Posts by Mad Dawg

12

bethel friend calls me the other night...

by SnakesInTheTower in

jw
friends

i have not heard from this particular (former) friend in some time.

he and i first met back around 1986-7 at pioneer school in his hometown.

we were both young ms's with dreams of bethel.

Believers Eternal Security vs. Tribulation Salvation

by Perry in

i found this interesting discussion on the topic of eternal security aka.

"once saved always saved".

http://www.rightlydividing.net/understanding_tribulation_salvat.htm.

The Scriptures seem to indicate that one is able to denounce their faith. It is not that one will wake up one morning and he will have “lost” his salvation. It would be a deliberate action on our part. I suggest that if one is concerned about whether or not his salvation is “lost”, then it is not.

Once again, the author strips verses of their context: Hebrews 10:26,29,38,39. The verses that he leaves out are important to understanding the text.

During the Tribulation, if a person has faith in Christ and helps his neighbor then Christ will dwell in him.

This statement is based on a false premise. All people, in all times, are saved by grace alone. Some by looking back to the cross, other were saved by looking forward to it. The various dispensations are strictly a matter of how God revealed Himself to us, not how we get saved.

If he breaks one of these commandments his former righteousness does not count, just as it was in the Old Testament. One must endure to the end and not be overcome. (II Peter 2:20)

He kind of gets it here. Nobody can live without breaking one of the commandments – all 600+ of them. The law can only condemn, it is the blood of Jesus that saves. Everyone is saved by grace.

9

Israel's Egyptian Exodus to the "promised land" only TWO saw it...same with Armagedon?

by Witness 007 in

how many of jehovah's israelites really saw the promised land?

only the two spies out of the original 3 million!

{joshua, caleb} moses, aaron, and the rest of the jews were killed off or left to die for their insolence and disobiedience!

Mad Dawg

From here:

Another argument that the Exodus never occurred is that there are no signs that the Israelites wandered in the Sinai desert for 40 years. However, we must remember that during the Exodus the Israelites were forced to live nomadic lives. No longer did they reside in villages with sturdy houses and artifacts that could have survived as evidence. Instead, in the wilderness environment, every item had to be used to its fullest capacity and then, if possible, recycled. Also, the portable tent encampments during those 40 years would have left few or no traces that could be found 3, 400 years later, especially in the shifting desert sands.

Interestingly, recent satellite infrared technology has revealed ancient caravan routes in the Sinai. George Stephen, a satellite-image analyst, discovered evidence in the satellite photographs of ancient tracks made by “a massive number of people” going “from the Nile Delta straight south along the east bank of the Gulf of Suez and around the tip of the Sinai Peninsula.” He also saw huge campsites along the route, one that fits the description given in the book of Exodus (Price 1997:137).

Could this evidence be a coincidence? If nothing else at least it shows that a large number of people could be sustained in the same region and on the same path as that taken by the Israelites during the Exodus.

47

Believers Eternal Security vs. Tribulation Salvation

by Perry in

i found this interesting discussion on the topic of eternal security aka.

"once saved always saved".

http://www.rightlydividing.net/understanding_tribulation_salvat.htm.

Mad Dawg

So what are we to do with apparent contradictions like this one when unsaved bible critics point things like this out? If not dispensational salvation, then what?

Then What? We take the time to understand the verse IN CONTEXT.

Romans 3:27,28Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Paul's conclusion is clear - salvation is "no more of works" (It used to be!!) but now faith alone justifies! James is just as clear as Paul.

Perry, you really need to read things more closely. Where in Romans 3:27 does it say "no more of works"? The author of this piece is putting himself under the condemnation of Rev 22:18 If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. The author added "no more” thereby changing the meaning of the verse to say something that it was never intended to say. He infers that the verse should have the added words in it.

James 2:24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

OUCH!! What does a Christian who doesn't divide his Bible do with that verse?

{2:24} Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. {2:25} Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent [them] out another way? {2:26} For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

If the author wishes to maintain that people were saved in different ways in different times, he has an even bigger problem:

Hebrews {11:31} By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

The entire chapter of Heb 11 talks of Old Testament people being saved by faith alone.

Here is a link that explains the James verses in light of the context.

Perry, beware of anyone that quotes a string of short verses instead of addressing them in context.

Here are some recommended sites:

Ø http://www.carm.org/

Ø http://www.tektonics.org/index.html

Ø http://www.christian-thinktank.com/

Ø http://creation.com/

Ø http://www.trueorigin.org/

You would do well to study the material on these sites and then unleash your passion. The verse that your author is so fond of starts with the admonition to study. You would do well to heed this call.

47

Believers Eternal Security vs. Tribulation Salvation

by Perry in

i found this interesting discussion on the topic of eternal security aka.

"once saved always saved".

http://www.rightlydividing.net/understanding_tribulation_salvat.htm.

Mad Dawg

I find that the link provided is fraught with false premises and factual errors. Such as:

The entire rest of the Old Testament deals with the nation of Israel.

Off hand the following don’t deal with the nation of Isreal specifically:

Ø Jonah (preaching to Ninevah)

Ø Nahum (condemns Ninevah)

Ø Psalms (mostly written to praise God)

Ø Proverbs (written by Solomon to his son)

Ø Ecclesiates (a commentary on the human condition)

Ø Song of Solomon (a love letter that is later said to be God referring to Israel)

The author of the article uses a rational about “divisions” that would make the WTS proud. When someone uses a series of snippets of scripture, be careful. Here the author brutally butchers the Scriptures:

· Matthew 19:16b,17,21

...Good Master, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life? 17 And he said unto him...if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 21...and follow me.

Which is compressed from here:

{19:16} And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? {19:17} And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is,] God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. {19:18} He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, {19:19} Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. {19:20} The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet? {19:21} Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go [and] sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come [and] follow me. {19:22} But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.

In a nutshell, the young man is saying that he is perfect enough to enter Heaven on his own merit. Jesus puts His finger on the man’s pride and points out that the man loves his possessions more than God or other people.

The article is so poorly written, one would do just as well as to discuss the topic with the Mad Hatter.

9

Israel's Egyptian Exodus to the "promised land" only TWO saw it...same with Armagedon?

by Witness 007 in

how many of jehovah's israelites really saw the promised land?

only the two spies out of the original 3 million!

{joshua, caleb} moses, aaron, and the rest of the jews were killed off or left to die for their insolence and disobiedience!

Mad Dawg

Also all those under 20 years of age would see the promised land (Numbers 14:29), which would be the majority of them given their life expectancy.

148

Christians explain? Jews never believed in a Trinity even today so how/when did it start?

by Witness 007 in

jews for thousands of years have believed in their "one god" so i always wondered if in jesus time this was the view, how and when did the trinity start?

did jesus start it off?

are you saying jews were trinitarian?

Mad Dawg

PS, here is an extensive article on the subject. Hope it helps. http://www.christian-thinktank.com/trin02.html

115

Angel Eye needs an education on the identity and nature of Christ

by jonathan dough in

angel eye wrote:.

john 14 v 1 shows jesus and jehovah are not 1.. acts 2 v 4 and 17 clearly show the holy spirit isnt a person,its gods active force.. john 14 v 28 is total proof,otherwise jesus would clearly be insane saying such things .

toomany scriptures to prove it...but just a few for you to recall,i guess its hard when your reading false claims to remember the truth.. .

Mad Dawg

JD, if you want to start a discussion on the Trinity, go for it. However, singling out an individual as needing "an education" is very poor form.

The rest of you, why are keeping this thread alive if it bothers you so?

118

Really, There Is A Lot To Learn About Your Faith

by AllTimeJeff in

in ak - jeffs thread "did jesus ever claim to be the messiah", narkissos said the following that i think, and have learned, is rather profound:.

a better approach to this discussion might start with questioning the presupposition that there was one concept of "messiahship" common to all or even most 1st-century ad jews.. the idea is, we assume that the faith and religion we have now, is as it was way back then... clearly, it isn't.. i haven't devoted a great deal of my time to this subject, but i have read enough to realize that there is a lot more to the history of our churches and religions then we think.

jw history is pretty easy, as they started in the late 19th century.

Mad Dawg

If one were to read the Apostolic Fathers, he would see that the fundamentals of the faith are the same now as they were then. What is in question are peripheral issues.

118

Really, There Is A Lot To Learn About Your Faith

by AllTimeJeff in

in ak - jeffs thread "did jesus ever claim to be the messiah", narkissos said the following that i think, and have learned, is rather profound:.

a better approach to this discussion might start with questioning the presupposition that there was one concept of "messiahship" common to all or even most 1st-century ad jews.. the idea is, we assume that the faith and religion we have now, is as it was way back then... clearly, it isn't.. i haven't devoted a great deal of my time to this subject, but i have read enough to realize that there is a lot more to the history of our churches and religions then we think.

jw history is pretty easy, as they started in the late 19th century.

Mad Dawg

Mad Dawg, if you are so sure that you have it right, why should you be concerned if anyone else reads the works of Bart Ehrman and others?

ATJ, did you miss where I said:

Actually, understanding the history of the Bible will increase one’s confidence in it. One should read different takes on it – not just those that wish to shred it like Bart.

Where have I discouraged anyone from reading anything?

When I said that if you have the truth it will be ok, then I see you and Perry try to discredit Ehrman in particular…

He deserves discrediting. All error deserves discrediting.

I have to wonder, what are you afraid of people reading about?

Nothing, why are you so upset that I said that one should read other things in addition to Bart? Such a lengthy post and all you can fixate on is two comments?

Are you more interested…

I am interested in truth, whatever that may be.

There are many like myself who read the history and see many red flags.

Have you ever read anything that would explain the “red flags”?

I certainly hope that people reading this won't be dissuaded from reading up on what other scholars have to say. To me, the efforts to discredit the findings of those who have studied this for their life's work is a bit JW like.

Are you saying that Bart is above scrutiny?

Some (not all) Christians who have participated in this discussion have a real bias towards the bible. They view it as divine revelation. I obviously do not, and find a whole host of reasons why I do not view it this way.

Which, by definition, means that you have a bias against the Bible.

BUT I AM NOT AFRAID TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH BY THOSE WHO ARE NOT CHURCH APOLOGISTS AND SEE WHAT THEIR FINDINGS ARE AND IF THEY HAVE THE RING OF TRUTH TO THEM.

Please read my quote in green above.

It disgusts me that rather then let these records stand on their merits, the scholars themselves are attacked, with the (perceived) hope of discouraging honest inquiry.

Attacked? Puh-leeeeze. Why the thin skin?

THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE GOVERNING BODY TRIED TO DO TO US WHEN WE WERE JW's.

And the GB wants us to accept their word as truth without question. Are we allowed to question Bart?

WHAT IN GODS NAME ARE YOU APOLOGISTS AFRAID OF PEOPLE READING UP ON AND FINDING OUT???????

Absolutely nothing. Please read the green quote above.

Here is a newsflash for all you apologists for defending something that was never attacked by me: ALL YOU HAVE ADMITTED TO AT BEST …

An oversimplification of what was said, and out of context to boot.

God, it seems to me, is perfectly capable of writing his own book if he so chooses to.

Which He did.

This pious attempt by a couple here to defend the bible, when all I did was suggest that readers see for themselves the real history of the bible and how the Church got started makes me angry.

Because of your poor grasp of history, I decided to correct your errors. Why does that so upset you? Why are you spending so much emotional energy on a tiny portion of the posts? If you want to talk history, then talk history. When you do, please back up your claims with evidence.

HAVE YOU APOLOGISTS CONSIDERED THE REAL POSSIBILITY THAT A READING OF THESE SOURCES COULD HAVE THE EFFECT OF STRENGHTHENING THE FAITH OF SOME WHO READ IT???

Again, please read the green quote above.

And that would be A-ok with me.

And me.

Mad Dawg, we haven't had many chances to interact, but it is clear that YOU have done your research and have come to your own conclusions, which I happily respect and accept.

Thank you, I most sincerely appreciate that.

Lastly, lets not forget, if its the truth, there is nothing to be afraid of. Read up! Don't just read people who have already made up their mind and have as their only goal to get you to believe as they do. See what critics have to say.

Does this include critics of Bart and others who wish to discredit the Bible?

Read up, take responsibility for your beliefs, and make up your own mind.

Agreed 100%.

Lets see, shall we put Ehrman and Ray Franz on the same level for the efforts of believers to discredit them before you even read a word, or seek to understand what and why they say what they say?

Let’s see, shall we put Ehrman and the GB on the same level in that they cannot be questioned? I understand Bart, that is why I descredit him.