i would love to be able to show them to my husband so he can check them for himself since he thinks the only changes made were that the nwt is in a "modern language" he gets quite upset with me when he tells me he has read the bible front to back several times and i say "yes you have, but the bible you are reading has been changed from what the scriptures in other versions of the bible say" thanks in advance for any help with this.grammy
Would he allow himself to read another version?
Or does he specifically stick to his NWT?
Hi Summer, yes he will and he has a King James version but he defends the NWT saying "Well, it means the same thing" when I point out differences, I need a few blatant changes to show him, and having not touched the thing since 2000 I'm rusty to say the least.
Grammy
i would love to be able to show them to my husband so he can check them for himself since he thinks the only changes made were that the nwt is in a "modern language" he gets quite upset with me when he tells me he has read the bible front to back several times and i say "yes you have, but the bible you are reading has been changed from what the scriptures in other versions of the bible say" thanks in advance for any help with this.grammy
I would love to be able to show them to my husband so he can check them for himself since he thinks the only changes made were that the NWT is in a "Modern Language" He gets quite upset with me when he tells me he has read the bible front to back several times and I say "Yes you have, but the bible you are reading has been changed from what the scriptures in other versions of the bible say" Thanks in advance for any help with this. Grammy
having believed the whole bible, hook, line and sinker all these years i get the impression many of you have come to the conclusion that we should take it with a pinch of salt and not hold to it so dogmatically.
and some possibly believe in it just as much as you did when you were a witness.
to save me some time please, lovely people, as i am very lazy - could you share with me why you do or don't believe in it - what evidence there is either way and if there are any particular books that you found helpful in coming to your conclusions?
I think you are right Dawg...
Excerpt from the Nicene creed.....
We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.
And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father. Through him all things were made.
I believe they definitely had an agenda!
having believed the whole bible, hook, line and sinker all these years i get the impression many of you have come to the conclusion that we should take it with a pinch of salt and not hold to it so dogmatically.
and some possibly believe in it just as much as you did when you were a witness.
to save me some time please, lovely people, as i am very lazy - could you share with me why you do or don't believe in it - what evidence there is either way and if there are any particular books that you found helpful in coming to your conclusions?
Dawg said...
That's what I'm talking about, the NT has been redefined myrids of times, what should go in and what to exclude...
This is only my opinion and I don't claim to be really intelligent lol
But..My understanding of the motives of the Nicene council was that they only wanted to include books that fit in with their particular agenda and interpretation of what the religion was supposed to be and how its followers were supposed to be. The Gnostic texts were different enough from what they wanted that the had no intention of even considering them.
That is why there is so much in the new testament about aspects of Christ's life in his early and formative years that is not there, even in the major Gospels. There are texts that include information, but they were not included in the bible because they contained information, and stories about Christ's life that portrayed his as somewhat less perfect than they wanted people to believe. I believe it is the gospel of writer Timothy or Thomas that contains some of those accounts and was thus not included, allowing them to keep the illusion that Christ was beyond all human reactions, desires and the like.
Their decisions were motivated more by their own agenda than any effort to have a complete inclusion of all available information, they only included what they wanted people to know.
having believed the whole bible, hook, line and sinker all these years i get the impression many of you have come to the conclusion that we should take it with a pinch of salt and not hold to it so dogmatically.
and some possibly believe in it just as much as you did when you were a witness.
to save me some time please, lovely people, as i am very lazy - could you share with me why you do or don't believe in it - what evidence there is either way and if there are any particular books that you found helpful in coming to your conclusions?
I can't help but think that if we had all grown up in a different part of the world, we would be discussing the veracity of a whole other God and a whole other book (or books) in intricate detail. And it would be equally evident to a lot of posters that that book was clearly inspired.
I think the Bible was written by man with no inspiration from any God...I know for a fact that mere mortal men were used to pick and choose what went into the Bible as we know it and they also chose what was left out. Do some research on the First Ecumenical Council of the Catholic Church, held in 325
children with no choice, once again.. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071115/ts_nm/russia_cult_dc_1.
moscow (reuters) - at least 30 members of a russian doomsday cult have barricaded themselves in a remote cave to await the end of the world and are threatening to commit suicide if police intervene, officials and media said on thursday.
"they have covered the entrance and refuse to come out and are threatening to blow themselves up," an official in the local prosecutor's office told reuters by telephone.
That is so sad....Religious delusion is arguably the most prevalent and potentially dangerous form of mental illness to have ever plagued humanity.
From burning people at the stake, to flying planes into buildings, to these ridiculous 'Doomsday' cults, filled with ignorant and superstitious fanatics.
I weep for their children who clearly have no choice in the matter and have to follow their fanatical parents with their made up religion....just as my sons did when I was a JW
sen. charles grassley of iowa, the ranking republican on the senate finance committee, is investigating six prominent televangelist ministries for possible financial misconduct.. .
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/senate-probes-televangelists-finances/20071106091309990001?ncid=nws00010000000001.
the six ministries identified as being under investigation by the committee are led by: paula white, joyce meyer, creflo dollar, eddie long, kenneth copeland and benny hinn.
I see no reason why these wealthy ministries should retain tax-exempt status.
I agree 100% now if only they would investigate the WBTS!
sen. charles grassley of iowa, the ranking republican on the senate finance committee, is investigating six prominent televangelist ministries for possible financial misconduct.. .
http://news.aol.com/story/_a/senate-probes-televangelists-finances/20071106091309990001?ncid=nws00010000000001.
the six ministries identified as being under investigation by the committee are led by: paula white, joyce meyer, creflo dollar, eddie long, kenneth copeland and benny hinn.
Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, is investigating six prominent televangelist ministries for possible financial misconduct.
The six ministries identified as being under investigation by the committee are led by: Paula White, Joyce Meyer, Creflo Dollar, Eddie Long, Kenneth Copeland and Benny Hinn. Three of the six - Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland and Creflo Dollar - also sit on the Board of Regents for the Oral Roberts University.
i'm not after a discussion on the rights or wrongs on abortion, what i'm asking is whether or not your views have evolved over time.. perhaps leaving the watchtower was enough to allow your true feelings on abortion to find expression.
maybe abortion is one of those subjects where you still find yourself in agreement with your old jw self.
did becoming a mother change your perspective in any way or solidify your views?.
i'm not after a discussion on the rights or wrongs on abortion, what i'm asking is whether or not your views have evolved over time.. perhaps leaving the watchtower was enough to allow your true feelings on abortion to find expression.
maybe abortion is one of those subjects where you still find yourself in agreement with your old jw self.
did becoming a mother change your perspective in any way or solidify your views?.
I have always been pro choice and I still am...and believe that no one has the right to dictate what a woman does with her own body, so no my views on abortion haven't changed.
On the other hand after seeing my great grandson Hunter born weighing 1 pound 12 ounces in September 2005 and seeing the healthy, happy toddler he is now has given me a greater appreciation for human life personally. http://www.biloximagnolia.com/Hunter.jpg
