in the past, we used to hear talks on:.
avoiding sexual immorality and porn, as well as masturbation and other sexual practices.
why evolution cannot possibly be true.
Two things came to my mind after reading this thread.
1. The ex-wife who sees the husband treat his second with more kindness who then gets angry because of his changes.
2 The Gospel story of Pharisees harshing on Jesus for not shunning sinners.
I'm sure some of you are simply noticing changes that surprise you and do not intend to sound negative about that; but if you really have a problem with the church becoming incrementally less controlling and judgmental, ask yourself why.
hello!i am an independent scholar and researcher with a deep curiosity for ancient cultures and texts.
i do not adhere to any religious tradition, but my passion for understanding the mysteries of our past has led me to explore biblical stories in depth.
my particular interest lies in the original hebrew text of the bible, which i find fascinating both as literature and as a source of historical riddles.i recently completed a study that might change the way you perceive some well-known biblical stories.
Tim is a science fiction writer according to his facebook page. I think he might have a knack.
this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.
the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.
at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.
Anony mous....I think you are correct. What was called Arianism was essentially a logos theology. An attempt to bridge the Logos of Philo et al with a historized understanding of the Jesus of the Gospels. I also liked your comment regarding the psychological underpinnings of the Trinity. It makes sense to understand your a singular deity as all things, Wise and Fatherly, Vital and powerful, and pervasive and omnipresent. Giving faces to those aspects is how humans understand things. We make models and symbols to conceptualize intangibles.
JWs unknowingly have done the same, they just dumbed it down. Either, or should I say any, conceptualization of deities will suffer from scrutiny and rational analysis, because they are the product of poets and diviners, not scientists.
this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.
the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.
at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.
Funny how the pagans came up with the trinity beliefs first well before the Christians. So it's not a new belief the Christian just copied their pagan cousins.
Touchofgrey....can't the same be said for everything? God having sons, some of whom were thought to have walked on earth, for example.
this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.
the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.
at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.
It was like attendees at a Star Wars convention voting which episode was the best. Oh, and agreeing that Star Wars is way better than Star Trek and Dr. Who.
this is just a quick summary that might be useful regarding the threads about the trinity currently on the board.. in 325 ce, the nicene council was called by constantine to settle schisms within the christian church.
the argument about the nature of jesus in relation to god was one of the big problems that needed resolution.
at first, constantine told the 2 main players, alexander and arius to sort it out between themselves, as he, constantine didnt see it as overly important.
The council itself involved a narrow selection of attendees with views within the burgeoning Catholic church. These views did not include various adoptionist, docetic Christologies or most relevantly, Logos theology.
"Logos-theology which taught a two-stage existence for the Logos: He always existed inside God but became a separate Being - a distinct Reality - when God decided to create." wiki
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
This exercise has at least demonstrated the futility of debating doctrine with a church that has had 1800 years of eisegesis practice. JWs are amateurs by comparison.
in an earlier thread another poster asserted that there is no evidence that revelation 3:14 played a part in the 4th controversy that led to the trinity doctrine.
this was claimed as evidence that the description of jesus as “the beginning of the creation of god” in the verse was not understood to mean that jesus was god’s first creation.
the scholarly greek–english lexicon of the new testament & other early christian literature 3e (2001) by bauer, arndt, gingrich, and danker, in its latest edition states that “first creation” is indeed the probable meaning of the greek phrase.
deleted by me, because what's the point.
what is the purpose of yorww having a creed & the forty (40) basic, fundamental truth requirement?.
many people have wondered about the above question and our stand on the forty (40) basic, fundamental truths, and why we make it a requirement for individual jehovah's witnesses to believe these ideas before...before they can join our five (5) discussion boards.well, its called the yorww congregation, isn't it?its a congregation of like believers and persons of like faith.
(matthew 18:20) so they are supposed to agree on their beliefs, exactly as first century christians agreed upon their beliefs.
Again just a $40 book to save yourself, what a deal.
what is the purpose of yorww having a creed & the forty (40) basic, fundamental truth requirement?.
many people have wondered about the above question and our stand on the forty (40) basic, fundamental truths, and why we make it a requirement for individual jehovah's witnesses to believe these ideas before...before they can join our five (5) discussion boards.well, its called the yorww congregation, isn't it?its a congregation of like believers and persons of like faith.
(matthew 18:20) so they are supposed to agree on their beliefs, exactly as first century christians agreed upon their beliefs.
From what I can gather, the poster regards themselves as God's prophet sent to gather Jehovah's Witnesses (the true religion) into an online 'wilderness' to receive 'Divine Instruction' until the WT is disciplined sufficiently for being an NGO. I see they have suffered from a messiah complex for many years. I don't think we are doing them any favors enabling them.
As members of the YORWW Congregation, we believe and teach Jehovah's Witnesses are God's Name People, established as such in 1931,....Therefore, in harmony with the powerful judgment messages of the prophets of old, yes, our prophetic message today as shown above, is called THE "REPORT",....
So a "voice" that speaks from the "wilderness" point of view, then has to be viewed as coming from a source OUTSIDE of the camp of Israel -- the voice of a prophet of God. Therefore, if God were to raise up a "prophet" then in our day, during times of National Apostasy to warn the people, he would no doubt raise him up from the "wilderness" point of view, thus being seen by the majority of people as being OUTSIDE the camp of Israel or apostate nation. Also, as we might rightly expect, this "voice from the wilderness" would urge "repentance" like John the Baptist did during his day. And yet, we would rightly expect this "prophet" to be seen or perceived by the nation as a whole as a distant "voice", far away from the nation itself. This "voice" would no doubt be generally considered by the religious leaders of that time and general populous, to be an OUTSIDER to the nation of Israel, thereby speaking from a non-acceptable source or point of origin...namely, the "wilderness." Think about it.THE YORWW ARRANGEMENT AS GOD'S SPECIAL "SANCTUARY" OR "TABERNACLE" FOR ALL MANKIND!
