where did this phrase 'in the truth' come from?.
it's been around as long as i can remember.
is it from the time they were promoting 'the truth shall make you free' book back in 1943?
This phrase is a title of Jesus when he claimed to be The Way, The Truth & The Life.
By referencing the organization as the Truth instead of Jesus, it is a subtle way to make themselves a type of Savior.
Many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and will deceive many. - Mark 13: 6
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
The problem with that term (omnibenevelent) is that it is pretty easy to show that Yahweh is not omnibenevolent.
@ TonusOH
Sure he is. Your next breath is a sign of his benevelence.
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
@AnyMous
Jesus died by crucifixion
Some theories (e.g., the swoon hypothesis) suggest Jesus may not have died but instead survived in a critically wounded state.
That doesn't seem plausible since he was severely whipped, hung on a cross, had a spear thrust in his side, and yet appeared to hundreds of people only a few days later with no apparent sign of streets from the abuse.
The disciples had experiences they believed were appearances of the risen Jesus
Psychological phenomena like hallucinations or mass delusions could explain these experiences.
Hard to image who hundreds of people could have a hallucination about interacting with the risen Jesus over a several month period, in different places. Especially, when people touched him and his healed wounds.
The disciples were transformed and willing to suffer and die for their belief
Many religious movements have members willing to die for a cause (e.g., Islamic martyrs, Heaven’s Gate). Sincerity does not equal truth.
But, that is not what we are dealing with here. You are asking us to believe that the apostles (and other eye-witnesses) were willing to die for a cause they KNEW to be a hoax. That ain't going to ever happen. People are willing to die for things they believe to be true, but would they all be willing to die for something they know to be a lie? I don't think so.
Paul, a skeptic and persecutor, converted after an experience he believed was of the risen Jesus
Paul’s experience as described could be explained as a medical event, such as an epileptic seizure
But, this is not what he said is it. He said that Jesus blinded, told him the things he was going to suffer for him him. His eyesight was restored and he immediately switched sides, going from a persecuter to a defender of Cbrist.
You are asking us to believe all this happened from an epileptic seizure? I'm not seeing how that is remotely possible.
"Personal comes from Non-Personal"
Consciousness is studied as an emergent property of neural complexity. Neuroscientific research supports that self-awareness, emotions, and decision-making arise from interactions among neurons and biochemical processes in the brain. Models of emergent complexity suggest that personality and agency result from layers of cognitive functions rather than requiring an external personal agent.
What are you talking about? Has a personality ever resulted from any known process other than reproduction? No. It is ludicrous to suggest otherwise. In otherwords, a miracle.
"Morality comes from Nothing"
Morality is widely studied in evolutionary biology and psychology as a product of social and survival mechanisms. Studies in primates, early human societies, and evolutionary game theory suggest that moral behaviors like cooperation, fairness, and reciprocity arise due to natural selection favoring group survival. Morality is not derived from "nothing" but from social contracts, evolutionary pressures, and cognitive processes.
That description is incompatible with data. Even the most remote tribes who have been cut off from the rest of civilization observe a moral code similar to everyone else’s. Although differences certainly exist in civil matters, virtues like bravery and loyalty and vices like greed, theft and cowardice are universal. If man were responsible for that code, it would differ as much as every other thing that man has invented. Animals have no problem with theft, greed etc.
Not buying it.
"Reason comes from Non-reason"
Cognitive science and evolutionary biology suggest that rational thought evolved as an adaptive trait. Early organisms developed simple problem-solving and predictive abilities, which became more sophisticated through natural selection. Neural networks, trial-and-error learning, and reinforcement mechanisms led to the development of logic, abstraction, and critical thinking. While the initial cognitive processes may not have been "reasoned" in the human sense, they laid the foundation for rational faculties.
You or anyone else can suggest all they want to. But it won't change the fact that if your arbitrariness was true, then the principles of logic or reason would vary by circumstance. But, that is not the way reason works is it? No, reason and logic are stable regardless, of location, people group, or circumstance.
Dr. Jason Lisle explains how good reasoning and "right" thinking is supposed to work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LAFmAkqYhA&ab_channel=TheChurchatPecanCreek%2CByPastorTreyTalley
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
The verse states that god creates evil. It seems more straightforward to read it as god being responsible for evil.
For God to be God, He must be omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient. Otherwise you are referring to a different God.
You forget that God is not obligated to same any of us, because of our sin. Of course God creates evil for his enemies. God pretty much had a hands off approach unless evil people thried to overthrow or interfere with his plan for salvation.
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
@Duran
Havent you heard? Jesus said that he would die a sacrifical death to reconnect those who wanted it to the Source of Life. Then to prove he was God beyond any doubt he would raise himself from the dead, while he was still dead. Then he did it. To maintain a reasonal skepticism of the resurrection, all you have to do is expalin away the basic facts that most schoiars accept. The below facts are accepted by a majority of scholars who publish in this area regardless of whether or not they are atheist, Jewish, agnostic, hindu, Christian or otherwise.
After you provide a plausible deniabiity explanation for each these facts, then all you have to do is provide some data to support the many fantastic atheist miracles they believe in that I referenced earlier:
Matter produces information
Order comes from Chaos
Life comes from non-life
Personal come from Non-Personal
Morality comes from Nothing
Reason comes from Non-reason
Regarding the difference between Jesus and other God figures like Zeus, I say this:
Two thousand years ago you could still travel to Crete and visit the tomb of Zeus, who was an actual figure at one time, as was Buddah, Mohammed, Pharohs, etc. Mount Yuchtas is the final resting place of the greatest god of the Greeks - Zeus. What makes Jesus different than these other gods, is that he is still alive. The rest are all dead. Jesus tomb was found to be empty three day after his murder.... just like he predicted. Why would anyone want to worship a dead guy when they could be adopted into the family of the living God?
When you add it all up, by far the weakest position are the atheist miracles that have ZERO support. Perhaps that is the reason why global atheism is in steep decline and is currently around 1.8% of the world population down from 4.5% in 1970.
By far, the strongest contender for God among the gods is Jesus. This is supported by not only his amzaing teachings, now firmly embedded in Western culture; but more specifically his prediction of self-resurrection and his historical success in performing such a feat, a feat that ONLY the Creator could do.
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
@KalebOutWest
All people do not know God exists. Since when? That is a lie.
People are designed to be "God"
So you do belive in God.
You are making my point is that atheism, as you put it: "and its dogma cause only confusion, stupidity, and the retardation of human capacity" by believing in miracles without a miracle worker:
Matter produces information
Order comes from Chaos
Life comes from non-life
Personal come from Non-Personal
Morality comes from Nothing
Reason comes from Non-reason
What data leads you to believe that any of these atheist fantasies could possibly be true?
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
@Duran,
All people know God exists. There has never been a culture yet discovered without a belief in God. The evidence for God is seen by the things he has made. To deny this is to believe in miracles without a miracle worker.; which I might point out is infinitely more difficult to believe in....
Atheist Miracles Include:
Matter produces information
Order comes from Chaos
Life comes from non-life
Personal come from Non-Personal
Morality comes from Nothing
Reason comes from Non-reason
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
We can settle on any definition of god that you want.
@TonusOH - Are you good with the commonly accepted definition of God: The Supreme Being who is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent?
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
@TonusOH
Again, you are talking about a different god, than God. This IS your premise, indicated by your use of the little "g".
God is described as omnipotent, omniscience, and omnipresence. Just googling "definition of God" produces:
Why isn't the definition that everyone else uses good enough for you? Doesn't make any sense does it?
This is the primary tool of deception that the Watchtower uses. For instance, Heb. 11: 15 says that Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant. The WT has denied Justification through the new covenant since the 1930's to new converts.
However, if you ask a JW if Jesus is their Mediator, they will lie, and claim that he is, even though they reject the new covenant at each memorial, which is what he mediates. They change the definition of the word mediator (without letting others know) to mean a mediator of prayers, pointing out that they end their prayers with we-ask-all-this-in-Jesus-name-amen. The position of mediator in the NT is defined as applying to the new covenant, not prayers.
They do this because they know that no one in their right mind would reject Jesus as their Mediator "for forgiveness of sins" (Mt. 26:27-28) So, they change the meaning so they won't appear like a satanic cult that rejects Jesus.
Your mind functions similarly when it has anything to do with God. I give you lots of thumbs up on most of your posts that don't have to do with God. But, when it comes to God, your mind is just broken. You are using the same sleight of definition trick that we we all subjected to from WT.
we get old because jehovah had to prove to all the angels that his way of ruling was the best?
that's the sorriest argument the watchtower has come up with.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/11hz_jqjkjo.
The point that I am (continually) making is that we should judge god by his actions.
@TonusOH - And, it is the premise behind this proposition that seems so puzzling to others. You rightly use the little "g" when describing the god you imagine. That is a different God than the one you argue about with others. It is your delusional premise that you refuse to let go of that drives your arguments. Like the Watchtower, you use a definition other than the one commonly accepted in a dictionary when it suits you. Are you trying to improve the overall moral character of your rebellion against God?
Anyway, when we are all using the same definition, your argument immediately falls apart. William Lane Craig explains:
Given the dizzying complexity of life, we are simply in no position at all to judge that God has no good reason for permitting some instance of suffering to afflict our lives. Every event that occurs sends a ripple effect through history, such that God’s reason for permitting it might not emerge until centuries later and perhaps in another country. Only an all-knowing God could grasp the complexities of directing a world of free people toward his envisioned goals.
Just think of the innumerable, incalculable events involved in arriving at a single historical event, say, the Allied victory at D-day! We have no idea of what suffering might be involved in order for God to achieve some intended purpose through the freely chosen actions of human persons. Nor should we expect to discern God’s reasons for permitting suffering. It’s hardly surprising that much suffering seems pointless and unnecessary to us, for we are overwhelmed by such complexity.
This is not to appeal to mystery but rather to point to our inherent limitations, which make it impossible for us to say, when confronted with some example of suffering, that God probably has no good reason for permitting it to occur. Unbelievers themselves recognize these limitations in other contexts…Some short-term good might actually lead to untold misery, while some action that looks disastrous in the short term may bring about the greatest good. We don’t have a clue.
- William Lane Craig
