ignore - accidental double post
Edited by - aChristian on 21 March 2001 0:6:17
i'm trying to get a clear "take" on this:.
the wts has often implied that their form of missionary work, concentrating on "preaching and teaching", is superior to that of christendom's.
christendom often starts out by bringing food supplies, hospitals and the like, supposedly "enticing" the natives with material goodies.
ignore - accidental double post
Edited by - aChristian on 21 March 2001 0:6:17
i'm trying to get a clear "take" on this:.
the wts has often implied that their form of missionary work, concentrating on "preaching and teaching", is superior to that of christendom's.
christendom often starts out by bringing food supplies, hospitals and the like, supposedly "enticing" the natives with material goodies.
: The WTS has often implied that their form of missionary work, concentrating on "preaching and teaching", is superior to that of Christendom's.
I believe JWs are wrong about this, just as they are wrong about almost everything else. The fact of the matter is the JW type of preaching is very ineffective. Very few people listen to door to door religion peddlers. For, as has often been said, people don't care how much you know until they know how much you care.
hl giancula,.
the signs and wonders that jehovah gave us, added to the bible writings completes the bible's outline directed to us.
by using the animals representing certain people it just makes it easier to understand jehovah's direction.. besides this, the number 144,000 stands alone with its exact numbeerrneeded in heaven.
: But in many areas of the bible God promises that those who accept Christ will go to heaven. Christ says that if we do, he will prepare a place for us - there are many rooms in heaven! Those who say Yes will reign along side with Christ.
How do you reconcile your belief with Rev 5:10, which says in all translations of the Bible, except the JW NWT, that those who will rule as kings and priests with Christ will do so "on the earth"?
this question is mostly for those of you who still believe in the bible to some extent.
my mother-in-law called the other day to see if rileygurl and i were going to the memorial this year.
we told her that we wouldn't be attending.
By the way, most Protestant Christian Churches celebrate Communion, where all believers in attendance are invited to partake of the bread and wine, about once a month. Some of them every week (Church of Christ, for example). During these times all in attendance are reminded of the meaning in partaking of these emblems. We are told that the bread symbolizes the body of Christ given for us, and that the wine symbolizes the blood of Christ shed for us. We are also then told that by partaking of these emblems should remind us of an important spiritual truth. Namely this: just as we must accept physical food and drink to sustain our physical lives, the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ is the spiritual food we must accept in order to gain eternal life.
As Christ himself said, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:53,54)
Those words do not bode well for 99.9 % of JWs.
hl giancula,.
the signs and wonders that jehovah gave us, added to the bible writings completes the bible's outline directed to us.
by using the animals representing certain people it just makes it easier to understand jehovah's direction.. besides this, the number 144,000 stands alone with its exact numbeerrneeded in heaven.
: To insist that the 144,000 are ... a large symbolic number is pushing the truth beyond the boundaries of sound biblical understanding.
Why is that, Bruce? The number 144,000 is, after all,the product of what you believe are two symbolic numbers. Is it not? 12 X 12,000. The number 12 being the number of the tribes of spiritual Israel. (Spiritual Israel is not divided into 12 literal tribes.) And the number 12,000 being the number of people Revelation says are taken from each of those non-literal tribes. Thus the number 12,000 is also a symbolic number.
If you don't mind me asking, what kind of math do you use to multiply one symbolic number by another and by so doing produce a literal
number?
this question is mostly for those of you who still believe in the bible to some extent.
my mother-in-law called the other day to see if rileygurl and i were going to the memorial this year.
we told her that we wouldn't be attending.
You asked: "How do those of you that still believe in the Bible but are no longer witnesses feel about the memorial? Do you attend?"
1 Cor. 11:23-26 reads as follows: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, "This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me." In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me." For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
With these verses in mind, as a Christian I can only view the JW "Memorial" as an abomination. Jesus told his disciples to, "Do this in remembrance of me." He did not say, "Refuse to do this in remembrance of me, and tell others that they are not scripturally permitted to do this in remembrance of me." If he had then the JW "Memorial" would be perfect. As it is, it is an absolute travesty. And I cannot believe any Christian would want to dignify that Christ dishonoring ceremony by supporting it with their presence.
i have been reading some on sumerian mythology.
now, it's said the sumerians predated hebrew writings by several centuries or longer.
the sumerians are the first writers.
: If all were not pagans, according to the Bible, then why would God entrust the true story of creation to pagans - and not righteous men of the time?
Who says He did? The Sumerians may simply have been the only people at the time to record historical records on clay tablets. God may very well have always had on this earth a few "righteous" people who preserved a perfectly acurate account of history by means of another less durable medium. Written records may have been kept on animal skins or other materials which did not endure as long as the clay tablets of the Sumerians. Or their medium for recording history may have been limited to an exact memorization of historical records which was accurately passed down from generation to generation until it was finally put into writing by Moses. But simply because the Sumerian record is the oldest written record resembling the Bible's Genesis account of history does not mean it was the first historical record of such a history.
i have been reading some on sumerian mythology.
now, it's said the sumerians predated hebrew writings by several centuries or longer.
the sumerians are the first writers.
: But if it is completely factual - then why would God entrust this history to pagans instead of bringing it down to his "chosen people" first?
Probably because God's chosen people, Adam and Eve's descendants, had all become "pagan" by the time called Abraham out of Ur. Then, in a land God would give Abraham and his descendants, God's chosen people would again begin worshipping God in truth.
i have been reading some on sumerian mythology.
now, it's said the sumerians predated hebrew writings by several centuries or longer.
the sumerians are the first writers.
Since the Bible indicates that Abraham lived in Ur hundreds of years after Noah's flood and thousands of years after Adam and Eve lived in Eden, it is possible that the mythology of the Sumerians may have been based on actual historical events, namely those recorded in Genesis.
was luther an apostate, or hus or wykliffe or calvin.?.
and what about the lollards the waldenses or the anabaptists were they all apostate?.
or were they just standing up for what they thought was right?.
: Galileo claimed that the earth was round and went against the popular views of the church.
I don't mean to be picky here. But for the sake of historical acuracy I don't believe Galileo ever quarelled with Church leaders over the shape of the earth. Rather he correctly maintained, contrary to the teachings of the Church and to the apparent teachings of the Bible, that the earth revolved around the sun and not vise-versa. Church leaders at the time correctly pointed out that the Bible seems to clearly say that the sun moves around the earth. Take, for instance, in Joshua where the Bible tells us of the time when "the sun stopped moving in the sky." (Joshua 10:13)
Of course, all Christians today maintain that Church leaders at the time simply misunderstood the Bible.