todays wt what a bunch of hooey.
try: nobody can explain the beliefs from the bible; there are lots of "rules" beyond tdhe ones on morals enforced(beards, movies),.
the "gifts in men" are in the least incompetent overworked well meaning; but others are overbearing power hungry bullies.
Getting baptized is like joining a health club. You read the rules and decide if you want to pay the dues. Don't ever equate it to the baptism done in New Testament times. The Watchtower Bible and Tract Society claims it is not a "church," but it has all the characteristics of a church, including the radical forbidding not to attend other churches.
Jesus told Peter that "upon this rock" (the rock of revelation) "I will build my church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it."
--
i did my own extensive research as i was getting out, and by exploring actual changes and mentions of core doctrine, i learned how it came about that the gb teach that only they know the truth and only they get holy spirit.
i was checking if jwfacts had it, and although they mention many older articles, it seems they didn't realize they taught there was no holy spirit.
this was a real big eye opener for me, so thought i'd share it, and curious if any of you knew about this yourselves????.
The Holy Spirit was a testator and was numbered as a witness of Jesus:
This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one. If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the witness of God which he hath testified of his Son.
The three are ONE in Christian theology, but not physically one. Jesus prayed to the Father concerning the Twelve: "...that they may be ONE, even as WE are ONE." It's a oneness of purpose. But for the Holy Spirit to be a witness and be able to testify (as, say, in a court of law), He would have to have an identity.
To say He is an "active force" -- like electricity -- and nothing more, it wouldn't make sense.
i cant seem to understand this text actually, can someone please explain it to me.
Venus: It means prayer can work as a placebo—curing some and not curing others. Thus James 5:14 can have both applications—literal and figurative.
What of blindness from birth? Was Jesus putting mud on the man's eyes a placebo? What about Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead? Even today there are miraculous healings that take place because of the faith of those being healed.
Healings can and do take place in many religions.
i was talking to my sister in law the other day about death, and i mentioned something about the afterlife, i don’t remember what i said but it was nothing shocking .
but she squealed, “we don’t believe in the afterlife!
!” and i reasoned, well we kinda do...life after death is the after life..and she just insisted no no it’s not the same thing.
i cant seem to understand this text actually, can someone please explain it to me.
Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.
In the ancient church, the elders would anoint the sick with consecrated oil, then pray for him. If the person was healed as a result, the person's sins would be forgiven him (see verse 15).
Anciently, sin was often associated with illness. That's why the apostles asked Jesus, "Master, who did sin, this man or his parents that he was born blind?" The inference was that this man either sinned before he was born or that his parents sinned.
imagine yourself still sitting at a kingdom hall meeting and turn to the book of mark 7: 21-23. the sayings of jesus are really profound.
the scripture makes you think, reflect, enters your heart and produces results.. today, you have your modern day governing body ( who supposedly are the mouthpiece for jesus and jehovah and provide spiritual food for the 8 million followers).
if jehovah really sends his holy spirit upon these seven men, is this silly and petty message they can come up with?
Yes, in France they dispense with the hotel room and go at it on public benches, in movie theaters, World War II monuments -- anywhere. If hotel staff don't see the DO NOT DISTURB tab and happen on a couple going at it in a room, they say, "Oh, c'mon, find a park!" The whole country needs dedicated men and women willing to walk up couples, hand them a WATCHTOWER and say, "Would you like to read about Jehovah's coming kingdom and the end of this wicked, horrible system of things?" (It's right around the corner!)
imagine yourself still sitting at a kingdom hall meeting and turn to the book of mark 7: 21-23. the sayings of jesus are really profound.
the scripture makes you think, reflect, enters your heart and produces results.. today, you have your modern day governing body ( who supposedly are the mouthpiece for jesus and jehovah and provide spiritual food for the 8 million followers).
if jehovah really sends his holy spirit upon these seven men, is this silly and petty message they can come up with?
The Governing Body is a group of men who I suspect fancy themselves as modern apostles. I also suspect that if two or more of them announced that the Second Coming was going to happen on April 1 of this year you'd have a bed-wetting epidemic unheard of since...well, 1978. Great for the mattress makers.
The religion has progressively centered on them as the faithful and discreet slave of Matthew 24, though I don't know why they would want to funnel the authority to themselves. Their jobs are safe, and were safe as far as they were concerned--so why would they want the extra authority that they once shared with the so-called anointed, or heavenly, class?
As their relevance waned, perhaps they realized they couldn't take the word of those of the John-class (after all, anyone can partake of the emblems). On the other hand, power is power. David Pack, of the Restored Church of God, has consolidated it in his movement and he speaks, writes articles and views himself as an end-times apostle. The GB, on the other hand, takes a bit of a softer approach. The GB members bask in the light of authority but as far as I can tell they're not at each others' throats competing with each other for authority. They seem to be happy pulling down recognition and whatever they can get at HQ.
I'd love to talk to one of them, just to see what make 'em tick. They want to be anointed leaders, but I think some of them just lack the education and the conviction.
when god informed of his intention of destroying the wicked inhabitants of sodom and gomorrah abraham made extensive questioning, cross-questioning and bargaining with god till he gets satisfied.
(genesis 18:16-33) however, when god informed of his intention of murdering abraham’s own only-begotten, innocent son, he simply obeys without any questionings [which he should naturally have done more intensely than he did in the case of unrelated wicked people].. god too acted strangely!
no introduction of the subject with sufficient reasons.
OP clearly says Father offering son as a sacrifice (both of Abraham and of God) is a human thought, written by humans. That means God is nowhere in the picture, says the Bible. (Luke 6:38)
I don't buy that it was. God, in my view, was very much in the picture. Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his only son as a type and shadow of the Father having to offer his Son, and I believe Abraham was acutely aware of that. He had a deep and abiding relationship with God; he knew that God was very much against human sacrifice, and he trusted God as a being of integrity and honor. Thus, he had every reason to expect that Issac would be spared. Some ancient accounts go so far as to say that if God did require Isaac to die that God would restore his life, but most seem to support the idea that God would somehow stop the sacrifice, which he did.
Why try to read anything else into it? Many Christian scholars have written about this extensively and they come to similar conclusions. Abraham learned of Christ by and through the commandment of God that came to him---that he should sacrifice Isaac; otherwise, the story makes little sense. If this story is marginalized, then Christianity makes little sense. But together, the religion of Jesus works masterfully as it looks both ways through the corridors of time.
At least that's how I see it. (I'm unsure of exactly what you mean by your allusion to Luke 6:38.)
in the aftermath of the valentine's day school shooting in florida, i have read quite a number of articles, blogs and posts about the event.
it is disturbing--and i think inexcusable--that many people take the opportunity to use horrible tragedies such as this to push their own particular agenda.. in particularly insensitive and tone-deaf tweet, conservative political commentator tomi lahren wrote: "can the left let the families grieve for even 24 hours before they push their anti-gun and anti-gunowner agenda?
my goodness.
During police interviews and in a statement he read in court, the shooter has given no rationale for why he killed four people or shot up his school.
Do they need a rationale? The guy wanted to kill people. That's why he did it. But when shooters survive, they want to escape the death penalty. Is it so difficult to realize that they wanted to shoot people?
It bugs the hell out of me that the shooter is pleading guilty to escape the death penalty. I'm sorry, but 17 people are dead and it's only right he be the 18th casualty.
You know what else bugs the hell out of me? That teachers who are ex-military can't carry guns or even keep them in a nearby drawer when the jackasses who can are outside hiding behind their police cruisers waiting for the shooting to stop! These are the people who are supposed to be taking care of us, and they're hiding!
I don't know who first said it, but I agree with it: namely, that when seconds count the police are just minutes away.
Truer words were never spoken.
in the aftermath of the valentine's day school shooting in florida, i have read quite a number of articles, blogs and posts about the event.
it is disturbing--and i think inexcusable--that many people take the opportunity to use horrible tragedies such as this to push their own particular agenda.. in particularly insensitive and tone-deaf tweet, conservative political commentator tomi lahren wrote: "can the left let the families grieve for even 24 hours before they push their anti-gun and anti-gunowner agenda?
my goodness.
MeanMrMustard » These debates go off the rails because of lack of clear meaning. If by “gun control” you mean “keeping guns out of the hands of people who would like to shoot up schools, movie theatres, etc.”, then everyone is on board. Period. Everyone wants this.
Yes, but how does one keep guns out of the wrong hands without taking them out of the right hands? Whenever something like this happens, people scream GUN CONTROL without giving any workable solutions. The government needs to register guns before they confiscate them, so any proposals that would implement registration is a non-starter by gun owners.
If we take away AR-15s, bad guys will use Ruger Mini-14s. Take away those and they'll use something else. These things don't stop until the guns are gone.
In the 1960s, guns were plentiful. Even Sears had them. And anyone could buy them if they were old enough. But school shootings were unheard of. Crime was low and violence was unheard of if one stayed out of the wrong areas.
But things are different now. We've become angry, resentful and distrustful as a nation. Our leaders are dishonest, conniving worms and they perhaps they always were. As we've become polarized no one wants to give. Those in the U.S. who voted for Hillary felt they were entitled to victory, and they took to the streets when she lost.
It's just the way things are now.
