Matt 8:11
11 I tell you, (A) many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven,
there is a scripture somewhere where god says " he has prepared a place in heaven for the faithful patriarchs of old abraham,isaac,jacob etc, what scripture is it and how do dubs explain it?
i never encountered it in any debating when i was a dub, i only used to remind my ex wife of it and she would just ignore me, surely this scripture is one of the most overwhelming counter doctrine pieces of text to disprove the little flock/great crowd in heaven anomaly.
Matt 8:11
11 I tell you, (A) many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven,
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
But Joseph
What I was showing is the oneness, as a husband and wife are one spiritual flesh. Although each have different roles and one is head over the other they share the same nature. My introduction of kids into this scenario was to expand more on role distinction yet sameness of nature. Perhaps I should have kept this to husband and wife, which the Bible calls one flesh. In the same way the Father and son are one, in a spiritual sense.
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
I will go on the ministry again but it will be outside
Outside? What do you mean by this and why?
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
ah, ok. Very nice.
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
Well said Sacolton
Acknowledging is not trusting. The demons do not trust Jesus- they are his enemy. Faith mixed with trust is what is needed.
By the way, what does sacolton mean?
for those of you who are interested, the project i've been working on for the last few months is finally finished.
i originally did a thread about it back in april: http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/156497/1.ashx.
it seems that alot of us still have family members in the religion and have not infrequent arguments with them about some of the beliefs and practices.
I think Reniaa would benefit from it. It owuld also make her a bit more informed before posting nonsense on here.
i thought after recently reading the bible i would put up for disussion some recent scriptures up which for me show that jesus never viewed himself as god and anyone listening would also see it this way too.. first mark 10 :17-20.
17as jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him.
"good teacher," he asked, "what must i do to inherit eternal life?
Great points StAnn...and to show distinction in roles yet equality in nature...
Let's take a family of four...2 children ages 10 and 18. The husband, as head, is the breadwinner. His wife, equal in nature, fulfils the roles as shopper, banker, cleaning/laundry, etc. She is just as human but submits to her husband's authority. She is lesser is authority. Both children have roles as students. They are still of the same nature but have chores. They are lesser in authority...perhaps the 10 yr old has a bedtime while the 18 yr old has a curfew and other house rules. All share the same nature...all can answer the doorbell or the phone but that fact that the 10 year old can not go out all hours of the night or the 18 year old can not drink beer does not make them of a lesser nature...simply positional.
i have these couple of jw's quoting this verse at me in an attempt to justify disfellowshipping, pair of morons.. in my letter i wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters.
otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.
11 but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.. why do they not see that these scriptures limit "sinful behaviour" to just a few behaviours, but not only that it doesn't say parents should shun their children.. can't believe how the wt misapplies some scripture and at the same time the individual jw just blindly follows.. just my rant for the day.. paul.
also...from the NWT
"But if anyone is not obedient to our word through this letter, keep this one marked, stop associating with him that he may become ashamed. And yet do not be considering him as an enemy, but continue admonishing him as a brother" (2 Thess. 3:14-15).
"Stop associating" in 2 Thes is the identical Greek word as 'quit mixing in company' in 1 Co 5:9. Check it out online at www.blueletterbile.org...go to that verse and go to "c" for concordance. Why does the WT translate differently? So you do not connect the 2 verses and see that one who you 'stop associating with' is still admonished as a brother. Then they claim with no basis whatsoever that 1 Co is speaking of gross sins while Thes is speaking of minor sins for marking.
i have these couple of jw's quoting this verse at me in an attempt to justify disfellowshipping, pair of morons.. in my letter i wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters.
otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.
11 but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.. why do they not see that these scriptures limit "sinful behaviour" to just a few behaviours, but not only that it doesn't say parents should shun their children.. can't believe how the wt misapplies some scripture and at the same time the individual jw just blindly follows.. just my rant for the day.. paul.
| 2Cr 2:5 | But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. |
| 2Cr 2:6 | Sufficient to such a man [is] this punishment, which [was inflicted] of many. |
| 2Cr 2:7 | So that contrariwise ye [ought] rather to forgive [him], and comfort [him], lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. |
i have these couple of jw's quoting this verse at me in an attempt to justify disfellowshipping, pair of morons.. in my letter i wrote you to quit mixing in company with fornicators, 10 not [meaning] entirely with the fornicators of this world or the greedy persons and extortioners or idolaters.
otherwise, you would actually have to get out of the world.
11 but now i am writing you to quit mixing in company with anyone called a brother that is a fornicator or a greedy person or an idolater or a reviler or a drunkard or an extortioner, not even eating with such a man.. why do they not see that these scriptures limit "sinful behaviour" to just a few behaviours, but not only that it doesn't say parents should shun their children.. can't believe how the wt misapplies some scripture and at the same time the individual jw just blindly follows.. just my rant for the day.. paul.
notice the 'reinstatement' in 2nd Cor. It is called the 'rebuke given by the MAJORITY"..not all. Obviously up to the individual. No mentioned of then shunning that minority who did not disfellowship this man.