i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
Many times Paul states, "the lord says..." and other times he says " I and not the Lord say.."
I noticed that. I wonder about cases where he doesn't actually say specific information is from him or God. I would assume if he didn't specifically say it was from him, then it would be from God.
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
Yes, Isaac, it is! Thank-you! I'm gonna read that. It's so easy to look over things and just not put it together sometimes. Thanks for the help!
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
Oh, sorry... I got angel eyes and aguest mixed up. Aguest - you around???
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
Oh, please don't run Angel Eyes of this thread! He really helped me in another thread and I really want to hear his viewpoint...
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
Oh really Isaac!!! Thanks for correcting my view, I'll reread the information tonight. ae - I feel like he is a cause of a lot of divisions not only in the cong of his day, but now down to our day. However, it doesn't seem like he was ever corrected and was speaking in behalf of God. Jesus seemed just so much more loving and forgiving. Please show me your opinion of how you feel I could be viewing him incorrectly. I'm open to learning!
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
If he was in fact given his own opinion, it wouldn't be as bad. However, when he spoke of women, his judgemental attitude towards gays, fornicators, etc that's when it irritates me. When he gives those opinions, it is never said that those are his own opinions in those instances and not Gods. So, in the case where he represents God I have to wonder why those things were allowed in an "inspired" bible.
Yes, some of his views are rather "pharisical" and at times his jewish unbring seems to get the better of him, but he was only human
But, if the bible is inspired of God then unless otherwise stated, wouldn't we have to take that his words as the word of God?
i find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes.
evidently, peter did also.
anyways, i find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and i was shocked how he rebuked with peter.
I find him very confusing and difficult to figure out sometimes. Evidently, Peter did also. Anyways, I find him a bit harsh and unloving in the way he deals with the congregations and I was shocked how he rebuked with Peter. I felt like he promoted divisions and that in he said things like, "do not even eat with" fornicators that are brothers and such. He doesn't seem to have followed Jesus way of doing things as Jesus eat with sinners and tax collectors. I just found Jesus to be so much more loving then the way Paul was.
He also seemed egotistical (sp?) to me in that he always seemed to give credit to himself and how he showed off about rebuking Peter publicly. For him to say for women to ask questions at home I find rude. The way he treated women I didn't like in general.
He also went to Jerusalem even after God and spirit annointed men told him not to. Not sure if he ever got rebuked for that.
Anyways, in Thess. in talks about God sending somebody to confuse people because they didn't first accept Jesus sacrifice or something like that. I have to wonder if he was speaking about Paul when he said that.
Idk, what are your thoughts?
not sure i really feel qualified to teach her anything about it.
i'll tell her that i can discuss my viewpoint, but, i may get things wrong.
it's really weird that somebody wants me to study with them.
No, she doesn't want me to study JW stuff with her, lol. Thanks for the link chickpea!
not sure i really feel qualified to teach her anything about it.
i'll tell her that i can discuss my viewpoint, but, i may get things wrong.
it's really weird that somebody wants me to study with them.
Not sure I really feel qualified to teach her anything about it. I'll tell her that I can discuss my viewpoint, but, I may get things wrong. It's really weird that somebody wants me to study with them. Especially now that I don't believe in the JW religion anymore...
What are your thoughts about this?
rch linsky stated the russell movement was part of the anti-christ in his commentary of 1 john 2:18. not sure what moved him to do that but thought it is pretty funny that jws quote a person who calls them the anti-christ....
http://www.evanglibrary.info/ - That link works. Under commentaries/ rch linsky/ 1 John 2:18
Here is the quote: The way in which John writes “antichrists many” appears to mean that other leaders of his type besides Cerinthus had already come to be. In the following ages new kinds of antichristian leaders arose. Church history describes them and the extent and the duration of the various movements. We are acquainted with those of recent times: Dowie, Russell, Mrs. Eddy, modernism, etc. As they have multiplied, many of the old antichristian falsehoods have been taken up anew, have been dressed up in new verbiage and have paraded as new discoveries. Thus Cerinthus made Jesus the son of Joseph, which is only the modernists’ rejection of the Virgin birth. He denied that the blood of Jesus is the blood of the Son of God with power to cleanse from sin (1:7; 2:2), which the modernists likewise deny.
