Posts by Hellrider

44

My Story..... Need advice on reinstatement Letter.

by jrjr4189 in

i've been a member of the site for a month, but have been reading the posts for a lot longer, however this is my first post.

i was raised a j-dub by my mother (my father wasn't religious) with my sister and brother.

i was pretty much convinced by my dub friends, bible study conductor, and mother that i should get baptized when i was 15 and decided to go for it.

Hellrider

jr:

Even though I totally do not believe the doctrine or want to be a part of the organization I think I may get reinsated just so I can associate freely with my family

Will that be enough? Can you pretend to be in the "truth" when you heart and brain tells you it`s all a big lie? What about meetings? Plan to go? If you don`t, what will happen then? Elders visits? Concerned calls? What about your wife. Are you going to drag her into it too? What about your children, or future children? What about a normal childhood for them? Birthdays, christmas, not feeling left out at a school, not feeling weird, abnormal, not like the other kids.
You have a lot to think about. Go with your heart. Stand up for yourself, don`t live in the shadow of your mother and siblings. Talk to your dad about all this.

17

?? The gospel accounts read entirely different regarding the resurection??

by Lady Liberty in

last night i recieved a call from my sister and she told me to compare the last chapters of each gospel regarding the resurection of jesus.

she said she was blown away to read that they all had drastic differences.

i haven't had the time to compare this yet, but have any of you discovered this?

Hellrider

LoL. Except for that the verses rules out that puzzle:

The gardener is shocked and tells her to let go of him. John 20:17:

20:16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned and said to him in Aramaic,“Rabboni” (which means Teacher). 20:17 Jesus replied,“Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my Father. Go to my brothers and tell them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’”

13

NEWS BIG- Church and (pedophile) secrecy

by DannyHaszard in

the church and secrecy

jamaica gleaner, jamaica - 1 hour ago .

... but, what many don't realise is that the jehovah's witnesses have also been the subject of many scandals in the united states and the united kingdom involving ...

Hellrider

This was so good:

If a wicked and murderous leader like Ahab could repent and be accepted by God; if David could kill a faithful warrior of God (Uriah) and commit adultery with his wife and still retain his kingly throne; if Noah could be involved in a drunken stupor with his daughters and if Jesus could associate with prostitutes and say He did not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance

The thing is, the sickos use this! They do their dirty deeds involving children, and then they "repent" afterwards. And with a sigh "Even David sinned", etc. Just repent, and then do it again. And again and again and again. And when I now point this out, if some jw reads this, he/she will think "yes, it`s true, but thos that do this and then pretend to repent afterwards, they are not true christians...Jehovah knows what`s in their heart, and will judge them accordingly". Well, guess what: That won`t do shit for the kids, will it? That won`t stop the pedos, will it? And so, the sickos will be allowed to continue destroying childhoods and lives. Wake up! Only the police can stop them! And you all know it. Ask yourself: What would Jesus do? I tell you, he`d be on the phone calling the cops before you could say "Watchtower legal department".

17

?? The gospel accounts read entirely different regarding the resurection??

by Lady Liberty in

last night i recieved a call from my sister and she told me to compare the last chapters of each gospel regarding the resurection of jesus.

she said she was blown away to read that they all had drastic differences.

i haven't had the time to compare this yet, but have any of you discovered this?

Hellrider

I read thru the christian explanations in the links that Jgnat posted. The point of the author seemed to be that the seeming inconsistencies could be explained by such things as the differences in focus of the authors, etc. But that doesn`t explain the points raised by Narkissos and Leolaia, that the stories in the different gospels rules out the description of events in (some of) the others.

And Shazard: That would be ok if it was written by men, wouldn`t it? But not if it was written by God...At least it shows that the view of the Bible that every word in it comes directly from God, isn`t true (in my opinion).

4

Child Of The Mighty Tower

by Bryan in

child of the mighty tower

im unaware of my legs and my arms are as clusters of suspension wires steadying the golden gate.

as my mind screams in fear, begging me to escape even with only half a life, i feel the lone drop of sweat cascade under my shirt down my side to my belt.

Hellrider

I have a sleep-disorder that sets in as I am trying to go to sleep, called R.I.P (ironically enough), Relaxation Induced Panic. It works like this: As I am starting to relax and fading away into the darkness, I panic. Actually, I often sream out loud "NOOO, WAKE UP!", and I sit up in bed slapping my own face in this halfsleep. Falling asleep feels like dying to me, and that makes me panic. Disappearing into the darkness. Loosing consciousness! It makes me panic. And the worst part: There is nothing to be done about it, it`s an anxiety-related disorder. Sleeping problems sucks. So let`s just stay up all night instead

30

Is Prince Still a Jehova's Witness?

by Silvia Plath in

.

has anyone heard of what happened with prince being a jehova's witness if he still is or not?

and how is he pursuing his music career while doing it?

Hellrider

Holy cow, she is one of the most beatiful girls I`ve ever seen. Looks a bit like Nelly Furtado.

His wife's website doesn't look very "witnessy"

Wheres that website?

49

How Does the WT Explain this verse

by XBEHERE in

(john 2:18-22) 18 therefore, in answer, the jews said to him: "what sign have you to show us, since you are doing these things?

" 19 in answer jesus said to them: "break down this temple, and in three days i will raise it up.

" 20 therefore the jews said: "this temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?

Hellrider

Since John says that Jesus was involved in his own resurrection and Romans says the Spirit was involved and other passages say the Father was involved, why do we need to insist that only the Father was involved?

Because that would smell of trinitarianism. And anti-trinitarians will have none of that. That`s why they insist on explaining away/twisting the scriptures that goes against the scriptures that says The Father did it.

49

How Does the WT Explain this verse

by XBEHERE in

(john 2:18-22) 18 therefore, in answer, the jews said to him: "what sign have you to show us, since you are doing these things?

" 19 in answer jesus said to them: "break down this temple, and in three days i will raise it up.

" 20 therefore the jews said: "this temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?

Hellrider

Leolaia:

Hellrider....Everyone is certainly justified in pointing out that throughout most of the NT and especially in the Pauline letters, Jesus is depicted as raised by God. This was the dominant view and it reflects Paul's view of Christ as subject to God

I know this. Like I said to Fjoth:

People who view the Bible as Gods word (each and every word that is in it), will never admit that there is historical development within the Bible itself, a historical development that makes the interpretation-work very, very difficult. I can accept that some people can`t swallow that

Some of Pauls letters are the oldest texts of the NT, and are low-Chistological. Later on, in the texts of the Johannine community, Christ is given a much higher status. The view that Christ raised himself (in John) isn`t so strange, as it appears in John. I would never try to make it appear as if this could be found in Pauls letters too. But my discussion with Fjoth is about an overall view of the Bible and the Trinity. He would never admit that your view is correct either, btw (the view that each text must be viewed on its own, and that an overall doctrine that aims at embracing the entire Bible, is...impossible? ) I was trying to debate Fjoth on this "common" ground, but I now realise that it doesn`t work. But yes, I am aware that Pauls view is that the Father raised him. And I believe that the best "overall view/ doctrine" on the Bible (if we are going to have develop one...personally I don`t think it`s necessary, but I believe that if you are going to do it, only the trinity can explain cerrtain inconsistencies), then the trinity is the way to go.

49

How Does the WT Explain this verse

by XBEHERE in

(john 2:18-22) 18 therefore, in answer, the jews said to him: "what sign have you to show us, since you are doing these things?

" 19 in answer jesus said to them: "break down this temple, and in three days i will raise it up.

" 20 therefore the jews said: "this temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?

Hellrider

Fjoth:

you yourself admitted that there is "an essence of metaphor" in John 2:19.

You have misread me. No, there is no essence of a metaphor in John 2:19 in the text given to the reader! There was a very clear and strong metaphor in what Jesus said to the jews present, that they did not understand, but that is irrelevant to the passage as whole not being a metaphor, as the lack of understanding (on behalf of the jews hearing Jesus say this) is explained in the verse to the reader! If you are unable to understand that, then that is not my problem. Here, have a closer look at the passage, and try again.

(John 2:18-22) 18 Therefore, in answer, the Jews said to him: "What sign have you to show us, since you are doing these things?" 19 In answer Jesus said to them: "Break down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." 20 Therefore the Jews said: "This temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?" 21 But he was talking about the temple of his body. 22 When, though, he was raised up from the dead, his disciples called to mind that he used to say this; and they believed the Scripture and the saying that Jesus said.

You accuse me of not answering you properly, but you still haven`t come up with a satisfactory explanation of the I-will-raise-it-up, statement, as it is clear here that there is nothng in this passage that indicates that Jesus is here speaking as an agent of God (by the way, in most of the places where this occurs, it is explained to the reader, or it becomes evident in some other way). And you have made no attempt of explaining John 10:17-18

"Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father."
...either. Who took his life back here? Was it the Father or the Son?

49

How Does the WT Explain this verse

by XBEHERE in

(john 2:18-22) 18 therefore, in answer, the jews said to him: "what sign have you to show us, since you are doing these things?

" 19 in answer jesus said to them: "break down this temple, and in three days i will raise it up.

" 20 therefore the jews said: "this temple was built in forty-six years, and will you raise it up in three days?

Hellrider

No, I admit I can`t really explain Galatians 1:1 in light of trinitarian doctrine. By the way, I have never said that ""God the Son raised Jesus without any help from his God and Father". The Bible clearly teaches that the authority to do this, was given to Jesus by his Father in heaven. I can try to give an explanation, but I doubt you will give it any credit: When Paul writes "Paul, an apostle—sent not from men nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead" (by the way, why does he write "God the Father", unless he also believed that there was a "God the Son"?), his intentions are not to say anything about doctrine, but to place the reader in a state of awe: This was written at a time when christianity was in a state of flux. Were the Galatians on the verge of turning away from Pauls leadership? That could definitely be the case. If Paul had just written that he was sent by Jesus Christ (who raised himself from the dead), then this wouldn`t necessarily have had the same effect on the readers, this, at a time when christianity was still in its cradle, and none of the christians were able to agree upon what exactly Jesus was! Was he God? Man? God-man? An angel? What if there were certain members of the Galatian community that believed he was just a man. A Messiah, but not sendt directly from the heavens? Pauls point here is to emphasise the connection between God the father and Jesus Christ . Yes, he is Paul, and he has authority, given to him directly by God in heaven (an extremely powerful statement to the reader of the day) via the ressurected Son. His point is to emphasise his own God-given authority, his status as an Apostle, and his Christ-centered message. The words "Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead" is an anti-thesis placing the risen Christ on the side of God, and this risen Lord had directly commisioned Paul. To challenge Paul, would be to challenge the Lord that had commisioned him. And not just that, it would to also challenge God himself!

I doubt that this will impress you much, though, but this is how I would explain it. People who view the Bible as Gods word (each and every word that is in it), will never admit that there is historical development within the Bible itself, a historical development that makes the interpretation-work very, very difficult. I can accept that some people can`t swallow that. But it also sets us worlds apart, with no common ground, and that makes the discussion very difficult. Some christians can accept this continous development thruout the Bible, though, and still believe. I have to say, I admire them more.