Posts by Hellrider

18

ATTENTION GUITAR PLAYERS and MUSIC FANS!!!!!!! Watch THIS!!!!!!!

by lowden in

i've been playing for 27yrs but this.......is awesome!!!.

have a cushion under your jaw 'cos it's gonna drop with some force.. i've seen this 'new wave' of tapping style before...but not like this guy.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abndgwfg22k.

peace.

Hellrider

Holy cow, that was awesome. I play too, I`ve been playing for 15 years, but I`ve never seen anything like that before.

41

SCARY(actually hilarious) JW Urban Legends (smurf content)

by *jeremiah* in

does anyone have any dub urban legend stories?.

i remember a story running rampant when i was in my pre-teenage years that went a little something like this:.

word on the street was that a young child went to the circuit assembly with his parents.

Hellrider

Hellrider, you sound like the sort of person who would turn an old Beatles album backwards on the turntable to hear the satanic imprinted message hidden thereupon...

He he, no, but anyone who was 10 years old in 1983 would automatically be fascinated by KISS. Those scary masks, catching tunes, cool costumes, fireworks on stage...they rocked, man. I got to see them live around six years ago, but I think I had gotten to old, it wasn`t as fantastic as I had imagined 20 years ago. Well, well.

41

SCARY(actually hilarious) JW Urban Legends (smurf content)

by *jeremiah* in

does anyone have any dub urban legend stories?.

i remember a story running rampant when i was in my pre-teenage years that went a little something like this:.

word on the street was that a young child went to the circuit assembly with his parents.

Hellrider

ET was of course demonic. I was in 4th or 5th grade when it came out (I think), no cinema for me. I only vaguely remember the smurfs being mentioned, but didn`t know the story before I came on jwd. As for the sister knowking on that serial killers door, there were many variations of this story too. And how about those horrible metal bands? The story was that the band KISS was short for "Kids in Satans Service" and the band WASP stood for "We are Satans People". Basically everything that was popular among the kids at school was demonic or wrong, one way or the other. Whenever I had a little money, I would go buy these little candy-"bags" (don`t know the english word) that had some candy and KISS-cards in them. The other kids had posters on the wall and the albums, I had little KISS-cards in secret...oh the joy of jw-childhoods...

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

Mondo:

It was a legalistic linguistic construct, which explains Paul's frequent usage, that affixed the named one as guarantor to the vow, contract, testimony. A sort of notarization that the following (or, more rarely, the preceding) is authentic, binding, or true. This construct was being used in many languages long prior to the writing of Revelation, and is still being used in the same way in legal documents down to this day

I had vaguely suspected that, after the discussion with Mondo in that thread was over. Thanks for confirming it!

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

LL:

About Rev 1:17-18 and 22:12-13, myself and other posters (inlcuding Leolaia) had a huge discussion with Mondo about this in the thread:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/121719/1.ashx

...it`s covered somewhere in the thread, from around page 12 (or something). In short, Mondo claims that the "first and the last" when used about Jesus in 1:17, refers not to his ontological status, but to his status as "the first to be ressurected". This is, of course, total BS, and I tried to force him to understand why it is BS, but it was like talking to a brick wall. About Rev.22:12-13, Mondo claims that there is a speaker change in the text, and that it is Yahweh that suddenly pops by to say "I am the first and the last, I am coming soon blah blah blah", etc, and he justifies it by the fact that Jesus is introduced again, a few passages later. I`m not sure about that text, but he might be right. On the other hand, the fact that Jesus is the one, elsewhere in Rev, that is described as the one "coming soon", it looks like Mondo is wrong even there.

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

Mondo wrote:

We have numerous works outside of the Bible that reflect the mindset of the time and it is from these and the scholarly work that has been done in these areas that can help us to determine how certain things should be understood. Of course, we must make sure that our conclusions do not conflict with Scripture in doing so, for in such a case ur interpretation would be wrong.

Translation from JW-talk:

We have numerous works outside of the Bible that reflect the mindset of the time, and of course we will pick and choose among these numerous works and extract those passages (with no regard to context) to use as we see fit, to support our allready established Watchtower-doctrines. Of course, we must make sure that our conclusions do not conflict with the Watchtowers interpretations of Scripture in doing so, for in such a case, the first-hand material would be wrong.

AuldSoul, there is no point in arguing with this guy. He is like a brick wall, anything he can`t answer in an adequate way, he simply dismisses, or comes up with some insane, not even unlikely, but impossible, explanation! It`s like throwing water at a goose, it bounces right off. Fortunately, any jw reading this discussion, that still has his brain intact, will see this for himself. There are many people who have joined this board that has done it as a direct result of seeing jw-apologist try to justofy their doctrines. But for me, I`m getting so tired of it.

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

Mondo:

If we want to understand the Bible, we must understand how those that were alive when it was wrote would look at it. I've attempted to give you a bit of insight into how they thought and how they wrote. You can call it explaining away, but it is hardly that. It is simply a fact that they looked at things as I put forth.

...Those alive at the time it was written would never look at it in the way you claim that they would look at it, on the contrary. To people in Palestine at the time of Christ, and in particular to the greeks, God-men were a dime a dozen. The idea was not new to neither greek, jew or roman. Shortly after Jesus, the roman emperor declared himself God. Greeks and romans had worshipped humans and dead objects ("idols") for centuries, allready. The NT was written in greek, by greeks. There is no surprise in the worship of Jesus Christ. The fact that you could write what you wrote above, shows that you know surprisingly little about history. There are so many points to be raised at this latest argument of yours that I don`t know where to begin. For example, the distinction Father/Son was not as clear as it is today. Today, in 2006, a young boy can grow up to be whatever he wants to be. 2000 years ago, this was not the case. If the father was a carpenter, the boy would be a carpenter (trained by his father). If the father was a civil servant, the boy would be a civil servant (trained by his father). If the father was God...well, you get the picture. Also, what did people know about, and believe about, conception and fatherhood at that time in history? They still believed the theories of Aristotle, theories which we today know are wrong, but at this time, these theories were considered "truth": The mother of a child contributes only physical matter, the flesh and blood. The form of the child, and its spirit and soul comes from the father only, the mother has absolutely nothing to do with it. If the child turns out to be a girl, she is, according to Aristotle, a "misfigured boy", in the sense that "something went wrong in the uterus". If the child is a healthy boy, he is a perfect image of the father, a part of the father in every way, as if the Spirit of the Father had had a spiritual offspring, taking place in the physical matter/flesh coming from the mother. And so, if the father was God...well, you get the picture. If you wish me to quote historians and works of Aristotle of this, let me know. The truth is, this what the greeks and romans, and to a certain extent, jews, believed at this time. If we are to take the historical context into consideration when trying to figure out "what these texts must have meant to the people at the time", I would love that, because my case is much, much stronger than yours on that particular issue. In fact, it would have been very strange if the jews and greeks at that time had believed in anything but a "God-man". If you had known anything at all about history, you would never have written what you just wrote above.

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

I read what you just wrote. I have no idea what to do with you, as you seem to be able to explain AWAY (!!!) any scripture thrown at you, even in the most insane, out-of-context way, and then you have the audacity to claim that this insane interpretation of yours is "plausible". I am pretty sure you could twist John 1.1 into saying "In the beginning there was a giant double Cheese burger with bacon and fries, and on the side there was a coke, and the coke was fully (a) softdrink", and prove it, biblically. I`ll give you a compliment: You are a fantastic demagogue. There is no sense in what you`re saying, but you are very, very good with words. To bad you`re a jw, you should go into politics, you`d make it to the top.

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

Mondo:

there is still the issue of the switch from 1st person to third person.

Yes, it`s peculiar, isn`t it? Unless you accept that Jesus is (part of) God, that is. Then it`s not peculiar at all.

The natural way to read this would be as I defined

Well, but that`s not what the Bible says, does it?

God is pierced because the one he sent was, and to do it to the one he sent is to do it to him.

Yahweh says that it is himself, you`re claiming (I assume) that this is something he means only in a figurative manner, that he will be so hurt by it, when they crucify Christ, that it will be as if it was himself that was pierced, correct?

A) First of all, this is not what the text says. The text says "they will look on ME", and then comes the change in person. This can be explained in two ways: Either to read something into the text that isn`t there at all (which is what you`re doing), or accepting that God himself would be pierced (literally). We know that nothing is impossible for God, so that is not shocking at all.

B) According to John 19: 37 " and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced", and by this, John establishes that it is Jesus that Yahweh means, when he says "ME". How do you explain that away? And you can`t claim that it is figurative, because John is here identifying the "ME" with Jesus, and we both KNOW that it is Yahweh speaking in Zechariah, right?

C) Fortunately, you whole explaining-away-seanse doesn`t make any sense, because the WTS forgot to mistranslate parts of the preceding chapter:

Zechariah 11: 10 "Then I took my staff called Favor and broke it, revoking the covenant I had made with all the nations. 11 It was revoked on that day, and so the afflicted of the flock who were watching me knew it was the word of the LORD.

12 I told them, "If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it." So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.

13 And the LORD said to me, "Throw it to the potter"-the handsome price at which they priced me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into the house of the LORD to the potter. "

...So I guess this is figurative too? Awful lot of figurative passages in WT-doctrines, I must say...

137

New World Translation Brackets!!

by gold_morning in

for what it is worth i wanted to pass this along.. we are all aware of those convienient brackets used in the new world translation.

the infamous colossians 1:16....."because by means of him all ((((other)))))) things were created...".

at the very bottom of the first page of their bible ...the foreword.... it says.

Hellrider

Borgia, I agree with you. I don`t think it is, or ever was, necessary to establish a "doctrine" on it. To use a worn-out WT-phrase "Jehovah will reveal it to us in due time":.. But the point is that iin the NT, Jesus Christ is definitely to be worshipped as God, as he is "the image of God", and God to us! That`s pretty much all there is to it, but the WTS has decided to do away with what the Bible says, so they can elevate themselves, which is shown pretty clear in their precious 144000-doctrine. And from a christian pow, that is perverse.

Mondo: To justify the NWT-translation of Zechariah with Matthew 25 is weak. This is jumping from text to text, with no regard for the context (not to mention that the "he" in Matthew 25:31-46 is Jesus, not the Father). In the manner you just jutified Zechariah now, anyone can justify any crazy biblical doctrine.

Doing it to the one God sent (hence the "him" in the text) is to do it to God himself.

You`re just explaining it away, instead of actually explaining it. This is called "twisting scripture".