this morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
i indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than i, whose shoes i am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and in fire.matthew 3:11. .
apparently, it seems, the brothers statement came from the societys cd-rom.
DagothUr:
"I'm an Atheist and I believe you are living a form of delusion."
And that certainly is your prerogative to so believe.
"Apart from the voices in your heads, what other evidence of God's existence do you have?"
With all due respect, DUr, if you cannot grasp the "evidence of God's existence," then far be it from me to tell you what is self-evident. And I mean no disrespect by stating this.
--Inkie
this morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
i indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than i, whose shoes i am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and in fire.matthew 3:11. .
apparently, it seems, the brothers statement came from the societys cd-rom.
DagothUR:
You asked,
“I don't get it: ‘My Lord said to me’ means Jesus told you in your head?”
Let me answer this question: In a manner of speaking, yes. However, in truth, it’s more spirit to spirit than it is “in your head.” You know when you “hear” the voice and from whom (Jaheshua, whom perhaps you know better as “Jesus”) and whence it comes.
You also asked:
“Have you ever considered that it is not God who talks to you in your head, but another image of yourself?”
In answer to your second question, yes, I have considered that. However, I have dismissed such a thought because I been found to be error having thought that. It has been shown to me by my Lord that it is indeed Him who has been speaking to me.
--Inkie
this morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
i indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than i, whose shoes i am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and in fire.matthew 3:11. .
apparently, it seems, the brothers statement came from the societys cd-rom.
And . . . and . . . when
"My Lord then said to me: “When I washed their feet only, was I not, according to the definition of the words, ‘baptizing’ them?” Indeed he was."
How are we then to understand what he stated at Matthew 28:19-20? Something to make you go, "Hmm . . . ." His method v. everyone else's? And something (washing one another's feet) he commanded US to do, yes? (John 13) Hmm. . . .
this morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
i indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than i, whose shoes i am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and in fire.matthew 3:11. .
apparently, it seems, the brothers statement came from the societys cd-rom.
Nor must we forget that Jah's presence with Israel was during Israel's exodus from Egypt as both a Pillar of Cloud (by day) and a Pillar of Fire (by night). This is everywhere written in Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Psalms, and Prophets.
this morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
i indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than i, whose shoes i am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the holy spirit and in fire.matthew 3:11. .
apparently, it seems, the brothers statement came from the societys cd-rom.
This morning my brother asked me a question about the following biblical text.
“I indeed baptize you in water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you in the Holy Spirit and in fire .”—Matthew 3:11.
He, my brother, had a conversation with a brother in the congregation who stated that “being baptized by fire was not the [same as being baptized by] Holy Spirit.” Apparently, it seems, the brother’s statement came from the Society’s CD-ROM. The brother stated that “fire always means destruction or something destructive and not rewarding.” The brother also said “that the Disciples were not ‘immersed’ in fire” and, thus, asserting that what happened at Pentecost was not a baptism in fire.
I wondered about this and asked my Lord: ‘Lord, how am I to respond to this inquiry? I don’t know how to answer him (my brother).’ My Lord said to me: ‘Do what you normally do. Look up the words. Start there.’ So that’s what I did. I looked up the words.
I then began writing the following to my brother:
While it is true the fire can destroy, it is also known to cleanse or make pure, while at the same time not destroy that which has been placed in the fire, yes?
Note that the Greek word for fire (pyr) means first: “to purify.” Thus, this “brother’s” assertion (and the Society’s CD-ROM explanation) that “fire always means destruction or something destructive and not rewarding” is false.
Note also the meaning of “baptize”: 1) to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk); 2) to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe.
Note too that while “baptism” is defined as “dipping or submerging,” it is also defined as “wash[ing]” and to “bathe,” which does not necessarily REQUIRE that one be totally submerged or IMMERSED in water (or fire) to be cleansed. One can be “wash[ed]” with a wash cloth and thus be made clean, yes? Meaning? Meaning, again, that one does not have to be totally IMMERSED in fire to be made clean (as some would have you believe MUST be done).
At this point, my Lord reminded me, ‘Did I not also say when washing ONLY the feet of my disciples:
‘He that has bathed does not need to have more than his feet washed, but is wholly clean.’”—John 13:10.
So it’s not necessary to be IMMERSED entirely or washed entirely to be made clean as some would have you believe MUST be the procedure. When Christ ‘washed’ the feet of his disciples it wasn’t necessary to bathe their entire bodies for them to be made clean, now was it?
My Lord then said to me: “When I washed their feet only, was I not, according to the definition of the words, ‘baptizing’ them?” Indeed he was. Thus, the flames of fire (holy spirit) above the heads of the disciples at Pentecost was also a “baptism” by ‘holy spirit and in fire.’
So, if you follow the meanings of the two words themselves, you get “being baptized” or, said another way, you get cleansed, washed, made clean, and bathed, with fire that purifies. Yes? Fire is first and foremost a cleansing agent before it becomes a destroying agent. Jah himself is described as a “consuming fire” and yet, what does He choose first? He chooses FIRST to save before the necessity of destroying. And it takes a long, long, long time for Him to get to that point of destroying. ‘Jah, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness.’
So then, when John says that the One coming after him (Christ) will baptize with “holy spirit and in fire” it means Christ will “cleanse” and “purify” first and foremost.
--Inkie
can you believe this?.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/24/vatican-economic-reform-radical_n_1028061.html?icid=maing-grid7%7cmain5%7cdl3%7csec3_lnk1%7c106754.
--inkie.
in genesis jehovah tells abraham he's going to nuke sodom off the map, but the more reasonable then god abraham says "please jehovah do not get hot with anger with me, but what if three men who are good ae found in sodom....." etc etc.
so here we have a god being given good, merciful advice from his servant abraham.....personally i would rather worship abraham, praise his holy name...jehovah can burn in hell!!!!
!.
Witness 007: Have you actually READ THE ACCOUNT for yourself? Dang! You sure seem to make a lot of erroneous assertions in your posts. The “more reasonable than God”? You might try re-reading the account again a bit more slowly.
20 Consequently Jehovah said: “The cry ofcomplaint about Sod´om and Go·mor´rah, yes, it is loud, and their sin, yes, it is very heavy. 21 I am quite determined to go down that I may see whether they act altogether according to the outcry over it that has come to me, and, if not, I can get to know it.”
That seems ‘more than reasonable to me.’ Does it not to you? God heard things about S & G and thus decided to go and check it out to see if the things He heard were true. Sounds reasonable to me.
22 At this point the men turned from there and got on their way to Sod´om; but as for Jehovah, he was still standing before Abraham. 23 Then Abraham approached and began to say: “Will you really sweep away the righteous with the wicked?
Apparently, W007, you miss a lot of information before the conclusion you make. It is Abraham who engaged God in a conversation—Abraham isn’t accusing God, he’s merely asking questions of God. Abraham is showing what is reasonable and righteous to him, not accusing God of being unreasonable or unrighteous. God never said he wasn’t going to do what was right—au contraire.
24 Suppose there are fifty righteous men in the midst of the city. Will you, then, sweep them away and not pardon the place for the sake of the fifty righteous who are inside it? 25 It is unthinkable of you that you are acting in this manner to put to death the righteous manwith the wicked one so that it has to occur with the righteous man as it does with the wicked! It is unthinkable of you. Is the Judge of all the earth not going to do what is right?”
26 Then Jehovah said: “If I shall find in Sod´om fifty righteous men in the midst of the city I will pardon the whole place on their account.” 27 But Abraham went on to answer and say: “Please, here I have taken upon myself to speak to Jehovah, whereas I am dust and ashes. 28 Suppose the fifty righteous should be lacking five. Will you for the five bring the whole city to ruin?” To this he said: “I shall not bring it to ruin if I find there forty-five.”
29 But yet again he spoke further to him and said: “Suppose forty are found there.” In turn he said: “I shall not do it on account of the forty.” 30 But he continued: “May Jehovah, please, not grow hot with anger,
Abraham did not want to exasperate God—not that God would have been exasperated—only that Abraham did not want to do so.
but let me go on speaking: Suppose thirty are found there.” In turn he said: “I shall not do it if I find thirty there.” 31 But he continued on: “Please, here I have taken upon myself to speak to Jehovah: Suppose twenty are found there.” In turn he said: “I shall not bring it to ruin on account of the twenty.” 32 Finally he said: “May Jehovah, please, not grow hot with anger, but let me speak just this once: Suppose ten are found there.” In turn he said: “I shall not bring it to ruin on account of the ten.” 33 Then Jehovah went his way when he had finished speaking to Abraham, and Abraham returned to his place.—Genesis 18:20-33
And so, not even ten righteous could be found.
“So here we have a GOD being given good, merciful advice from his servant Abraham....”
Abraham was not giving ADVICE. Dang! Re-read the text! He as asking questions. Abraham was engaged in some rhetoric—but he certainly wasn’t giving advice.
if satan came down to eden and said...."hi there, i'm one of jehovahs angels...wanna try this fruit?
" would have worked.
i mean eve could have said regarding the snake...."okay for the last 100 years no animals here talked, except for adams parrot which calls him a "pretty boy" so i may have to talk to jehover about this....i mean everlasting life in paradise or......munch on this apple.....hmmmm i dont know, it looks yummy.
Sometimes you guys just make me shake my head. . . . Would you please, please, try to get your “facts” straight.
The account does not mention a “snake.” It mentions a “serpent.” The two are NOT the same. Nor does the account state that Satan “used” either a “snake” or a “serpent.” Satan IS a serpent—he didn’t use one.
As for Eve, was she blonde? Who cares? Regardless of her hair color she was dumb and deceived. Her husband could have saved her but instead he chose to join her.
Your headache is understandable, Witness 007. If Jah were to stop everyone from committing bad, in all your life (however old you are), how many times would He have had to stop you in your life from committing bad. Someone else here on this thread mentioned “free will.” And, yes, Jah did give us free will.
So, what’s your point?
dear friends:.
for years now after my exit from the wtbts i have searched for god.
as i have previously mentioned in other threads i looked into many other religions, including druidry, zen and tibetan buddhism (not really a religion), asatru, native american shamanism, kemetic orthodoxy, gnosticism and pandeism.
Awen, concerning some of your comments to PSac, you write:
In the Bible we are reminded time and again that it's through God's grace that we are deemed worthy of Him.
The Bible doesn’t say that. Where did you get that? We are never deemed “worthy” of Him. We are blessed by Him, yes. We are granted mercy by Him, yes. We are granted forgiveness by Him, yes. We are granted undeserved kindness by Him, yes. We are granted relationship with Him and His Son, yes. We are granted many things by Him, but “worthy”? Never. Where did you ever get that?
Yet we as a race have been waiting for 6,000 years for Him to act.
No we haven’t. Where did you ever get that the human race has been waiting that long for Him to act? Very little of the human race has ever known of the Most Holy One of Israel. If any can truly be said to have been waiting, it would be Israel, but certainly not the human race. You are talking out of your emotion (and making absurd assertions) not from facts.
I say "god" isn't worthy of us.
Whoa!!! When I read or hear statements like this, or similar to this, I think how arrogant they sound. How blasphemous they sound. If there is an almighty God who exists (and I do believe there is), to say such things is extremely arrogant, pompous, and most supercilious.
Many of us served god whole-souled with every bit of our strength, love and mind yet never received an answer to our prayers. We received no intervention in our lives. It has to be within God's will for him to help us.
You write that “[m]any of us served god whole-souled.” Did we? Did we, in fact? I am reminded of the biblical text where Paul is supposed to have said of the Jews: “They have a zeal for god but not according to accurate knowledge.” Many who claim to serve God with all their ‘strength, love, and mind’ may in fact be doing so in order to establish their ‘own righteousness’ rather than seeking God’s righteousness or trying to determine “How does God want to be worshiped”? You state: “It has to be within God’s will for him to help us.” Okay . . . and? Isn’t this also true of any parent? Really? You live in your parents’ house. Do you live by rules pertaining to Johnny’s parents or Susie’s parents on the next block down the street or do you live by YOUR parents rules?
What parent would treat their children like this?
Interesting . . . this question presupposes that we ARE children of God from the get-go. The biblical text says that the vast majority of mankind are not children of God. The biblical text does state how to become children of God but prior to DOING THAT, we are not children of God. You believe that all mankind are children of God, in all probability, because you were told this error. But those who told you these things either were lying to you or didn’t know themselves. You seem to have been a JW for some years (I do not know) and, if so, why do you not know what the biblical text says concerning this very issue on how one isn’t a child of God from the get-go or how one does become a child of God. You seem to imply that all humanity make up children of God and you couldn’t be in more error on this.
What human parent would allow their child to suffer only so that the parent's name could be magnified?
Please see above. ARE YOU a child of God simply because you are human? If so, how do you know this?
How unscrupulous is that? There is not a single parent that I know of, who when their child is sick wouldn't do everything in their power to ease their child's pain. Yet we get.....nothing.
Again, you assume that all of us are children of God. Your assumption is in error and thus your questions lack standing. There are those here on this board who do claim to be children of God and who will tell you that God often answers them. But because you don’t seem to get answers from God, shouldn’t that tell you something? Shouldn’t that make you examine whether or not you are a son or daughter? And, if not, find out how you can become one? It would me.
So to me god is like an abusive parent.
How sad for you, how very very sad.
One could say that because god created us we owe him.
One could say that, couldn’t one.
But even us lowly humans realize that you can't make someone love you if they have no love to give. Many of us have dealt with abusive parents and no matter how hard we tried there was no pleasing them. We were never good enough, faithful enough or whatever. God's silence all these thousands of years seem to be indicative of the same thing.
But, Awen, it’s only a seeming silence to those who are not His children, to those who arrogate sonship to themselves, to those without God. (Ephesians 2) God declared Himself to be the Father of Israel, declared Himself to be the God of Israel, and while, yes, other people of the nations could “come” to him, and be welcomed by him, if they approached according to His laws, he did not make them (those other nations) to be a “special property” or a “holy nation” or a “people for special possession,” or “sons” as he did with Israel and now as he does with His true “chosen ones” whom He takes in to become his “sons and daughters.”
What made the Hebrews in the Bible so good
Nothing. Where did you ever get the impression that the Hebrews were “so good”? Seriously?
(even though God called them stiff-necked) that God would appear in a burning bush, or part the Red Sea, speak from a windstorm?
Even you yourself admit that He called them stiff-necked. He not only called them stiff-necked, be He also called them hard-hearted, obstinate, and said that living among them is like living among scorpions. Where did you ever get they were “so good”? Again, have you NOT READ the biblical texts that answer your questions? No, seriously? How long have you been a JW and have supposedly read and/or studied the Bible? Have you NOT READ the texts that answer your questions?
These are just stories with no factual basis.
So you say.
There is no place where a "miracle" occurred that we can go back and say "look God was here." The stories in the Bible are just myths like every other religion. Almost no one serves the Egyptian gods or the Roman ones, or the Greek. Christianity is still young and I think eventually it will go the way of the Dodo bird. I say good riddance!
Why is it that people “require” a miracle from God? Require a “sign”? ‘A wicked and adulterous generation seek for a sign.’ And who says that “Christianity” is the true religion? Christianity as it has existed throughout the centuries has NEVER been the true religion. Duh! Relationship (think: father, son, daughter, brother, sister, mother), however, with God and His Christ is another matter entirely.
our readers ask: will the earth survive 2012?.
page 10: "when will this occur?
no human knows.
Lost Generation: Well doo-dah! Thank you for these. It is appreciated. --Inkie
