Posts by corproal

44

Jesus no longer really "a god"?

by M.J. in

i saw the latest wt magazine released this week.

i don't have it on me but on the cover it asks the question, "is there only one true god?".

skimming the story inside i noticed they quoted the verse in isaiah where it mentions there is only one god and there never was or will be a god alongside him.. "hmm," i wondered, "how will they reconcile this with john 1:1?".

corproal

How dare these fools.

They are quick to quote apostate material to suit their agenda.

"The basic Greek word for "only-begotten" used for Jesus and Isaac is mo·no·ge·nes', from mo'nos, meaning "only," and gi'no·mai, a root word meaning "to generate," "to become (come into being)," states Strong's Exhaustive Concordance. Hence, mo·no·ge·nes' is defined as: "Only born, only begotten, i.e. an only child."—A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament, by E. Robinson.

The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, edited by Gerhard Kittel, says: "[Mo·no·ge·nes'] means 'of sole descent,' i.e., without brothers or sisters." This book also states that at John 1:18 ; 3:16 , 18 ; and 1 John 4:9 , "the relation of Jesus is not just compared to that of an only child to its father. It is the relation of the only-begotten to the Father." "

they are however dishonest with their quotes as usual.Here's what's actually written.

Thayer's Lexicon (Help)

44

Jesus no longer really "a god"?

by M.J. in

i saw the latest wt magazine released this week.

i don't have it on me but on the cover it asks the question, "is there only one true god?".

skimming the story inside i noticed they quoted the verse in isaiah where it mentions there is only one god and there never was or will be a god alongside him.. "hmm," i wondered, "how will they reconcile this with john 1:1?".

corproal

Here's what I find rather pathetic reasoning.

How Much Was the Ransom?

ONE of the main reasons why Jesus came to earth also has a direct bearing on the Trinity. The Bible states: "There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, a man, Christ Jesus, who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all."— 1 Timothy 2:5, 6 .

Jesus, no more and no less than a perfect human, became a ransom that compensated exactly for what Adam lost—the right to perfect human life on earth. So Jesus could rightly be called "the last Adam" by the apostle Paul, who said in the same context: "Just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive." ( 1 Corinthians 15:22 , 45 ) The perfect human life of Jesus was the "corresponding ransom" required by divine justice—no more, no less. A basic principle even of human justice is that the price paid should fit the wrong committed.

If Jesus, however, were part of a Godhead, the ransom price would have been infinitely higher than what God's own Law required. ( Exodus 21:23-25 ; Leviticus 24:19-21 ) It was only a perfect human, Adam, who sinned in Eden, not God. So the ransom, to be truly in line with God's justice, had to be strictly an equivalent—a perfect human, "the last Adam." Thus, when God sent Jesus to earth as the ransom, he made Jesus to be what would satisfy justice, not an incarnation, not a god-man, but a perfect man, "lower than angels." ( Hebrews 2:9 ; compare Psalm 8:5, 6 .) How could any part of an almighty Godhead—Father, Son, or holy spirit—ever be lower than angels?

This from their web-site.

http://www.watchtower.org/library/ti/article_05.htm

114

Do you support gay marriage?

by chappy in

is your belief moral, social or practical?

would you feel the same way if there were absolutely no religious influence on the matter pro or con?.

regardless of your belief, does every adult have a fundimental right to marry anyone of his or her choosing, regardless of gender?.

corproal

Would your support extend to multiple partners, ie: bigamy?
What about individuals wanting to "marry" non-humans? This question isn't meant to stir up dissent. Fact is there are individuals who will raise this issue in the future and it will have to be addressed.

This has nothing to do with gay marriage rights. Is this supposed to defend the "sacred act of matrimony"? By comparing gay marriage to bigamy and animals ( non humans? )

That's insulting and offensive and I do hope that wasn't your intent.

Dams

OOPs posted before I was ready. I don't see anything insulting in the comment highlighted above. The question posted is legit.Where do you draw the line concerning marriage? I for one don't support gay marriage,but if they allow it what can I do? I just get tired of hearing those in the gay community comparing themselves to blacks when it came to basic rights. Craig

114

Do you support gay marriage?

by chappy in

is your belief moral, social or practical?

would you feel the same way if there were absolutely no religious influence on the matter pro or con?.

regardless of your belief, does every adult have a fundimental right to marry anyone of his or her choosing, regardless of gender?.

corproal

Would your support extend to multiple partners, ie: bigamy?
What about individuals wanting to "marry" non-humans? This question isn't meant to stir up dissent. Fact is there are individuals who will raise this issue in the future and it will have to be addressed.

This has nothing to do with gay marriage rights. Is this supposed to defend the "sacred act of matrimony"? By comparing gay marriage to bigamy and animals ( non humans? )

That's insulting and offensive and I do hope that wasn't your intent.

Dams

27

NEW HEAVENS AND NEW EARTH

by Raphael in

any one done some research on the above from a non jw view:.

some points of view suggest that at some point all the barriers that prohibit movement between the physical world and the spritual will be removed and that glorified bodies will allow us to materialize and dematerialize at will and to transfer as it were between the various dimensions that exist in our universe and beyond, and in this sense "god brings together all things in christ, both things on the earth and things in the heavens" and also in this sense new jerusalem comes down from heaven and god himself resides with them".. and so in this way also will those who dwell in the heavens enjoy access to the physical world in order to enjoy the whole of creation including the animal world.. .

any other points view ??.

corproal

G'day Nudeman,

I have done extensive research in this area as part of recovery from a destructive christian cult. Here are some truths that lead to everlasting secular freedom:

The Bible God was an invention of power hungry men.

Christ was an invention of apostate Paul.

Jerusalem is severly overated (I leave the explaination as to why the F^@# everyone from the French Fascists to Chinese Pentecostals are investing so much emotional energy in desiring to one day control that particular piece of crap real estate to those trained in the fine art of psychiatry.)

There ain't no sky daddy gona save us bro.

cheers unclebruce

PS: If you are a Biblenut, Brooklyn Scholar or Jesus Freak these brief pearls of wisdom just whistled through the old heavens waaay

What ever you say .

It is quite interesting to see some label others as nuts or Jesus Freaks. If you feel you don't need Jesus ,well that's how you feel,but to cast a label on those who may not feel the same as you is quite childish.

Is this what you do when others don't happen to share your viewpoints?

Craig(of the Jesus Freak Class)

35

Speaking in tongues

by Stewart75 in

there's something which has crossed my mind too often, after doing some research, meeting people myself- i have become more convinced that speaking in tongues was mis interpretered wrongly by the pentecostals.

i would be interested to hear jw's view of speaking in tongues and why jehovah witness classify them as one of the christodom.

which of their any of their customs/traditions which bible doesnt support, i am just trying to make myself aware, with help if possible.. clarification would be much appreciated

corproal

You are correct in your interpretation of tongues.Many of these televagelists are what are commonly known as faith healers.I say they're crooks.

enough said.

Craig

11

The Atheist's Book of Bible Stories - new - It Brings Bad Things to Life

by RunningMan in

it brings bad things to life

in the future, religious groups will get mad at me, thus boosting my book sales.

scott adams, the dilbert future., p 111.

corproal

IP_SEC,

I read every word Runningman posted.

It still boils down tohim blaming religion.

11

The Atheist's Book of Bible Stories - new - It Brings Bad Things to Life

by RunningMan in

it brings bad things to life

in the future, religious groups will get mad at me, thus boosting my book sales.

scott adams, the dilbert future., p 111.

corproal

I meant religion.

11

The Atheist's Book of Bible Stories - new - It Brings Bad Things to Life

by RunningMan in

it brings bad things to life

in the future, religious groups will get mad at me, thus boosting my book sales.

scott adams, the dilbert future., p 111.

corproal

What a crock.

Blaming relion for all the social ill.s you can do better than this I hope.

23

The Atheist's Book of Bible Stories - new - Bible Science

by RunningMan in

well, i'm back with a couple of new chapters.

i have been putting this one off for a long time.

so, please feel free to post any biblical science errors that you know of.

corproal

The point I was trying to illustrate in my first post is ,to belittle another person because he or she happens to believe in a creator makes you really look childish.If you choose to not believe ,cracking jokes and poking fun at an individual does nothing to further your cause.I'd be more inclined to listen to what you have to say if you went about it in a respectful amnner.

Craig