im following along a little from the above topic.
i remember in a book study reading that there are more people alive on the earth today than have ever lived in the past.......6 billion.
so is it true that less than 6 billion people have ever lived up to this century?.
I could just see it now. A janitor tries to build a rocket, and uses window cleaner to propel it.
I know why WTWizard,
The window cleaner could not afford a good burbon like Rebel Yell to propel it. (I really think he drank the stuff himself and substituted whatever else was readily available.) But will the new system be over crowded? Yes! Why? Because there will be a final culling out of those unsuitable for what God has in store for our future. It is called the final test.
Joseph
how far do you allow the government tell you what to do?
do you allow governemt to make those dicisions for you?
Free2beme,
It is not just the military. We also have local police, boarder patrol and others empowered to protect us. This is all a part of life our time this side of the Kingdom. And it is sad too since what is delaying the Kingdom I feel is a lack of suitable candidates to populate and function in it..
Joseph
how far do you allow the government tell you what to do?
do you allow governemt to make those dicisions for you?
Does the US make mistakes? They do as does every person, nation and leaders. I would still rather live here in the US than anywhere else in the world. If you don't feel that way why are you still here?
Are they always the good guy? Why don't you ask those who have benefited from the blood of our Marines, Air Force, Army, National Guard and Navy? (and the Coast Guard and Ready Reserves.)
Carla,
Your points are well taken and should be given serious consideration. Perhaps if we looked back to the times when Israel killed and conquered and ask ourselves, was that wrong? Does God disagree with killing and worse still will He punish such killers and exclude them from His Kingdom? And how did Cornelius get into the Faith while still being in the military service of Rome? If he was commanded to kill Christians that rebelled against Rome for example would he have refused?
Somewhere, somehow, something, is missed in this discussion. Who’s side is God on when it comes to such killing and why?
Romans 13: 1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: 4 For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Governments are ordained by God. They are permitted to exist in order to maintain peace in the world until the Kingdom of God replaces them. We are here told to be in subjection to them. Cornelius was obligated to be in subjection to them. When such Governments step out of line other Governments are empowered to resist them and restore order once again. Killing is a part of this process and is not viewed as bad the way many do here.
Then again we have another view given by Paul which went like this: Col 1: 14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: 15 Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature: 16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.
Christ is the head of such governments and they consist by him. The reasons for this is the same as the ones given above. Killing should it become necessary to prevent our being overrun by evil will not result in the loss of our salvation as some may think. Then we also have our Lord’s personal view which was: 36 He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. 37 It is written: ‘And he was numbered with the transgressors’; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment. 38 The disciples said, "See, Lord, here are two swords." "That is enough," he replied." When these swords were used improperly our Lord resolved the problem but did not cast out the one that abused them. They would now be essential to the Faith which has an obligation to support such higher powers in this endeavor.
Joseph
it struck me this past year, with respect to jw teachings about the timing of genesis 1, that even in things that really have no impact on what most jws think of as "core doctrine" the watchtower society sticks to its traditions over what the bible says.
this was again brought home in the september, 2006 awake!
17 between me and the sons of israel it is a sign to time indefinite, because in six days jehovah made the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day he rested and proceeded to refresh himself.
3) If you accept the above, do you accept that this Law demeans females, ascribing to them an inferior status in numerous avenues of life than it does to males?
HS,
I have already responded to this. Our Lord's words qualified what was done and why. You did not live with them and see what kind of life they had. All you have is what you think the interpretation of such texts means putting the worse spin on it that you can. Did not females hold high station in Israel yielding great influence? Ex 15:20 Then Miriam the prophetess, Aaron’s sister, took a tambourine in her hand, and all the women followed her, with tambourines and dancing. 2Ki 22:14 Hilkiah the priest, Ahikam, Acbor, Shaphan and Asaiah went to speak to the prophetess Huldah, who was the wife of Shallum son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe. She lived in Jerusalem, in the Second District. They were more advanced than we are today, and while there may have been bad apples in the Nation we have the same here and now. You have not disproved what I have said regarding the accuracy of Alanf's statements. In this you have failed.
Joseph
it struck me this past year, with respect to jw teachings about the timing of genesis 1, that even in things that really have no impact on what most jws think of as "core doctrine" the watchtower society sticks to its traditions over what the bible says.
this was again brought home in the september, 2006 awake!
17 between me and the sons of israel it is a sign to time indefinite, because in six days jehovah made the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day he rested and proceeded to refresh himself.
Though the word 'property' may substituted in the OT with others words, the principle of male ownership of women in ancient Hebrew Biblical times is not one that can be disputed.
HS,
What? You admit an error has been made, a critical word misused but discount it? Not an error or an inaccurate statement according to you. Yet this is an admission that my observation was justified. And you are well aware that if NT texts are used this argument will fail. So you must keep them out. Yet Alanf agreed with such principles thus bringing them into modern times. What we can be sure of regarding such OT times is this: Mt 19:8 Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. In other words this did not come from the way God created man and women since AlanF said: "I agree! That women are men's property is perfectly in harmony both with God's explicit laws and with the way in which he created men and women, where women are in subjection to men, both by nature and by common assent." This is wrong inaccurate and not supported by scripture as were other remarks made by him.
Joseph
it struck me this past year, with respect to jw teachings about the timing of genesis 1, that even in things that really have no impact on what most jws think of as "core doctrine" the watchtower society sticks to its traditions over what the bible says.
this was again brought home in the september, 2006 awake!
17 between me and the sons of israel it is a sign to time indefinite, because in six days jehovah made the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day he rested and proceeded to refresh himself.
If you do, in what way is the point AlanF made inaccurate?
HS,
I already explained why. Then the suggestion that there was a lack of progress in the Bible and using words like property were not helpful. Much progress was made back then and especially in NT texts. Today children (women included) are responsible to their parents until they reach a certain age. Such parents are expected to deal with them as they grow up. Are they then property of such parents? Do not parents today have something to say about who such children associate with? Are things so different now? Hardly as we simply use different words to say the same things. Break the Law and you will soon find out that you are the property of the state. There are obligations imposed on all of us like them or not. It is simply a matter of how such responsibilities are stated. While things may have gone too far and dominance may have been carried to extremes in some cases this was corrected in NT times and would not be tolerated in the Faith any longer. We face similar problems today. Humanity not scripture is the real problem. Simply do a search of the word property in the AV or NIV bible. Will you find agreement with Alan's comments? No! Paul put down those that tried doing this in the Faith. But what did AlanF say about such progress? "That women are men's property is perfectly in harmony both with God's explicit laws and with the way in which he created men and women, where women are in subjection to men, both by nature and by common assent." This is inaccurate HS, just as his inability to accept other texts using the word "day" for an event or epoch of known or unknown length.
Joseph
(matthew 11:11-12) 11 truly i say to you people, among those born of women there has not been raised up a greater than john the baptist; but a person that is a lesser one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is.
12 but from the days of john the baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it.
i can't tell you how many times i used to use that verse to defend our two-class system; the earthly class which would be comprised of our friend mentioned above and us, the lowly ones who didn't have the "heavenly calling".
The lame excuse they use is that John the Baptist (who they rudely call John the Baptizer ) died before the heavenly calling was open.
WTwizard,
How about that! I was just about to add a P.S to Mary to bring this out but you beat me to it. Good for you. Their thinking is that our Lord''s death or perhaps the Pentecost that followed made some sort of difference. But our Lord made such an opportunity available and open since John so we do not have to guess at it. This is so simple it is frightening. Thanks for pointing this out wiz.
Joseph
(matthew 11:11-12) 11 truly i say to you people, among those born of women there has not been raised up a greater than john the baptist; but a person that is a lesser one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is.
12 but from the days of john the baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it.
i can't tell you how many times i used to use that verse to defend our two-class system; the earthly class which would be comprised of our friend mentioned above and us, the lowly ones who didn't have the "heavenly calling".
Well Mary,
The WT does not understand scripture and very little of what they teach will stand. The sad thing about errors like this is that it conceals the truth, significant in many cases, some vital to life and they will die without ever learning it. They give their allegiance to men and reject the Christ as a consequence even denying Him by refusing to partake of the Passover bread and wine. While we may have some success in recovering from such indoctrination, how much more still lies hidden, waiting to be revealed? We do not yet have all the answers and perhaps the many here will some day come up with a truth yet unknown by the Faith. In my case I give the WT less benefit of the doubt than you, but then again I have had enough of their abuses and lies.
Joseph
(matthew 11:11-12) 11 truly i say to you people, among those born of women there has not been raised up a greater than john the baptist; but a person that is a lesser one in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he is.
12 but from the days of john the baptist until now the kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it.
i can't tell you how many times i used to use that verse to defend our two-class system; the earthly class which would be comprised of our friend mentioned above and us, the lowly ones who didn't have the "heavenly calling".
Of course, there is no concept in the text of an earthly hope (which JtB has) and a heavenly hope that the followers of Jesus have, but there is a clear discontinuity here of the situation "until John" (v. 13) and the situation "from the days of John the Baptist to now" (v. 12), with John marking the dividing line between the two.
Leolaia,
I did not bother to argue with the point made about John still being alive as it did not matter since John’s existence divided the facts under discussion. Personally I feel that John was already beheaded and dead. But the concept of a heavenly hope is not about a place other than right here. For such reasons our Lord will return once again in the flesh. (Acts 1:11) This was the hope Jews had which was common to them and there was no need to elaborate in this text. After all our Lord said to Martha: Joh 11:24 Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the resurrection at the last day. 25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: 26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?
The immediate result was a resurrection to human life with the main difference at such a future time being immortality. And our Lord also taught: Mt 19:28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. So a human existence was anticipated but with a twist which went like this: Lu 20:36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Thus angels are compared to their immortality which Paul emphasized as well. How this all became intertwined with a non-human existence somewhere else is the real mystery.
Joseph
it struck me this past year, with respect to jw teachings about the timing of genesis 1, that even in things that really have no impact on what most jws think of as "core doctrine" the watchtower society sticks to its traditions over what the bible says.
this was again brought home in the september, 2006 awake!
17 between me and the sons of israel it is a sign to time indefinite, because in six days jehovah made the heavens and the earth and on the seventh day he rested and proceeded to refresh himself.
AlanF,
I saw your response to TopHat and disagreed with both of you. There was no further need to bother with such error. You have not addressed my point which any simply look up will verify. And I saw was your ridicule of others making the same observation. Regarding your further response to TopHat you also said:
! But how far has the Bible's view of, say, women come along in that time period? Nada. Remember that the Bible's view of women is that they are the property of men -- a special kind of property, but still property. A girl was her father's property until she married, after which she was her husband's property. Whose property are you?
What nonsense. Paul made it a point that women were all equal in the faith and staunchly apposed those that disagreed. He even had overseers appointed to oppose such men and sent others like Timothy out to identify and oppose them. I know that many do not understand what he was teaching and take his comments the wrong way. But I expect more from those doing a critical analysis of the texts.
Joseph
