Posts by Drearyweather

19

Pioneers Living With Married Couple

by msecodo in

so ... situation:.

a baptized married couple, with no privileges that we know of, have opened their home to 2 unmarried regular pioneers because of the pioneers' financial issues (limited income).. - husband works from home.

- wife doesn't work and stays home or in service.

Drearyweather

The wife and I were talking and found out that this situation existed for about 1-2 months ... THEN, the elders met with the pioneers (not the couple) and told them to leave the house or they would no longer be pioneers. No reason given but Hebrews 13:17 read about obeying the elders.

If Elders give no reason, the pioneers don't need to get out of the house. If the Elders decide to remove them as pioneers, they will have to give a reason and inform the pioneer why they have decided to delete. The Pioneer can go all the way to the branch office for this.

I think the rumors could be true. Such a thing has happened in our local cong too.

72

JW`s Lie about Christendom hiding the Name Jehovah.or its equivalent Yahweh

by smiddy in

jehovahs witnesses have been outspoken over the years/decades that christendom have been hiding or obscuring or even eliminating gods name jehovah from the general public.. how true is that statement .?.

1. it was a catholic monk of the 13th century that first coined the name jehovah in the english language.. 2.the roman catholic douay version of the bible does have the name jehovah in it.

about the 16th century.

Drearyweather

Any JW lurkers please take note . As l said before the WT teaching that the Trinity was " thought up in Nicea is total bunkum . lf they are any kind of scholars they SHOULD know that .

jhine, thanks for bringing up the Ignatius quote.

However, I don't feel JW's teach that the Trinity was 'thought up' during Nicean council. In their book Reasoning From the Scriptures, the say the following under the heading:

What is the origin of the Trinity doctrine?

The New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4). . . . The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. . . . By the end of the 4th century . . . the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.”—(1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”—(1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101989276

So the JW's accept that the concept of Trinity was gradually developing, however, was adopted as an official creed during the Council of Nicea, which is I guess is true.

13

What or Who is a Jehovah's Witness?

by Vanderhoven7 in

what or who is a jehovah's witness?.

a jehovah's witness is a person whose faith is centered in men (gb) not god or the bible and who must never voice any opinion on any doctrine contrary to that of the gb or risk discipline and possible disfellowship.. well....its a start.. vander .

Drearyweather

a small correction:

n. who take full advantage of government provisions such as health care and income benefits, yet will not vote, or work for a governmental organization.

JW's take advantage of governmental provisions because individual JW's pay their taxes and hence as legal citizens they have the right to get these benefits.

72

JW`s Lie about Christendom hiding the Name Jehovah.or its equivalent Yahweh

by smiddy in

jehovahs witnesses have been outspoken over the years/decades that christendom have been hiding or obscuring or even eliminating gods name jehovah from the general public.. how true is that statement .?.

1. it was a catholic monk of the 13th century that first coined the name jehovah in the english language.. 2.the roman catholic douay version of the bible does have the name jehovah in it.

about the 16th century.

Drearyweather

Jehovahs Witnesses have been outspoken over the years/decades that Christendom have been hiding or obscuring or even eliminating Gods name Jehovah from the general public.

How true is that statement .?

The following are some points that do show that efforts were made to hide the name:

1. In 405 CE Jerome (a Catholic priest and secretary to Pope Damasus I) did not include God’s name in his translation, the Latin Vulgate

2. The Catholic Douay Version, which was based on Latin Vulgate, does not use the divine name

3. You say that the Catholic Monk invented the name Jehovah. Is it? See what the Catholic Encyclopedia says regarding it, under the name 'Jehovah':

Finally, the word is found even in the "Pugio fidei" of Raymund Martin, a work written about 1270 (ed. Paris, 1651, pt. III, dist. ii, cap. iii, p. 448, and Note, p. 745). Probably the introduction of the name Jehovah antedates even R. Martin.

4. A 2008 directive to all Catholic Bishops directs them to not use any form of the Tetragrammaton in their Church services:

http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/the-mass/frequently-asked-questions/upload/name-of-god.pdf

So to make the claim Christendom has been burrying that name is ludicrous since they actually invented it eg: Roman catholics.in the 13th Century.adding vowels to the 4 letters of the tetragrammaton translated in english .

If Catholics 'invented' the name Jehovah, why don't they use it in their Official translations and in their Church services?

72

JW`s Lie about Christendom hiding the Name Jehovah.or its equivalent Yahweh

by smiddy in

jehovahs witnesses have been outspoken over the years/decades that christendom have been hiding or obscuring or even eliminating gods name jehovah from the general public.. how true is that statement .?.

1. it was a catholic monk of the 13th century that first coined the name jehovah in the english language.. 2.the roman catholic douay version of the bible does have the name jehovah in it.

about the 16th century.

Drearyweather

.The Roman Catholic Douay version of the bible does have the name Jehovah in it. About the 16th century. AD

Are you sure that 16th Century Douay has the name Jehovah in it?

7

Romans 4:5

by NJ501 in

romans 4:5new international version (niv).

5 however, to the one who does not work but trusts god who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.. .

i need help to understand this scripture.

Drearyweather

NJ5011

In this scripture, Paul explains the difference between Faith and Works.

If you read the surrounding scriptures, you will see it. When a slave receives wages for his work, the wage is not a gift, but an amount that is due to him by his master.

However, salvation and grace is a gift, not a wage that we receive due to our works. So even though a person may work to back up his faith, the credit for his saving goes to his faith and not the works that he did.

Abraham did lot of works in obedience to God and because of his love for him, like leaving his home and personal luxuries behind, circumcising the male members of his family, readiness to sacrifice Isaac, etc. However, the credit for his righteousness did not go to this works, but to his Faith - Genesis 15:6.

To understand this, take the example of a husband and wife who are celebrating their 50th marriage anniversary. When the husband gifts something expensive to his loving wife, he is not paying her for all the dishes and clothes that she washed, the food that she cooked for the last 50 years, etc. She is not a maid. He gifts her for being faithful and loving throughout the years. Similarly, God gifts us with salvation not because we have worked for him, but because we showed love and faith while doing those works.

7

Miracles and responses—both are not explicable

by venus in

a miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws.

bible reports many such miracles.

interestingly, responses to these reported miracles could be even labeled as a greater miracle which cannot be explained by any known law, logic or experience.

Drearyweather

If there is no ruler in the White House for 40 days, would the American people forget their founding fathers and all the bloodshed in the freedom struggle?

We cannot compare the behavior patterns of the ancient Israelites and the 21st Century Americans. We are discussing about Jews who spent generations in hardship and slavery and then are stranded in a wilderness.

You provide three reasons why people rejecting Jesus. But they do not explain why should anyone prefer a bandit to an altruistic miracle worker.

The reason is simple: Indoctrination.

Matt 27:20: But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitude that they should ask Barabbas, and destroy Jesus.

why should anyone prefer a bandit to an altruistic miracle worker.

What do you think, why did 27,000 foreign people leave their families, friends, governments to join the ISIS? Persuasion? Indoctrination? Delusion?

11

Isn’t concept of sinner itself faulty?

by venus in

a person may sometimes get swelling on his leg and may have limped a few times—but he is never called lame.

similarly, sometimes a person may slip into selfishness and use his free-will to his own harm or to the harm of others—but this does not make him a sinner because the ability to do the contrary (ability choose to commit virtuous act to any extent) too exists in him.

if one’s occasional sinning does not make him a sinner, sin of another person (such as first human couple) can never make others sinners.

Drearyweather

Concept that sin is hereditary is the invention of Paul who openly admits that he was not inspired--2 Cor. 11:17

The concept that sin is hereditary was not 'invented' by Paul. Rather, Paul simply explained what was already known to people from long ago:

Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.- Psalms 51:5

11

Isn’t concept of sinner itself faulty?

by venus in

a person may sometimes get swelling on his leg and may have limped a few times—but he is never called lame.

similarly, sometimes a person may slip into selfishness and use his free-will to his own harm or to the harm of others—but this does not make him a sinner because the ability to do the contrary (ability choose to commit virtuous act to any extent) too exists in him.

if one’s occasional sinning does not make him a sinner, sin of another person (such as first human couple) can never make others sinners.

Drearyweather

If sin is an inherited tendency as you believe, how can people at times choose to commit virtuous act?

That's because we have a conscience and the ability to fight sinful tendencies. It's like asking How can a double amputee run and win an Olympics? By his ability to fight all odds and becoming victorious. Remember, Sin did not remove all other good qualities that we already have. It was an addition. Any person with determination can fight wrong thoughts and do good. Our heart is treacherous, but God's love is greater than our hearts.

Sin is not hereditarily passed

Since you are talking about a Biblical concept, allow Romans 5:12 to answer this: Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

7

Miracles and responses—both are not explicable

by venus in

a miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws.

bible reports many such miracles.

interestingly, responses to these reported miracles could be even labeled as a greater miracle which cannot be explained by any known law, logic or experience.

Drearyweather

No, this does not defy logic. What happened can be called different variations of human behavior.

I would see the accounts differently:

1. The response to the parting of the Red sea was not the making of the Golden calf. The song sung by Miriam and the other women and all the Israelites were a response to the Red sea. Exodus 15:1 and 20 says that Moses, the Israelites, Miriam and all the women participated in the song. This victory song was the response to the miracle. And all Israelites participated in singing it.

The event of the golden calf took place later due to the fact that Moses was away for 40 days. And it’s was not the entire Israel’s reaction, but as the account says, 3000 men were killed for this, or, 0.5% of the total Israelite men.

No matter how good you do, you will always have some people who won’t be grateful for you have done, or will forget the favor you do to them. That’s what we call human, thankful today, thankless tomorrow.

2. Many people benefited from the miracles of Jesus, however, long before his death, many of these who benefited from him later left him because of the following reasons:

a. They were interested only in physical miracles and not his teachings (John 6:26)

b. Jesus refused to be their leader (John 6:14, 15)

c. They did not understand Jesus teachings (John 6:66)

These were the ones who wanted Jesus dead. It was not that they suddenly turned against their leader. They had already left following him long before his death.