the wts takes great pride in announcing that because they go from door-to-door to preach their beliefs, that they are "chosen" by god to represent him--the only ones who have the right to do so.. very misleading advertising, imho.
the facts being, that followers of jesus worldwide are living their lives in the true meaning of his teachings as they unselfishly give of themselves every day.. my understanding of "true" christianity vastly differs from that of the watchtower society.
my reasoning is this;.
the christians i have met since i have been out, seem to live up to this description. and the christians on JWD are da best.
TS,
I hope every Christian who has encountered you appreciates this statement. The ultimate joy would come if you ever write "Jesus: my Lord and my God!"
Mike
ok i just have a few questions ive always wanted to ask.
this is open to non christians as well.
can christians actually somehow communicate with the lord like ive heard and read so many times.
Faith, I think most of us understand what you're saying. It would be nice, but in a place like this, with so many members with different viewpoints, any statement, especially one of opinion or belief, is subject to scrutiny. In a free country, that has always been true in any open forum, but it seems even more so in the post-Watergate era. You're not going to get what you would expect in a group where everybody shares the same perspective, such as in a small church group.
If this forum is a family, it's a somewhat dysfunctional one.
It would be like Gov. Schwarzenegger holding a public forum and expecting the same reception he would get at those $1000/plate dinners he holds.
ok i just have a few questions ive always wanted to ask.
this is open to non christians as well.
can christians actually somehow communicate with the lord like ive heard and read so many times.
Faith,
I hope you stick around, understanding that while you have something to offer that your feel others can benefit from, not everyone will be interested. I know that hurts, but that's how it is in the world, and why should it be any different here? It's too easy to get defensive; if we have something good to offer, let's just put it out there. If others don't like it--well, it's nothing personal, right? If it's too much of a problem for us, we should examine our motives for getting involved.
Ticker,
Hope these help you. Hearing from God doesn't have to mean in an audible voice.
Kim Norris,
Great to see an attorney in here. Maybe someday we can get a discussion going on historical evidence for the Bible.
Pete,
I bet you didn't see the complement I paid you in a recent thread. Narkissos appreciated his.
ok i just have a few questions ive always wanted to ask.
this is open to non christians as well.
can christians actually somehow communicate with the lord like ive heard and read so many times.
Some may have the idea that, for Christians, God's direction and leading is always nice and soft and comforting. Not so! The challenges and corrections are sometimes difficult to accept, and can be made more so by our resistance. It can be a hard road because we are imperfect and, in that imperfection, would like to be left alone to live our lives in a way that is comfortable to us. Sometimes, the comfort for us comes just in knowing that God cares enough to point us in the right direction.
Upside/down, I appreciate what you are saying. The bulk of our understanding comes from the Scriptures, and we always have to be careful about claims made--people have started cults and committed murders based on what they claim to have heard God tell them. Still, I think there is such a thing as being directed by God. We need to evaluate things based on whether or not it is consistent with what is revealed in Scripture.
Faith, that's quite a testimony! Understand that many of the members here have come out of an organization that dictated their thinking for the organization's own purpose. They're not going to allow themselves to be sucked in to something again, especially something that sounds much like what they left. My advice is to just present your case, support it as well as you can, and let it stand on it's own merit. I always say, "You never know who's watching, what they are thinking, or what they will remember."
ok i just have a few questions ive always wanted to ask.
this is open to non christians as well.
can christians actually somehow communicate with the lord like ive heard and read so many times.
Sometimes, appropriate answers come in unexpected ways from external sources.
This is my take on it: How does spiritual communication enter the conscious mind? Some people have a better ability regarding this than others. God sends answers--it's our ability to receive and recognize those answers that is in question. The means He uses depends a lot on us. Then, of course, the question is: what do we do with the answer--do we act on it?
i enjoy discussing god with people from all walks of life & all beliefs.
this is just something that has been skipping about in my brain...is it possible that god appeared to different cultures as different gods????
to the jews of the ancient days he appeared as yahweh, to the buddhist as budda, to the christians as jesus, to the moselim as allah etc etc.. i know the witnesses taught that everyone doesn't worship the true god & not all religions lead to god.
LouBelle,
Did you modify your profile biography? I seem to remember there was something joyful about it before that's not there now. Was it my imagination?
i've seen several comments about trinity, so here goes another one: .
please read again genesis 1:26
this is very interesting paragraph and many times is being used as a proof of trinity as it says let us create .
Hi zagor,
I glanced over your post. It was rather lengthy, so I copied it. I am not familiar with some of the things you mentioned, and will need time to look them over.
In the meantime, I can say that although I'm not a Hebrew scholar, there are some who are that hold to the position on ehad that I proposed. I could post more references, but they say basically the same thing, and ones you will post will probably be basically the same as the one you put up. I will look into it further for my own info, but I think I can see what's happening here.
That ehad is translated as one is not in question. Neither is the fact that it can mean a single unit, or a collection of individual units that make a whole one. What seems to be the issue is, "What does it mean here?" and, if it’s a collective unit, "Does it support the trinity or, at least, a plurality within one God?" The conclusions drawn by the scholars look like they depend on each person's preconceived idea. Those supporting Jesus as in one with YHWH would translate ehad as a collective one to show that there is a plurality within YHWH--that ehad supports the deity of Jesus. Jewish scholars will insist the word should be understood to mean singularity, and, therefore, cannot be used to support Jesus as divine. Since both sides have historically been at odds on this and other issues, their interpretations may even be somewhat affected by their rejection of the other's overall perspective--"If the other side believes this, then we must take the opposite position because, of course, they are wrong and we are right." Consequently, I don't think anything can be accomplished here after all. It wouldn’t do any good to turn this into “dueling experts” where each side attempts to justify itself by the number and significance of credentials their experts have. It appears to be, like so much else, open to interpretation. That also means we cannot know for certain what the author of the original manuscript meant by the use of the word. Also, if we allow for divine influence in the choice of the words, then the author could have chosen this word without understanding the all ramifications of it. It’s just another one of those issues on which we will have to agree to disagree.
This text is not essential to supporting the case of Jesus as one with YHWH anyway.
no longer being a christian, it has become a mind opening experience to look back and see certian things i once ignored or just brushed off.
yet now i can not help but see these things and wonder why other christians do not.. if you have ever studied greek, roman or any other cultures religions in history.
then you have no doubt read their legends, about gods and how things came to be, and no doubt you have enjoyed these and at the same time you must have wondered how people actually bought this enough to make it a religion.
LittleToe,
Oh God! is a movie made back in the 70s. God (played by George Burns) reveals himself to a store clerk (played by John Denver) and directs him to tell the world that he is alive and well and cares about man. It takes a sometimes-humorous, sometimes-serious look at what would happen if God appeared to someone, and how that person would be perceived by others. Most are skeptical, and the religious leaders are upset that they weren't chosen for the manifestation. In the end, God clearly demonstrates some of his powers in a courtroom full of people, yet the judge refuses to accept that God had really appeared. I think there were two sequels to this movie.
i can think of dozens of ways that he could have done things so much better regarding letting the world know about him, if he is indeed omnimax. if he isn't omnimax, why would he deserve to be worshiped, or even revered?
I'd like to comment on this also. One of the objections I commonly hear and read is along the lines of, "If God wanted the world to believe he exists, why doesn't he just open up the skies and clearly reveal himself?"
If the God of the Bible really exists as He is described, then He is certainly capable of such an act. I would submit, however, that God is not after quantity when it comes to those who will accept him. I know that 1 Tim. 2:4 states that God "wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth," but I see problems with this universal revelation.
First, to require God to perform this in order to believe Him is putting acceptance of Him on OUR terms. From what the Bible teaches, we are clearly in no position to dictate terms. He has the power, not us. To me, this seems like a situation where a person finds someone drowning and wants to save him, and the person drowning says, "I will accept your offer IF..."
Second, it is not as if God were some ancient military commander going out to recruit troops because he needs them to win the battle. This God is self-sufficient--He doesn't NEED us to sustain Him. We are not doing Him a favor by accepting Him--He is the one doing us a favor. So, again, how can we dictate terms?
Finally, and most critically, God has determined, for whatever reason, that people who come to Him must do it by faith--that is, by believing that He has said something and will bring that to pass. That's how it's always been, even in the OT. Sometimes people got direct communication from God, but mostly the communication was relayed by annointed messengers--prophets and apostles. People were expected to believe the messages of these representatives just as if it came from God Himself directly. Our Bible is a collection of these communications in written form, and that is what we have, and, perhaps with few exceptions, that is all we have. This is the way He has given us. If God were to appear before all of us, it would no longer require faith--we would know. Faith is a risk, sure, but it's not blind faith--the claims of the Bible can be supported. Of course, even if God did reveal Himself openly and unmistakeably, wouldn't there still be people who would not accept it--claiming it was an illusion, a trick, or some kind of natural phenomenon?
I realize this opens up the issue of false prophets and interpretations, but there are guidelines for exercising discernment. I just want to make the point that it is faith--and faith properly directed--that this God of the Bible is asking for. When He finally does reveal Himself openly, it will be too late to choose because it will no longer be a matter of faith.
Maybe it's because having faith requires a condition of the heart and mind that He looks for. To be convinced through sensory input doesn't necessarily inspire devotion: "I guess I have to accept it--I have no choice, but I don't like it." I'm not saying it's this way for every skeptic; some would really like to believe, and just need a little confirmation. Sometimes, God does accomodate these desires, but one has to be able to recognize it when it comes.
i enjoy discussing god with people from all walks of life & all beliefs.
this is just something that has been skipping about in my brain...is it possible that god appeared to different cultures as different gods????
to the jews of the ancient days he appeared as yahweh, to the buddhist as budda, to the christians as jesus, to the moselim as allah etc etc.. i know the witnesses taught that everyone doesn't worship the true god & not all religions lead to god.
LouBelle,
Jesus instructed his disciples to take his message out into the world--that means to places where other religions existed. When Paul came to a Gentile culture that had their own religion, he didn't offer to help them find their way within their own religion. No, he proclaimed the God of Abraham--through whom all nations would be blessed--and then Jesus, the Saviour and judge of the earth.
Everyone is certainly free to come to their own conclusions. I just wanted to make sure this plate was on the table and the choice was clear.
i enjoy discussing god with people from all walks of life & all beliefs.
this is just something that has been skipping about in my brain...is it possible that god appeared to different cultures as different gods????
to the jews of the ancient days he appeared as yahweh, to the buddhist as budda, to the christians as jesus, to the moselim as allah etc etc.. i know the witnesses taught that everyone doesn't worship the true god & not all religions lead to god.
Hi LouBelle,
This is a popular idea that's been around for a long time. In the Biblical Christian perspective, it can't work, however. The NT teaches that Jesus died to pay for people's sins. If there was another way to reach God--by keeping the Hebrew laws, by mediation, by holy war, or whatever, why would Jesus have to die? Why not another way? Paul went into the Gentile world to preach the gospel of Jesus because there was no other way for them to the real God.
People accuse Christianity of being exclusive. Well, it is if one is going to adhere to the canonical Bible as authoritative. As Peter is recorded to have said, "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12).
