Posts by Fisherman

58

Did the ransom sacrifice even work?

by Sharpie in

shower thought entered my mind the other day... jesus christ.

as per doctrine.

is still alive in heaven right now correct?

Fisherman

Apply the ransom

Legally speaking, as Alan F pointed out, how is it just for humanity to suffer and die after justice was served with the payment of the ransom. The physical effects of the antibiotics starting to work are felt during the millennium. Jesus resurrected the dead, restored people to good health is proof that the ransom works. So to answer the question raised in the Topic, Jesus gave empirical evidence that the ransom works—for some people, the ones that were healed by Jesus. That is not really the issue that the ransom works. The tension is that Adam sinned resulting in God demanding justice in the payment of a ransom to him and since justice was served, what is the legal reason for humans to suffer so horribly and die ((and especially caused by Christianity instead of christianity at least mitigating human suffering). The application of the ransom is not a legal reason why humans are required to suffer and die when somebody else already did that for all humans, Jesus. Legally speaking, why is the ransom not working physically?— Playing devil’s advocate.

39

Is Russia Bluffing?

by Fisherman in

“supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

“if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

what is russia implying?

Fisherman

poo tin

Nope. It’s Put in like the dose of radiation someone put in the news reporter’s food a while back.

Nice post Anony Mous!!

39

Is Russia Bluffing?

by Fisherman in

“supplies of offensive weapons to the kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” state duma chairman vyacheslav volodin said.

“if washington and nato supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”.

what is russia implying?

Fisherman

“Supplies of offensive weapons to the Kyiv regime would lead to a global catastrophe,” State Duma Chairman Vyacheslav Volodin said. “If Washington and NATO supply weapons that would be used for striking peaceful cities and making attempts to seize our territory as they threaten to do, it would trigger a retaliation with more powerful weapons.”

What is Russia implying? And are the threats nothing to worry about?

58

Did the ransom sacrifice even work?

by Sharpie in

shower thought entered my mind the other day... jesus christ.

as per doctrine.

is still alive in heaven right now correct?

Fisherman

Then when he became king in 1914, it was applied

Playing devils advocate here but prayers for forgiveness are based on the application of the ransom which must apply after God accepted payment. Also, as Alan F pointed out, after God accepted payment for the sin of Adam and Jesus dying and all that suffering as payment in full, what legal grounds is there for human’s death and human suffering, legally speaking. Farkel put it in a very funny way, when is the insurance company going to pay on the premium? It is understood that the ransom gives God law to forgive mankind because the penalty was paid but since the penalty was paid what law still holds man captive to sin and death?

58

Did the ransom sacrifice even work?

by Sharpie in

shower thought entered my mind the other day... jesus christ.

as per doctrine.

is still alive in heaven right now correct?

Fisherman

The Bible says ransom is payment in full. Alan F argued in his article: Then legally, why does humanity still suffer. And why works of faith. What ls the legal justification for death and human suffering? However, before AF article, the Knowledge book brought that point out pointing out that after the ransom was paid, God had the legal grounds to bring Armageddon back then in the 1st Century. But he didn’t.

203

My Explanation of Why They Got it Wrong About Blood Using Only the NWT

by cofty in

10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.

12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.

15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.

Fisherman

This is why there was no penalty.

1954 WT that I cited explains that the penalty for eating a dead animal was washing your garments, the state of uncleanness for the rest of the day and the ritual bath.

94

New GB

by XBEHERE in

jw
friends

gage fleegle.

jeffrey winder.

anyone know them?

Fisherman

JW helpers are not anointed I think so they wouldn’t be disappointed.

94

New GB

by XBEHERE in

jw
friends

gage fleegle.

jeffrey winder.

anyone know them?

Fisherman

encourage GB members to retire when they no longer feel able to continue.

You mean stop being FDS? How is that possible.

203

My Explanation of Why They Got it Wrong About Blood Using Only the NWT

by cofty in

10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.

12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.

15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.

Fisherman

Another point to consider about eating a dead animal is that the person was unclean until evening and that wasn’t easy. Then he had to go through the ordeal of a ritual (mikveh) and that wasn’t easy either. By the time it was all over, he was hungry again so he goes back and eats another piece. And then he has to go through the same ordeal again and again and again every time he ate some dead animal. Even if he wasn’t hungry, he had to be careful not to accidentally touch it or any of his family members either or anybody else or they would spend all their time of day in an unclean state and taking ritual baths. Suppose the entire nation made a practice of this as cofty suggests, the entire nation would always be unclean and at the mikveh day in and day out an unholy nation all day long.

I figure that there were Gentiles conveniently not so far away that would buy the dirty thing off their hands so they could get rid of it asap and didn’t have to touch it so they didn’t have to go through that ordeal. “Take this unclean thing away away from here.”

(Jews are not allowed to violate the Sabbath so a Jew will seek assistance from a “Shabbos Goy” when needed to kindly do things that violate the Sabbath such as turning ithe lights because Gentiles don’t have to observe the Sabbath. a SG is not paid because that would violate the Sabbath but appreciation is shown maybe by giving him some food etc.)

203

My Explanation of Why They Got it Wrong About Blood Using Only the NWT

by cofty in

10 " any israelite or any alien living among them who eats any bloodi will set my face against that person who eats blood and will cut him off from his people.

12 therefore i say to the israelites, "none of you may eat blood, nor may an alien living among you eat blood.

15 'anyone, whether native-born or alien, who eats anything found dead or torn by wild animals must wash his clothes and bathe with water, and he will be ceremonially unclean till evening; then he will be clean.

Fisherman

The 'penalty' was take a bath.

Similarly for Christians if they sin there is no “penalty” for mur$er, eating blood, or any other forgivable sin.

And yet you would prefer a child dies.

No. You conclude that. The issue here is whether or not the act of eating a dead animal is wrong, not the penalty for the Acts. Applying eating dead animals to blood transfusions is a cofty theory that Blood is only sacred to God after life is taken and derivatively (from God’s point of view,) people can go around eating dead animals, and eating blood from living animals or humans just as long as their life wasn’t taken for the same reason the blood in a blood transfusion is meaningless sort of speak to God.