How can the Bible be proven through archeology? Troy (or Ilium), Sparta and Mycenae, as well as other cities, have all been substantiated as real, but that doesn't mean the theology is true. Athena stopped Achilles from doing rash things, Apollo brought a plague to the Achaean army and taunted the great runner in battle; Hermes got Priam past the Achaean posts and into Achilles' tent and what does this all this prove? Nothing. The Trojan War may have happened, and many of the characters in The Iliad may be true or based on real people, but it doesn't substantiate the theology. And just because biblical sites have been found doesn't mean the theology is true.
Cold Steel
JoinedPosts by Cold Steel
-
45
Why don't established religions care about Ron Wyatt's archaelogical findings confirming the Bible?
by Kosonen inwhy don't established religions care about ron wyatt's archaelogical findings confirming the bible?
what does that reveal about them?
have you any idea?.
-
-
-
116
God gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites - What does the bible REALLY teach?
by irondork inthat is why god gave them up to disgraceful sexual appetites, for both their females changed the natural use of themselves into one contrary to nature;and likewise even the males left the natural use of the female and became violently inflamed in their lust toward one another, males with males, working what is obscene and receiving in themselves the full recompense, which was due for their error.
romans 1:26,27.
(excerpts from: homosexianity by r. d. weekly for the sake of familiarity, scripture quotations appearing in the book were replaced with the new world translation) http://www.amazon.com/homosexianity-letting-devastating-scripture-orientation/dp/1442163062/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=utf8&qid=1356175321&sr=1-1&keywords=homosexianity.
-
-
Cold Steel
Naturally, no fundamentalist sect will agree with the understanding we and others have. They will insist that these passages make an unqualified condemnation of same-sex relations. However, it is good to know that alternative understandings are possible, especially when readers look at this passage exegetically.
When the Lord returns, He said it will be as it was in the days of Noah—evil enough to be eradicated. As it was in the days of Noah, Jesus said, even so shall it be in the days of the coming of the Son of Man. Reading Paul ’ s epistle to the Romans in Chapter 1, it ’ s clear what the context is. We know that the Jews and the early Christians both excoriated homosexuality and other deviant sexual behavior. Why should one be expected to engage in macro-exegesis to garner the true meaning of the scripture? Are you seriously arguing that Paul thought there was nothing unnatural about homosexuality, pedophilia, beastiality and other deviant sexual practices?
The Northern Colorado Gazette reported that once homosexuals were considered a mental disorder by American Psychiatric Association. In 1973, the APA declassified it. Now a group of psychiatrists are proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders.
Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status, arguing their sexual desire for children is an orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals. And there’s nothing in the Bible prohibiting pedophilia, isn’t that right?
The Gazette goes on to report:
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.
No one says one has to act on their sexual desires and appetites, and homosexuality carries with it considerably more aberrant and promiscuous behaviors than heterosexuality, many which are unquestionably demonstrative of the mental and emotional deviancy we see in San Francisco’s “gay” parades’ debauchery. These involve wildly effeminate behaviors, the abuse and torture of small animals, holes cut in bathroom stalls, one-night stands and other abnormalities. One emergency room doctor I spoke to years ago told me that he’s removed from men’s rectums virtually anything that would fit between their cheeks.
Forgive me if I view this as a deviant mental disorder. Can homosexuals change? I really don’t know. Can pedophiles change? Again, I don’t know. Based on statistical recidivism, it seems doubtful.
My view is that if you’re gay, and want to live that way, go for it! It’s a horrible thing to have to fight and I’m certainly not your judge. I have enough of my own problems as a sinful mortal that I can’t point the finger at anyone. But that said, don’t seek solace from the scriptures. You’re only deceiving yourselves.
-
49
Is the Jehovah's Witness religion Christian?
by Zagor Almanah inis the jehovah's witness religion christian?the answer to the question is, "no.
it is not christian.
" like all non-christian cults, the jehovah's witness organization distorts the essential doctrines of christianity.
-
-
Cold Steel
The JW, the Mormon, and the Bahai all have different definitions of WHO Jesus is and WHO God is...these definitions are different from each other and different from the orthodox. If it doesn't make much difference what you believe about the One who saves you, then why would the apostle Paul bother to try and correct erroneous BELIEF?
Very well said. What troubles me is when someone not only condemns the doctrines of other Christians, but then puts them on a greased slide to Hell. To my understanding, Hell is not vindictive, but remedial, and in many ways you're the harshest judge of yourself. This is reflected in countless near death experiences, and while God wishes us to be one in thought and doctrine, eternal hellfire isn't the penalty for believing false doctrine. We've got more than just a handful of Christian doctors who can't agree on what the apostle Paul was trying to say when he offered his corrections.
What we believe about God and Jesus IS important...it unites us where differing beliefs have a tendency to cause division.
Yes, and if we agree that Jesus is the Christ, the author of our salvation, and that He is the only begotten Son of the Father and that He was resurrected and is the firstfruits of them who slept. All else is open to question, at least as others see it. The "traditional" concept of Hell is that one burns forever and is never consumed, and that the righteous of the earth are condemned there because of circumstance. What we do for others has more to do with where we end up after death. People can be taught about Christ after death and before the resurrection, but those who worship money, success, power and prestige in this life are going to find it far more difficult to find Eternal Life than those who live in religious confusion, but try to serve others.
When Jesus is called Father it does not mean that he is Jehovah, because Adam is also father. Because Jesus replaced, not Jehovah as Father but Jesus replaced Adam as father, for Christians. But still Jehovah is the Greatest Father. ... logically how could Jesus be at the same time both Son of God and the the Father God and Jehovah?
Where do you find in scripture that God the Father is Jehovah? How do you know He is not the Son? Is He not the great intercessor between the Father and Mankind? Are not His titles in the Old Testament the same titles of Jesus in the New? The prophets described Jehovah as the Great Judge of Mankind, yet John says the Father judges no one, but has committed all judgment to the Son (John 5:22). If one reads his vision on Patmos, it's pretty clear that Jesus and Jehovah are the same. And if you'll read Psalms 110:1-2, David writes: "The Lord saith unto MY LORD, sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool."
Who is David's Lord?
Is it not Jehovah, the Great I Am? Here, one God is speaking to another, and it's the Father speaking to Jehovah. When Jesus told the Jews, "Before Abraham was I Am," why did the Jews go into a frenzy of wrath, to the point they wanted to stone Him?? This passage could mean that before Abraham existed, He existed, but that wouldn't have pushed the Jews into such a commotion. It also could mean that in meeting Abraham, He was the I Am. Now that would have done it! And when we have one verse that can be interpreted two different ways, one has to look at the context and the reaction of the hearers. Not whether it supports your theology.
In Genesis 1, it's clear there were numerous dieties involved. "Let US make man in OUR image...." "Man has become as one of US, knowing good from evil." "Let US go down...." (to see the great tower). When Adam and Eve sinned, the Father could no more communicate with mankind directly. An intercessor was needed. And no text tells us that in the beginning, Jehovah created the Heavens and the Earth; but rather, it was "Eloheim" ("Gods"). The Father and the Son are united, being ONE in purpose, not not one in essence; and we know that the Word of God, who was Jehovah, was the Creator (John 1:1). So again, why do JWs insist that Jehovah is the Father?
One last point. Read Genesis 8 where Jehovah appears to Abraham in the plain of Mamre as three men. Why three? These were certainly angels, acting through a divine investiture of authority, because they are the same who went to Sodom and to Lot. That there were three of them were symbolic of the Godhead, for they all spoke as one. They also ate a meal with Abraham, so they couldn't have been spirits, but men "sent" of God (which is what "angel" means). The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all one and speak as one, all without being physically one. The Son is the Intercessor and is the God of Israel, the one who spoke face to face with Moses and was the great I Am who appeared to Abraham.
-
49
Is the Jehovah's Witness religion Christian?
by Zagor Almanah inis the jehovah's witness religion christian?the answer to the question is, "no.
it is not christian.
" like all non-christian cults, the jehovah's witness organization distorts the essential doctrines of christianity.
-
-
Cold Steel
The tactic of labeling people as not Christian only causes contention. Why? Because it should be up to the members as to how they view themselves. You take the largest Christian faith on the planet -- the Catholic Church -- and it could be argued that they aren't Christian. With their lavish robes, their long pointed hats, their praying to saints in the exact same manner that the Romans worshiped their household gods. Then there's transubstantiation, infant baptism, the veneration of Mary and papal infallibility.
How about the Methodists and the Calvinists? Again, infant baptism with the Methodists, predestination of the "elect" with the Calvinists. Where does one draw the line? Jehovah's Witnesses don't think people who believe in the Trinity are Christians. Evangelicals don't think Mormons are Christian. These charges simply stir up contention.
I'm not a Jehovah's Witness, and I don't like a lot of their doctrines. I don't believe that Jesus is Michael, but rather, Jehovah, and modern scholars like Dr. Margaret Barker has written extensively on the fact that Jehovah isn't the Father, but rather, the Son, which makes sense. If the Father required an Intercessor after the Fall of Adam, why would he have to wait until the coming of Christ to establish one?
BOTTOM LINE: People should stop trying to be the arbiter of who are Christians and who aren't. If people believe that Jesus is the Messiah, who took upon himself the sins of the world, was crucified, died, and was resurrected, then I'm willing to classify them as Christians and let God be the Judge.
-
25
Mormon leaders reach out to gays, lesbian. I,am shocked!!
by jam inmormon leaders made their most signifcant outreach.
yet to gays and lesbians, unveiling a new website thursday.
that encourages church members to be more compassionate.
-
-
Cold Steel
After all, God was fine with men raping young girls and prisoners of war, so he doesn’t really require consent... Or has God’s view of right and wrong “evolved” now that we’re no longer living in the Bronze Age.
Was he, now? Please provide the basis of your historical fantasies. In other words, this is a call for references.
And what’s the problem with gays living happy, fulfilled lives however they wish? The Mormon Church will gladly baptize anyone as a Mormon after they’re dead. Posthumous proxy baptism of the dead, such as Anne Frank, is more common than magic underwear.
If gays can live happy, fulfilled lives, fine, but they will not be able to be baptized. The same goes for pedophiles and other sexual deviations. A news article from the Northern Colorado Gazette states:
Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. “Gay” advocates have taken offense at such a position insisting this would never happen. However, psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.
In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists with B4U-Act recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.
B4U-Act calls pedophiles “minor-attracted people.” The organization’s website states its purpose is to “help mental health professionals learn more about attraction to minors and to consider the effects of stereotyping, stigma and fear.”
Regarding the Christian practice of baptism for the dead (I Cor. 15:29), all vicarious work done by the Latter-day Saints requires a corresponding confirmation ceremony in the realm of the spirits. It’s not enough to baptize a person for the dead; if the person it’s being done for refuses it (and everyone has that right), then the vicarious ordinance is “null and void.” One could do a hundred baptisms for Adolf Hitler, and none of them would do any good because he’s suffering the ravages of hell.
As far as baptisms for the dead being more common than the liturgical priesthood vestments one receives in the temple, I’d also like to see references for that.
-
7
When a JW realizes they're anointed, are they supposed to tell the elders?
by Badfish inwhen a jw believes they are anointed, are they supposed to tell the elders, or do they keep silent and just partake of the emblems at the memorial?.
-
-
Cold Steel
Isn't it interesting that with all the biblical scholars of our time, and with all the early church fathers (some, like Clement, who personally knew Peter), only the Jehovah's Witnesses have been able to see this doctrine. It either proves that they either have insights no one else has or that their exegesis is off by a country mile! Having read the requisite scriptures put forth by the JWs, I'm convinced it's fiction. Why? Because the scriptures don't say what the JW literature says they say.
That's not likely to change any minds, but the question becomes, how would anyone know that they're anointed unless they receive revelation from Heaven? They couldn't. And the official doctrine of the church states that revelation ceased with the ancient apostles. So God would have to make an exception with the anointed class. I'm also fascinated by the doctrine that Jesus was resurrected a spirit when he plainly told the apostles, "Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bone as ye see me have." What did he say after that? "Ah, I'm just messin' with you...I'm really a spirit with this physical body I materialized. Guess I had you fooled!"
If I were a JW, you can bet that I'd be one of the anointed ones -- anything but living in a garden setting for the rest of eternity. The scriptures talk about those having "this hope" (being resurrected as Christ was)...so perhaps those who are anointed get it because they want it, not because they were predestined. The 144,000 number is not generally regarded as being a literal number anyway; rather, twelve denotes fullness and priesthood. The numbers need not be exact, and to qualify, you have to be a member of the House of Israel and one of the twelve tribes. So if you believe the JW doctrine and have the hope of being of the anointed class, go ahead and partake of the emblems. You've got as much of a chance as anyone else!
-
67
WT Admits It's Free For Them ... But Not For You
by Perry init official and clear as mud.
however i pulled out my highlighter and made a few notes.. it's free for us - but it ain't for y'all.
too bad i missed the 6/15/2011 wt study.
-
-
Cold Steel
...Mormons’ authority is [the] Book of Mormon, [while] us “born againers’” main
authority is God’s word, the Bible.This is why people who want to know about religions should go to people who are members of those religions and not self-styled experts in other sects.
In this case, the authority of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not rest in the Book of Mormon. Books, including the Bible, do not convey authority. No man has ever received even a scintilla of divine authority from a book. Books convey information and intelligence, but not authority—and I challenge anyone to show me otherwise.
Another problem is that the Bible is not complete. There are scores of questions it doesn’t answer. For example: 1) how is baptism performed? 2) who is authorized to perform it? 3) is it still necessary to bestow the gift of the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands? 4) if so, who is authorized to perform it and what words are said? 5) what are the duties of the various officers? 6) what does a bishop do? 7) what does an elder do? 8) can one elder or bishop ordain another elder or bishop, respectively? 9) who can speak for the entire church? 10) how does the church determine what is scripture? (The early church always had an open canon...in fact, there’s never been a time in the history of the church that the canon has been closed.)
These are just ten questions I came up with off the top of my head. I could easily write another ten, and then another. The view that the Bible is the total and complete Word of God is a very narrow view, and we Mormons don’t apologize for accepting other books of scripture such as the Book of Mormon and Doctrine & Covenants. Both were written by prophets under the inspiration of the Spirit of God or direct visitations by angelic beings in fulfillment of biblical prophecy. What then? If Elijah appears in a temple and conveys the keys of authority for the binding of families forever, wouldn’t that event, if true, be worthy of being recorded in scripture? That can’t happen with a closed canon. Oh, and one more question, 11) if the Lord has a communication for mankind, who could he possibly call on who could authoritatively deliver the message? Would the Methodists listen to a Baptist? Would the Southern Baptist Convention consider the word of a Presbyterian? This business about the “body of Christ” being a collection of competitive religions is a manmade doctrine and is a crock. Certainly, the only man a Jehovah's Witness might listen to would be a member of the Governing Body, and they say they don’t receive revelation...except for “new light.”
If the early church needed to glean authority from the scriptures, what scriptures did the early church use to gain their authority? I see these paranormal shows on TV and the Christian pastor walking around a haunted house with his worn Bible and reading from it. More often than not it doesn’t do any good, and how could it? Satan knew the scriptures as well as Jesus and used them to tempt him.
-
67
WT Admits It's Free For Them ... But Not For You
by Perry init official and clear as mud.
however i pulled out my highlighter and made a few notes.. it's free for us - but it ain't for y'all.
too bad i missed the 6/15/2011 wt study.
-
-
Cold Steel
This is incredible. It made even me sputter, and I'm used to JW doctrine!
The person who wrote this piece most likely had a few drinks before coming home, went home, had a couple of glasses of wine with his meal, didn't feel too well and, fearing he was catching a cold, down a cup of cold medicine, then decided to write the article so he wouldn't have to the next day. It has a woozy quality to it and it certainly isn't justified by scripture.
The truth is, God wants everyone to be resurrected and have a physically real spiritual body like His. When Jesus was resurrected, He did not tell anyone that He was a spirit. Quite to the contrary, He said specifically that He was not a spirit. "Here," He said,"handle me and see. For a spirit hath not flesh and bone as ye see me have." But how, they reasoned, could He go through the ceiling and the doors? Surely He must have been a Spirit, for a flesh and bone being could not do that. But of course they can. The JWs just made a supposition that affects their entire way of doing things, and with no authority at all. After all, what could Jesus do when He was resurrected in Jerusalem? His body was gone from the tomb and his burial clothes were neatly folded right where He left it, so we know it was a physical resurrection. He could go through ceilings and walls, but that's not because He was a spirit; it's because he had molecular control over His entire body. Blood did not flow through his veins, but instead, spirit. They also used to say that John the Baptist wasn't going to heaven because Jesus, although praising him, said that "he who is least in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater that he." By that the Lord meant Himself. He, the Lord, having suffered for all things mortal, had the least claim on the Kingdom. But He was greater than John.
It's painful to read sometimes!
-
13
Derren Brown Fear & Faith
by dozy ini'm a big derren brown fan & enjoyed these episodes - interesting from an ex-jw perspective ( where essentially all of us were fooled , consciously or subconsciously by the society ).. especially interesting is ( in part 2 ) where he convinces a totally atheistic stem cell scientist to have a religious conversion in 15 minutes.
presumably this is the same mechanism where jws become "anointed" ( or where evangelicals become born again etc.
he also touches on subliminal images ( larsinger please note!).
-
-
Cold Steel
I've seen his do some fascinating things. Unfortunately, the links don't work (at least for me).
My favorite episode is when he made the sun disappear in the middle of a desert. He actually put a guy to sleep, reset his watch, waited for the sun to go down, then woke him up. It was hilarious, especially when the guy looked at his watch. I also enjoyed the one where he made a woman into a professional concert pianist in one week. The trick was, she already was a concert pianist. He just made her forget.
Someone like Derren Brown can be dangerous if he's not bound by ethics. He seduced a number of gals at a bar by telling them exactly what they wanted to hear. Too bad he's gay.
Wonder if he can convince a gay person that they're straight and vice versa?
-
15
The last moments of Pastor Russell in a sleeper car in Pampas Texas
by Terry in" his mother's voice.. .
"mother?".
"who is that, mother?
-
-
Cold Steel
One of the most fascinating near death stories I've ever read is Return From Tomorrow by George Ritchie. And one of the most ironic things about the Jehovah's Witnesses is that when they die, it takes them only moments to realize that they need to rethink their eschatological doctrines and convictions.
Many of you are either Jehovah's Witnesses or former members, and you were taught that when you’re dead, you cease to exist until God recreates you sometime in the future. To them, they close their eyes in death and then the next minute they open them sometime in the future. But what if that doesn’t happen? What happens if you’re horribly sick and suddenly you feel much better? You get out of the bed thinking you’ve beat the sickness and you look back and see someone lying in the bed you just got out of. At first it frightens you. Who is that person? (Many people don’t recognize themselves because they’re not used to seeing themselves in 3D aside from a mirror, and the experience is almost universally startling because they think it’s someone else.) This happened in Ritchie’s story. “...Suddenly I remembered the young man I had seen in the bed in that little hospital room,” he wrote. “What if it had been me?”
Later he recounts: “And slowly a...more alarming truth began to register. I had never seen myself! Not really. Not the way I saw other people ... from the shoulders up...I had seen only a two-dimensional mirror-image staring at me from a piece of glass. And occasionally a snapshot, equally two-dimensional. That was all. The roundedness, the living, space-filling presence of myself, I did not know at all.”
But what must a Jehovah’s Witness think when they experience the same? Certainly they can’t blame this on the Devil, or some aberration of perception. But is it enough to change their views?
I don’t think someone’s beliefs are enough to condemn them to a never ending tortuous Hell, as the OP suggests; however, Russell and “the Judge” misled a number of people who relied on their scriptural exegesis.
But what do you think? Is there life after death and, if so, how do you think Jehovah's Witnesses react to it? If you’re a former JW, have you changed your opinions about death?