He ransomed his unborn children for Adam's unborn children
Jesus had no children. Metaphorically christians are brothers of Christ not children.
according to the watchtower:.
who received the ransom payment?.
why did the ransomer need to be paid?.
He ransomed his unborn children for Adam's unborn children
Jesus had no children. Metaphorically christians are brothers of Christ not children.
In Mathew 15:11 Jesus flouted the law about what is to be eaten--Law says certain flesh as clean and certain as unclean. - Venus
No he didn't. The context was about eating without washing hands. There is no law about that. Jesus obviously knew nothing about germ theory but he did not encourage breaking the Law on unclean foods.
Again Jesus clearly flouted the law of Deuteronomy 24:16 (which says sins cannot be swapped) when he said he came to die for the sins of the world (Mathew 20:28; 26:28)
Vicarious punishment in the form of animal sacrifice was central to the Law. According to christian doctrine Jesus voluntarily gave his life in the place of penitent sinners. This in no way negates the Law at Deut.14 which forbids punishing a child for the sins of the parent or vice-versa.
Leviticus 10:9 also he violated in a whole sale
Leviticus 10 describes additional laws that applied only to the priests serving at the Tabernacle. The restriction against drinking alcohol was not binding on Israel in general. Jesus was not of a priestly tribe and never entered the naos - the Holy part of the temple - as opposed the the hieron which was open to all Jews.
I can give you many ....
So far you have not come up with any.
Jesus obeyed the Law of Moses meticulously and commanded his followers to do likewise. Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi, he was not a Christian.
Dawkins is wrong about that. He should stick to biology.
Venus - Jesus believed in the Law with a passion. He rejected not one jot or tittle of the Old Testament.
the capital of biblical israel was samaria.. jerusalem was the capital of judah/benjamin.. the modern state of israel is not named after the biblical nation of israel.
it is named after a man.
it is named after jacob, the lion of judah, who was later given the name of israel.
I'm not convinced by mythological theories about Jesus. The gospel writers tie themselves in knots to try to make his story align with Old Testament references. They would not do that if he was made out of "whole cloth".
The latest and most compelling attempt to explain Jesus as a mythological character was made by Richard Carrier - "On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt".
Jesus ... rejected much of the scriptures of his time - Venus
No he didn't. He was passionate about the Law and taught his disciples to follow it meticulously. He rejected the way the OT was being interpreted by the Pharisees.
greeting everyone!
it is good to be back on here, i used to be on here years ago (prob.
8ish) under the moniker mystruggle.
Hi Aaron welcome back to the forum. I look forward to hearing more about your research project.
I am already investigating some concerning ritual observance
Jonathan Haidt makes some interesting observations about this in "The Righteous Mind".
to the majority of people who investigate the activities of the wts from its beginning history there were obvious false proclamations and doctrines propagated by the wts.. a matter of fact the wts produced a long list of literature that posted proclamations on the front cover and went into detail of things that were suppose to happen, from jesus returning changing the world in which we live and so on.. wonderful things one might say but not factual or either theologically correct .
.
how many of them truly believe in God - Venus
I did. One hundred percent genuine.
went to the meeting last night with my believing wife.
the co was visiting and delivered a really cult-ish talk on loyalty but that's another story.. they made the announcement that starting january 1st they were going to have only 3 congregations in this town instead of 4.. they are dissolving one and growing the territories of the remaining 3. the reason given is that many of the elders are getting up there in age and can't do what they used to do.
basically not enough elders and ministerial servants...or even men reaching out for that matter.
With the legal problems the WT are experiencing why would anybody want to be an elder anymore? It is also becoming clear that the organisation is happy to throw elders under the bus when problems become public.