recent events and book reads (one suggested by cofty i believe- thank you) have lead me to the only logical and acceptable conclusion:.
there is no god.. simple logical reasoning: matter can neither me created or destroyed.
so the amount of mass in the universe is constant.
@enigma haha no I didn't even realize it was April fools. I'm not accustomed to remembering it's a holiday. Except Christmas, because it's always so in your face.
@marvin I guess I should say, logical to me. i can't believe I ever accepted faith in God TBH. It no longer makes sense to me for the reason I posted.
recent events and book reads (one suggested by cofty i believe- thank you) have lead me to the only logical and acceptable conclusion:.
there is no god.. simple logical reasoning: matter can neither me created or destroyed.
so the amount of mass in the universe is constant.
@cappy It is liberating. And I look forward to learning more.
@cantleave lol.
recent events and book reads (one suggested by cofty i believe- thank you) have lead me to the only logical and acceptable conclusion:.
there is no god.. simple logical reasoning: matter can neither me created or destroyed.
so the amount of mass in the universe is constant.
Recent events and book reads (one suggested by Cofty I believe- thank you) have lead me to the only logical and acceptable conclusion:
there is no God.
simple logical reasoning: matter can neither me created or destroyed. So the amount of mass in the universe is constant. This more complex reality is dumbed down in the idea of a God that has always been and always will be- but it's more accurate to say that mass has always been and always will be. It will change over time what it's made of: matter or energy. When matter, it is made up of elements, all the same elements all across the universe. With infinite time, a highly improbable possibility becomes 100% guaranteed and thus somewhere, sometime the elements mix just right and we get life. That life micro evolves over an incredible amount of time leading to macro changes and over a very long period of time we get here, today.
This is is logical. And religion must die so that we can survive before we all kill each other.
1sa 28:3-25 (nwt - not revised version).
7 finally saul said to his servants: seek for me a woman who is a mistress of spirit mediumship, and i will go to her and consult her.
then his servants said to him: look!
Back to Saul and the witch of Endor. If it was a demon, the demon would have refused to comply or would have given better news to Saul even if it was false information. Since the message from the woman came true it had to come from God. It would have to be God speaking through the brain pattern of Samuel.
I disagree with the premise that if it were demon it must have then refused to comply or give better news. Just because demons are fallen angels who rebel against God doesn't mean that they also must all have purely evil intent or be mischievous inherently. This would be akin to stating that a person who doesn't follow the bible or doesn't believe in God (hence rebels to various degrees) is always evil and mischievous but we know that isn't true. demons may have rebelled and may have a certain death awaiting them, but assuming that they then must behave in certain ways because it would make sense I don't think is logical.
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
WOW! JD is totally obtuse! - DDYep.
"tabernacle" = skene NOT naos.
Rev 7:15 naos - Strongs 3485 = a temple, a shrine, that part of the temple where God himself resides.
Only the priest could enter the naos.
Rev 21:3 skene - Strongs 4633 = tent
Omg. And where was the tent that the priest entered? Was it in heaven or was it on earth? Where was the temple IN JERUSALEM where GODS HOUSE was? Was it in Jerusalem, in Israel, on earth AMONG MEN or in heaven?
In both cases, the tent or tabernacle and the temple were on earth among men in the midst of the people. This is exactly where the book of revelation places it as well, hence the crowd, Ochlos, is in the Naos where God resides in the same sense as he always does/has in the bible among his people on earth. They are in the temple because they no longer have priests to represent them on earth and have been made clean and thus are holy and may enter the temple (check Hebrews chapter 7, where paul states there would no more be any priest succession as Christ is said to be the king priest for eternity who will never die).
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
No...
Rev 7:15
15 For this reason, they are before the throne of God; and they serve Him day and night in His [a]temple; and He who sits on the throne will spread His tabernacle over them.
Where is the temple and where is the tabernacle?
Revelation 21:3
3 And I heard a loud voice from the throne, saying, “Behold, the tabernacle of God is among men, and He will [a]dwell among them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be among them[b],
Because it's off topic, I won't post about it again. But they are before the throne but not in heaven, the tabernacle is shown to be among mankind in the context of revelation. It nowhere states that it is in heaven, only on earth, among mankind.
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
So your outnumbered by some very educated individualsNo I'm agreeing with all of them. You need to go back and read the conversation. I suggested you start a new topic if you want to discuss the great crowd. This thread is about homosexuality and the outdated moral edicts of the bible and those who follow it.
Somtimes posts here really frustrate me. You are factually wrong and that's the end of it. The word for crowd is not Naos. Good game. That was the entire conversation where you're concerned, and it is over. A topic discussing it is unnecessary.
Haters gonna hate. Won't matter what I say to you, or how many sources I quote- you will always be right. If I felt you were reasonable I'd next post pictures of the entires in these books- but where this is concerned you are not reasonable. You blindly hate the bible, and your ignorance of SOME but not ALL topics concerning it undermines you're entire viewpoint IMO.
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
Jd you are officially clueless, were you ever a JW?
Well I quoted James strong from his concordance. Vines dictionary and Greens interlinear bible all agree and confirm with one another. So your outnumbered by some very educated individuals, regardless of my opinion.
also yes I was a JW. They cost me a great deal in my life including a relationship with a loved one who lost their life.
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
I checked it out and the word naos appears never to refer to the crowd or be translated as great crowd or crowd. its translated as temple or used in another word for temple guardian.
The word used for crowd or multitude in revelation 7:9 is Ochlos, from der. Of 2192 (a vehicle); a disorganized throng (as borne along); by impl. The rabble; by extens. A class of people; fig. A riot... (1.) Used frequently in the four gospels and acts; elsewhere only in rev 7:9; 17:15; 19:1, 6; (2.) it denotes (2a) a crowd or multitude of persons; a throng (2b) often in the plural (2c) with 'polus', "much" or "great" it signifies (2c1) a great multitude (2c2) the common people (2c3) in jn 12:9, 'the people' stands in contrast with their leaders."
so not only is it not naos, but it is a word merely signifying a numerous group of people, often disorgaized. Which, in my opinion, further emphasizes the realy probability that the religions are traps and the disorganized multitude that isn't a part of them are the ones actually doing what we are supposed to.
in the january 2012 awake, pages 28-29 there is another article about homosexuality.. .
the writers argue that genetics, the environment, and sexual abuse do not justify homosexuality.
the bible clearly states that homosexuality is wrong and is an abhorrent sin.
JD - I am wondering if you have ever read the bible without Watchtower glasses?
I have/am. Witnesses are not the only ones who believe in this separation. And the reason is because of you read it literally it's clearly legitimate. This separation is the reason for the difference between 1thess and 2thess. In 1st he's talking about the nearness of their being taken to heaven, but in the second he's talking about the end far off in the future for everyone who doesn't ascend. There are a great many indications of this separation regardless of what JWs say about it.
Dont fall into the same mistaken logic they use of discrediting the statement/belief because they happen to share it. Where the bible is concerned, if taken literally as it says, they aren't wrong on everything. But they are wrong enough to be killing people and protecting pedos amongst many other issues.
