saw you, you Heathen ! lol Sorry dude...!
-
LittleToe
Love_Truth:
IMHO the context of Paul's words in 1Cor.11 are that some were arriving drunk.v27 uses the word anaxious - unworthily or irreverently.
v29 uses the word krima - a decision, judgement, etc.Hence I believe that the thrust of what Paul was saying is that the Communion table should be approached with reverence, discerning the "body" of Christ. Some were holding it in little esteem, and were making a clear decision as to how highly they viewed it.
Since the wine represents sin-atoning blood, sin is being dealt with there.
What is your understanding of what the bread represents?
IMHO there are other passages talking about the Christian "way" of life, but these have little direct bearing on the communion table.
Again, it was Paul who talked about "not feasting with a man who was a drunkard, etc., etc.", likely in this context.A lot of this rests on whether or not you follow a Pauline Christianity to the letter, since by his standards Jacob probably wouldn't have a place at the table, given his polygamy.
IMHO Jesus was far more understanding (I'm intentionally not using the word "tolerant" here) of sinfulness.
He simply said, eat, you're in a new covenant, now.
That didn't really give license for any religion to bar those, who were persuaded of their adoption, from the table.Just a few additional thoughts, in addition to the stuff that's usually considered on the subject.
-
AGuest
dear A Pad... and peace to you...
I would respond "yes", if that man saw me "eating" the food of such table. He, too, might be enticed to eat. But simply my presence in the "temple" of an idol does not mean eating what is offered there. I ask you: what was "offered" at the temple in Jerusalem? Was it not "leaven"... hypocrisy and hatred? And yet, my Lord went there. Why? To find the "lost" sheep. What was "offered" in the synagogues of his day? Was it not the same? And yet, did he not tell his disciples that they would in fact enter into synagogues, yes, and on occasion even be thrown out?
I do not come here to "eat" from the table of idols; that would be tantamount to "following every wind of teaching," and there's quite a bit here - runs the gamut, from one spectrum to the other. Some good, some interesting (some even very interesting)... and some not so good and "interesting" would be quite the opposite. But this is pretty much a "synagogue"... a PUBLIC MEETING PLACE... and you get what you get. I have not been sent, however, to judge any of it... not at all. That is not my "work." I am not originator of the message; only the courier.
So, if I perhaps DO enter into a temple of idols... or other place... because I was sent TO such place... and upon entering see OTHERS "eating things sacrificed to idols," etc., of what concern is it to me? I do not judge others as to what they eat or drink, whether it is "sacrificed to idols," or isn't. While it is my obligation no to stumble others... it is also my task not to BE stumbled... if I can at all not be. Through love, though, I can almost most certainly avoid it, as God purposed to judge the world by another... my Lord. If HE, then, sees fit to send me wherever he wills... then I will go. Indeed, send me!
Your servant and slave of Christ,
SJ
-
AGuest
May you have peace!
That's quite a persecution complex you have there.
You are, of course, entitled to your opinion. But I don't believe it to be a "complex," although there are indeed times when I do feel persecuted, just as there are with all of us. But that's usually when I am being persecuted. Please don't take offense, though, because I don't. Truly, I don't have a problem with it (except when it gets malicious, which it does from time to time), because it comes with the "territory." If one agrees to go and speak to a hard-headed, stiff-necked people, who have a history and track record of persecuting those sent to speak to them... and one is told before one goes that one will be persecuted for doing so... one cannot rightly cry "foul" when such persecution comes to pass, can one? Did not such one CHOOSE to be persecuted... or "reproached"?
Hebrews 11:24-28
I think I've heard enough of the FDS stuff from the watchtower
You and me, both, my brother!
you are an apostate guilty twisting the scriptures to your own end.
A couple things come to my mind: (1) with the exception of Numbers 11:16 and so, I didn't even refer to scripture; and (2) how is it that you have authority to judge the house servant of another? Is it not to his/her own master that he/she will stand or fall?
The apostle paul had alot to say about a womans possition and as usual you have over looked many passages that clearly leave women out of celebrating the memorial supper.
First, I don't follow Paul; he is not my leader.
Matthew 23:10
Second, I beg to differ, for just as ALL ate the manna in the wilderness, ALL must eat the manna that is the flesh of Christ. For if one does NOT... one cannot have life within his/her self. At least, that is what the CHRIST said. Who should I listen to... Paul? Or the Son of God?
Matthew 17:5
Women learning in silence...
Now it is you and your WTBTS friends who "twist" the truth. How so? Because you believe and therefore teach that the "law" Paul referred to was "scripture". And it was no such thing! The "law" that Paul referred to had to do with ROMAN law, which prohibited women from speaking in public. Since synagogues were PUBLIC places, the women could not speak, not even to ask questions, there.
And why did Paul push this "law"? Because at that time, "christians" were being so horribly persecuted by the Romans, who looked for any and every reason to throw them to the lions, that a woman caught speaking in public put the entire congregation in danger. I advise you... read up on it.
women not allowed to teach men spiritual things
Save for those SENT... NO ONE is allowed to teach ANYONE spiritual things. These things are to be TAUGHT... by the SPIRIT! Indeed, one only has to LISTEN... and HEAR. It is when one DOESN'T... that someone is SENT! Certainly you know this, for you seem to want to give the impression that you have read your Bible...
Ezekiel 3:20, 21; John 14:26; 1 John 2:26-28
the head of man is the christ the head of woman is the husband , women would be saved through faith , childbearing and sancitfication provided they have soundness of mind .
You quote Paul, and by means this seem to imply what the WTBTS also implies: that women cannot learn from the Christ, for only men can, and thus women must learn from the men. I wish to make two (2) replies to that: first, are not men also saved through faith? The letter to the Hebrews name many who were. Second, let's look at the TRUTH of your assertion:
"This woman (Martha) had a sister called Mary, who, however, sat down at the feet of the Lord and kept KEPT LISTENING TO HIS WORD. Martha, on the other hand, was distracted with attending to many duties. So, she came near and said: "Lord, does it not matter to YOU that my sister has left me alone to attend to things? Tell her, therefore, to join in helping me."
And what was the result?
"In answer, the Lord said to her, "Martha, Martha, you are anxious and disturbed about many things. A few things, though, are needed, or just one. For HER part, MARY... CHOSE the GOOD portion... and it will NOT be taken away from her."
While you're pondering that one (ummm, you can find it at Luke 10:39-42), how about the one where my Lord spoke to the woman at the well, while his disciples marveled? Or how about when the MEN were SUPPOSED to wash his feet, but it was a woman who finally did so, and with her tears?
I notice even the WTBTS overlooks these passages because they can manipulate women to sell magazines.
You are in error; the have women offering magazines due to their misinterpretation of them being a "large army."
I suppose you can start a cult if you want , makes no difference to me
I have no intention of starting any such thing, for I am merely a messenger and can save NO ONE; however, I certainly do appear to make a difference to you. However, the "gnashing" of your "teeth" shows what kind of difference... and why... does it not?
but since you went ahead and condemned me I thought I'd mention a few facts here .
And again, you are in error, for no one condemned you. Indeed, who am I that I can condemn ANYONE... for ANY reason? I do not even judge myself, but am judged by the Son of God. Dear Heathen, I am not sure what you "read"... here or in the Bible... but perhaps you should back and do so again... this time, more slowly and certainly more carefully.
BTW I do think the bread should be done in a proper way and baked on the same day of celebration.
Oh, yeah, THAT'll make it all "proper," now, won't it? Dear Heather, you've missed the entire point... for in some instances (for instance, when it is not available), it doens't even have to be bread and wine. It could be whatever one had available to one, so long as one DISCERNS it to be the flesh and blood of Christ... and eats IN FAITH... without hypocrisy! But I am quite sure that the truth of that will "passover" you. Ah, well...
Jesus often used parables about the weeds and the wheat
Indeed...
and think his body should be symbolized by using unleven wheat bread.
Hmmmm... and if you don't happen to HAVE any wheat? Or are ALLERGIC to wheat? Would not barley do? Or oats? Or rye? Wouldn't ANY grain do... so long as the "cake" or bread made with it is UNLEAVENED? Truly, cannot one eat unleavened WHEAT bread... and eat UNWORTHILY due to the uncleanliness of HIS/HER heart and hands... and cannot another eat unleavened BARLEY bread... and eat to salvation... due to the cleanliness of HIS/HER heart and hands?
You've entirely missed the point of eating and drinking, dear Heathen, and rather than seeing it as the SPIRITUAL food and drink that it is, you, like so many others... have made a ritual of the flesh. Ah, well...
I actually have better things to do than argue more
If that were true, why then, did you not remain silent? Apparently, you had nothing "better" to do... than "argue." I did not come here to do so.
so HAVE A NICE DAY.
Hmmmm... seems to ME that from within you issues "blessing" (i.e., you wish for my day), and "cursing" (your sarcastic "eye rolling"). Perhaps it's the "leaven"... in you. However... my wish for peace to you... remains.
Your servant... and a slave of Christ,
SJ
-
AGuest
dear Love_Truth... and peace to you...
is that neither is "once saved always saved" true... nor is "once condemned always condemned." For God shows mercy to whomever HE wishes to show it... at whatever time and for whatever reason He wishes to. Thus, anyone can be forgiven ANY sin... at ANY time... save blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. For that is the only "unforgivable" sin.
We all sin, dear one, many times... and although my Lord does not WANT us to sin... we have him as a "propitiatory" for when we do. HIS blood... can cover our sins, whatever they may be, and thus should be esteemed as of high value.
But here is what is important: we can attempt to follow the Law in its entirety, and may for the most part do so... but if even in doing so we don't love God... AND... LOVE OUR NEIGHBOR... AS OURSELF... it won't matter. And eventually we will fail the Law, because ALL sin and fall short. But because of not obeying the command to LOVE, we will have no "covering" for our sins... small or great as they may be.
However, LOVE... covers... a MULTITUDE of transgressions. So that if we indeed follow our Lord's command to "love one another" just as he loved US... and FORGAVE us... and RELEASED us... and gave his LIFE for us... then our sins... small and great... can be "covered" by means of faith in Christ's ability to do so... and DEMONSTRATING that faith by following his command... to love one another... JUST AS he loved us!
I implore you, then: do not judge... not even in your heart (for God knows the heart!)... so that you are not judged. Rather, go on releasing... so that you will be released. For happy are the merciful... since they will be SHOWN mercy. And sooner or later, we will ALL need mercy, yes?
Learn to walk as Christ, who condemned no one (save the wicked scribes and Pharisees who shut up the kingdom before men)... but forgave and released all who came to him. Do NOT follow Paul... for even Paul had to learn humility, love... and mercy. That is why his letters changed, from what they were in his first two letters to the Corinthians, to what they became in his 3rd letter to them... and his letter to the Romans.
I truly bid you the greatest of love and peace.
Your servant, for I, too, love the Truth (John 14:6) and thus am HIS servant and slave,
SJ
-
LittleToe
Love IS the law!
-
AGuest
"IMHO Jesus was far more understanding (I'm intentionally not using the word "tolerant" here) of sinfulness. He simply said, eat, you're in a new covenant, now.
That didn't really give license for any religion to bar those, who were persuaded of their adoption, from the table.Amen... and amen. May the day come when ALL who profess to love God and Christ, THROUGH Christ, come to understand this truth!
The greatest of love and peace to you, my dear brother in Christ, Ross, and may the undeserved kindness and mercy of our God and Father, the Most Holy One of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whose name is JAH... of Armies... and the peace of His Son and glorious Christ, our Lord, JAHESHUA MISCHAJAH... be upon you... you and your entire household... to time indefinite. And let every living thing, indeed, every living BREATHING thing... let it praise JAH!
Praise JAH, you people!
Servant to the Household of God, Israel, and all those who go with them, and a slave of Christ to time indefinite,
SJ
-
heathen
AGeust--- You may not be a follower of the apostle Paul but he was chosen directly from God as a prophet and an apostle to teach and preach about the kingdom of the heavens and how to worship in conjuction with it . You do argue the same way the WTBTS does on the issue but I can not deny what is written as being just as important as the rest of the gospel . Jesus does look for faith where ever he can find it but if you remember after he was resurected he did not allow women to touch him but later the apostle thomas was permited to touch the wounds on his body . There are different rules that apply before and after his resurection . We could discuss the issue forever but if you are going to discredit most of the new testament then it is pointless.
Further more I am not persecuting you and did not "curse " you with a scarcastic smilie. You are free to say and do as you want but I also am free to disagree , don't you think? AFA the wheat bread is concerned I think (it's just my opinion now) that if at all possible should be wheat but I also think we need to stay with the program of eating unleaven bread and drinking red wine even though I have yet to do it myself . I'm not allergic to wheat bread in fact I prefer wheat bread over other types of bread . Just basing my opinion on the biblical account and nothing else . Have a nice day .
edited --- because it just looked stupid the way I spelled persecuting.