đ¤Śââď¸this 25 million different languages thing is getting ridiculous.
this link is hilarious!
they've only gone and translated into jamaican patois and boy this isn't just translation, they're literally using slang....what next?
I think this is fantastic and inclusive and I donât see a thing wrong with it. Do other religious groups produce literature in Jamaican patois, I wonder? If not, then even more kudos to Watchtower for doing this.
Seems a bit odd to include the flag, though. Do they do this for other countries?
I wish theyâd produce British English spelling versions of literature and the NWT too, but maybe thatâs not a priority.
uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.
Mostly accurate, but initially she says his Patron account funded âthings like his research, travel, and legal battles against Watchtowerâ. Did he ever even claim the money was used for âlegal battlesâ or is she just adding this as fluff? Even if he somewhere claimed it, she shouldnât be naive to repeat such an obvious falsehood. Iâd be astonished if a single penny was ever spent on any such thing.
Interesting that she says she watched all his videos back in the day but she only recently found out about the scandal. I guess that there are still fans who have no idea.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
Well thereâs still no Trinity in the Bible but now youâve shown a couple of complicated diagrams that totally makes it true. đ¤
On 1 Tim 2.5 you treat Godness and humanness as like two sticky substances and Jesus somehow needs to be dipped in both to be a mediator who partakes in both. In reality thatâs later philosophy talking, nothing to do with what the Bible says. What the Bible says is that there is one God and one mediator between God and humans, that is the man Jesus Christ. Notice it doesnât say the God-man Jesus, and notice it doesnât say between divinity and humanity. It says one man between the one God and humans. Jesus is neither the one God nor is he a sinful human. He is the one perfect human who can act as the bridge or mediator between God and sinful humans. Trinitarians claim that Jesus, on the basis of a philosophical notion of essences, must be part of both sides. In reality a mediator acts âbetweenâ two parties and is not part of either, as Paul points out in Gal 3.20
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
Some JW teachings thatâs no doubt true, Phizzy. However the view of Jesus as distinct and subordinate to God is so clear I think itâs the straightforward reading. How anyone can read passages like 1 Tim 2.5 and still conclude God is a trinity is the true mystery.
For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
I think the Bible is entirely clear that Jesus was created by God and is distinct from and subject to God. Thatâs what Christians believed until the fourth century. If you handed the Bible to somebody afresh without any history of dogma attached there is no way they would ever come up with a Trinitarian God of three coequal persons. Itâs a peculiar artefact of the particular philosophical and political interactions of fourth century Christianity.
The Bible explicitly says that God is one. (Gal 3.20)
It explicitly says that Jesus is the firstborn of all creation. (Col 1.15)
It explicitly says that Jesus is distinct from and subject to God. (1 Cor 11.3 and dozens of other verses)
There are no verses anywhere that say God consists of three coequal and coeternal persons, nothing even close to it.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
Eusebius of Caesarea argued similarly:
But the Father precedes the Son, and has preceded Him in existence, inasmuch as He alone is unbegotten. The One, perfect in Himself and first in order as Father, and the cause of the Son's existence, receives nothing towards the completeness of His Godhead from the Son: the Other, as a Son begotten of Him that caused His being, came second to Him, Whose Son He is, receiving from the Father both His Being, and the character of His Being .
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
Tertullian believed God always had his Reason or his Word AND that God was alone before he brought his Son into existence. He said both things and clearly believed both. Itâs only if you impose a strict idea that Word=Son that there is a problem and you have to negate one or the other of Tertullianâs statements. Tertullian made a distinction between Godâs Reason which he always had, and his Son which he brought into existence and thereby became a Father. Tertullian did believe that Jesus is divine in some sense, just as JWs do, even God from God, if you like. This sits alongside his view that there was a time when the Son didnât exist and that the Son is distinct from God and subordinate to him. Tertullian is eminently clear on these points:
I am, moreover, obliged to say this, when (extolling the Monarchy at the expense of the Economy) they contend for the identity of the Father and Son and Spirit, that it is not by way of diversity that the Son differs from the Father, but by distribution: it is not by division that He is different, but by distinction; because the Father is not the same as the Son, since they differ one from the other in the mode of their being. For the Father is the entire substance, but the Son is a derivation and portion of the whole, as He Himself acknowledges: My Father is greater than I. Against Praxeas 14
can anyone watch the whole of koyaanisqatsi are seriously not conclude that humanity doomed?
itâs simply the most incredible film.
i saw it first as a child, and i had the privilege of seeing it performed live by philip glass himself around ten years ago.
Can anyone watch the whole of Koyaanisqatsi are seriously not conclude that humanity doomed? Itâs simply the most incredible film. I saw it first as a child, and I had the privilege of seeing it performed live by Philip Glass himself around ten years ago.
I rewatched it today and I think itâs even more relevant today than itâs ever been, in view of impending doom by AI, world war, or both.
But as I was watching it this time, I noticed, and I was wondering, does anyone know, is the building in view at around 30 seconds in this part the old Watchtower building in Brooklyn?
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
rowan williams, the former archbishop of canterbury gave an interesting answer to the somewhat stark question, whatâs the point of us existing?
as a christian, my starting point is that we exist because the most fundamental form of activity, energy, call it what you like, that is there, is love.
that is, itâs a willingness that the other should be.
What Tertullian said about the subject (for some reason you avoid quoting the passage directly) was the following:
Because God is in like manner a Father, and He is also a Judge; but He has not always been Father and Judge, merely on the ground of His having always been God. For He could not have been the Father previous to the Son, nor a Judge previous to sin. There was, however, a time when neither sin existed with Him, nor the Son; the former of which was to constitute the Lord a Judge, and the latter a Father. In this way He was not Lord previous to those things of which He was to be the Lord. But He was only to become Lord at some future time: just as He became the Father by the Son, and a Judge by sin, so also did He become Lord by means of those things which He had made, in order that they might serve Him. Against Hermogenes 3
Who does Tertullian sound like here, someone who believes Jesus came into existence or a Trinitarian? If weâre being honest I think the answer is very obvious.
