Terry, off topic
Just wondering if you have read God Against the Gods by Johnathan Kirsh?
is this the best of all possible worlds?.
if it isn't, wouldn't that be the best possible proof that a benevolent and all-powerful deity had nothing to do with creating it?.
if a loving and benevolent creator was going to create a world--why make one with a built-in self-destruct mechanism??.
Terry, off topic
Just wondering if you have read God Against the Gods by Johnathan Kirsh?
is this the best of all possible worlds?.
if it isn't, wouldn't that be the best possible proof that a benevolent and all-powerful deity had nothing to do with creating it?.
if a loving and benevolent creator was going to create a world--why make one with a built-in self-destruct mechanism??.
Interesting Terry
is this the best of all possible worlds?.
if it isn't, wouldn't that be the best possible proof that a benevolent and all-powerful deity had nothing to do with creating it?.
if a loving and benevolent creator was going to create a world--why make one with a built-in self-destruct mechanism??.
Look at the bible, if that is not a FAIL, I don't know what is.
Look at all the things that must take place before peace is allowed to be on the earth.
It never once says, this does not have to happen, but all these things must happen.
No wonder why some people don't even try to make things better.
They can't!!! If you believe the bible.
purps
I agree, aging is very sobering.
It came in some increments for me but then bam it was here.
I am freaking old, there is no turning back so many things.
I think to do it gracefully is not to fight it, embrace it as much as you can.
Take the collective of all you learned over the past years to good use.
Be thankful you still have a mind because of the things your body can't do anymore.
Find people that are not all caught up in the youth hype, that makes it easier too.
and for gods sake, don't wear hot pants!
purps
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
I think I'll get a tattoo of a snake on a cross with blood dripping from his fangs...
ohhhh sexy, and with that parrot on your shoulder and eye patch, even better...
hope you have it all ready when the elders visit!!!!
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
http://www.gotquestions.org/snake-handling.html
Question: "What does the Bible say about snake handling? Should we be handling snakes in church?"
Answer: Mark 16:17-18 records, “and these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will … pick up snakes with their hands.” As a result of this text, there are some churches that practice snake handling. During church services, people actually handle poisonous snakes, supposedly giving evidence that they are true believers who are empowered and protected by God. Is that what Mark 16:17-18 is really instructing us to do?
First, it is very important to remember that there are some questions regarding whether Mark chapter 16, verses 9-20 belong in the Bible. There is some evidence that these verses were not originally part of the Gospel of Mark. Some of the oldest and most reliable Greek manuscripts of the Gospel of Mark do not contain verses 9-20. Some other manuscripts contain Mark 16:9-20 , but set them apart from the rest of the Gospel of Mark. As a result, it is not wise to use anything from Mark 16:9-20 as the sole basis for a doctrine or practice. Snake handling is one such example of a dubious concept from Mark 16:9-20 . For more information, please read Should Mark 16:9-20 be in the Bible?.
If we assume, despite the evidence to the contrary, that Mark 16:17-18 does belong in Scripture, does it teach that we should be handling snakes in church? The answer to that question is a definitive no. Mark 16:17-18 does not contain any imperatives. It does not say, “Go out and handle snakes.” It says “they will pick up snakes with their hands.” It is describing something that will occur, not commanding that something should occur. An example of this is the Apostle Paul in Acts 28:3-5 , “Paul gathered a pile of brushwood and, as he put it on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand … But Paul shook the snake off into the fire and suffered no ill effects.” Notice that Paul did not seek out to handle a snake. The snake bit Paul, but God protected Paul from the effects of the snake bite. Mark 16:17-18 is saying that if you are faithfully serving God in the spread of the Gospel, He can protect you from anything that may cross your path.
If the snake handling churches were consistent, they would also follow the second part of Mark 16:18 , “…and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all.” Scripture is consistent that God can and will protect us, according to His will, as we are serving Him. Scripture is also consistent that we are not to put the Lord to the test ( Exodus 17:2 ; Matthew 4:7 ). Just as Jesus refused to jump off the pinnacle of the temple, even though God would send angels to protect Jesus, so are we to not intentionally put ourselves in situations that require God’s miraculous intervention. First Corinthians 10:9 , while not speaking directly of snake handling in churches, says it best, “We should not test the Lord, as some of them did — and were killed by snakes.”
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
I had a started a thread about this some time back,
The article is off the net and all the comments to the thread are gone.
It was not a very great discussion but I wish I could refer back to it.
Back then my thoughts were, snake-handling was outlawed as it was dangerous and could lead to death and maybe some day refusing blood would be outlawed too as it can lead to death too.
I think/hope someday the refusal of blood will look just as silly and superstitious as some other religious practices.
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
I guess it was not a fair comparison on my part
as I was comparing the two as a religious practice and a belief.
But when snake handling is as a form of idoltry,
abstaining from blood would not be considered the same thing.
Still, I found the last sentence ironic,
Surely, handling snakes and possibly suffering pain, sickness and even death as a result is not
what Jehovah and Jesus desire.
As long as it is worship to Jehovah it is ok any suffering, pain, sickness or death that occurs.
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
Here is the full article.
this is a scan from the march 2010 awake.
i thought it ironic that jehovah would not want people to handle snakes to worship.
him because it might cause suffering, pain, and even death, but would want his followers to refuse blood that can cause the .
Mark 16:17, 18 from NWT
Furthermore, these signs will accompany those believing: By the use of my name they will expel demons, they will speak in tongues, 18 and with their hands they will pick up serpents, and if they drink anything deadly it will not hurt them at all. They will lay their hands upon sick persons, and these will become well."