pomegranate

Joined

• started 35 topics
• posted 1,285 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by pomegranate

• 
  12

  Are you good enoughto attend?

  by eyeslice in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  are you good enough to attend an international 2003 district conventions?.

  other threads have brought up the subject of the planned 2003 district conventions ( http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.asp?id=34494&site=3 ), but do you qualify to attend a convention in another land?.

  according to the official letter, no one is to make private travel arrangements but must go through the official channels.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  The "Jews" are STILL making their "sacrifices."

  Matt 9:13
  13 But go and learn what this means: 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.'
• 
  9

  "jehovah?" me no tink so....

  by pomegranate in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "jehovah,".... that name is being dragged through the filthiest filth of the world's media day after day and this god seems powerless to stop it.

  does jehovah like the publicity of being associated with child molestation?

  if not, why is he letting this happen to his "holy name?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  The label that counts. Father. Abba. Daddy. Dada...
  That is a full encompassing of what He is.

  Solomon even admitted that God could not be contained in a temple. Please explain how God can be contained in a label.

  The source of "Jehovah" is middle ages Catholicism. As I have asked before, someone explain to me how this got to be accepted as God's "name." Jehovah's Witnesses own literature say is of TRADITION. Who here believes this man made tradition is acceptable to God and why? If before 1270 the "name" was never uttered, then the "name" isn't true.

  God's name = his historicity and reputation. That's the name that counts. At least to me.

  I understand you jack2.

  Dizzy Cat, I don't understand you.

  SYN, you are in the groove I believe.
• 
  30

  2 Cor 4:4: Jehovah=Satan?

  by Sirona in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i just can't see the answer to this question.

  it may be obvious, so please forgive me if you think i'm silly for asking.. 2 corinthians 4 verse 4 in the nwt:.

  "among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the christ, who is the image of god, might not shine through".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  Yes the bible does say that. I do not agree with that personally.

  Then why open a topic on the Bible, if you do not believe the Bible?
  
  If you are not looking, you are hiding.
• 
  9

  "jehovah?" me no tink so....

  by pomegranate in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "jehovah,".... that name is being dragged through the filthiest filth of the world's media day after day and this god seems powerless to stop it.

  does jehovah like the publicity of being associated with child molestation?

  if not, why is he letting this happen to his "holy name?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  You could say that God doesn't care, would you care what a flea thinks about you?

  If I made the flea to think, I would care what the flea thinks, other wise why give the flea thinking ability? If I made the flea I would care what the flea thinks, especially regarding me, who made the flea be able to think.

  Then again, there might not be a God like you say. I just leave it up to each person to decide that for themselves.

  I did not say there is no God, I said God's name isn't "Jehovah." Never has been, never will be. A little easy research will show that it is a man made tradition invented in 1270 AD by a Catholic priest.

  I have yet to have anyone explain to me how this got to be accepted as God's "name." If it is a man made tradition, it surely wasn't God's will to have a new utterance concocted to labelize Himself through a man made tradition. Surely, that's what it is, a man made tradtion. History proves that fact.

  Which is why I believe this name is now being dragged throught the mud of pedophilia.

  The true God would never let that happen to His "name" now would He? Me no tink so.

  Edited by - pomegranate on 14 August 2002 8:21:50
• 
  30

  2 Cor 4:4: Jehovah=Satan?

  by Sirona in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i just can't see the answer to this question.

  it may be obvious, so please forgive me if you think i'm silly for asking.. 2 corinthians 4 verse 4 in the nwt:.

  "among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the christ, who is the image of god, might not shine through".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  I'm not sure that God can be said to be doing something active (e.g. blinding minds) when actually he is being passive (e.g. failing ot heal)

  First, God does not "fail" to heal. He chooses NOT to heal which is just as "active" as healing, with that activity being defined as CHOOSING. YES or NO. "No" is just as active as "yes" when one is making a choice. NOT HEAL is just as active a decision as HEAL when making a choice. The HEAL means a release of power, the NOT HEAL means no release. When you make a choice, your NO is just as active as your YES. Giving sight is just as active as NOT giving sight.

  Then again, the bible does mention those chosen and those not chosen by God. Interesting perspective

  I believe that's what the real truth is all about. It's God's choice and man has no say. He decides right and wrong, good and bad, wheat and weed, light and dark, chosen and unchosen. Who are we to resist His will?
• 
  9

  "jehovah?" me no tink so....

  by pomegranate in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  "jehovah,".... that name is being dragged through the filthiest filth of the world's media day after day and this god seems powerless to stop it.

  does jehovah like the publicity of being associated with child molestation?

  if not, why is he letting this happen to his "holy name?".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  "Jehovah,".... that name is being dragged through the filthiest filth of the world's media day after day and this god seems powerless to stop it. Does Jehovah like the publicity of being associated with child molestation? If not, why is he letting this happen to his "holy name?"
  
  Could "Jehovah" in fact be a powerless false god that knows not how to keep his "sacred name" clean, because ...errrr...well, because he really is a dumb nothing? I really don't see how he can clean himself off either. Unless, his plan is to bring Armageddon fast and rid himself of the nasty soil that he is now covered in.
  
  Yeah that's it...destroy the evidence?
  
  Folks who believe "Jehovah" is God's name, why not defend your god and tell me how this sin can be washed off your god's sacred name...can you do that for me? What kind of spot remover will "Jehovah" use?
  
  "jehovah" CANNOT be God's name, because the true God would never let his "name" be associated FOR ONE SECOND with this caliber of degradation or ANY degradation for that matter.
• 
  30

  2 Cor 4:4: Jehovah=Satan?

  by Sirona in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i just can't see the answer to this question.

  it may be obvious, so please forgive me if you think i'm silly for asking.. 2 corinthians 4 verse 4 in the nwt:.

  "among whom the god of this system of things has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, that the illumination of the glorious good news about the christ, who is the image of god, might not shine through".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  If Satan is responsible for blinding the whole world to the light of God, and it is by God's will and God's will alone that some are "healed" and given "sight" from this blindness, can it be said that God has indeed "blinded" some if He chose NOT to give these unchosen ones sight to see the light?

  By choosing NOT to heal, hasn't God "blinded" by His choice NOT to heal?

  If the power of light is stronger than the dark, and ONLY THE LIGHT chooses who shall see and reflect and who shall not, the light by CHOICE has blinded some by leaving the blindness UNHEALED. Wouldn't that be true?

  Could it be that though God is not the source or creator of darkness and blindness, He uses it as a means to have LIGHT SHINE OUT OF THE DARKNESS? At His will and discretion only?

  2 Cor 4:6
  6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness,"

  In contrast, Satan would be saying, cover over the light with my darkness.

  Edited by - pomegranate on 13 August 2002 15:58:56
• 
  29

  Scripture to Back Beliefs

  by Gritsgirl in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  we have close friends who secretly became jw's.

  now that they are "out" they say that war is wrong and our son shouldn't join the military.

  we know that war is not what god wants, however, we need scripture to back defending our country and protecting our loved ones.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  each to his/her own conscience...
• 
  13

  was adam and eve forgiven?

  by Sangdigger in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  this was the subject of a recent debate with myself and some jw family members.

  i dont have all the info.

  in front of me, but i will give you just two points that i used to lean toward the idea that they were in fact, forgiven.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  If I remember correctly, "the wages sin pays is death."

  Adam and Eve sinned. They died. They are out of debt as they payed for their sin with their lives.

  But...still dead.

  Now, it's what God chooses to do, give them life again, or not.

  IMHU

  Edited by - pomegranate on 12 August 2002 14:21:49
• 
  27

  How to See, Hear and Know God...

  by AGuest in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  thus, when you see the consonants yhwh, it is in truth jhwh or jhvh and is pronouced yah-veh (hebrews pronounce js like ys and ws, like vs. my fathers name, then, is jah (jah) of armies (veh), jah, who brings armies into existence, or jah, who cause armies to become.. .

  it is not, dear ones.

  matthew 7:1; luke 6:37. in this light, gods laws are not burdensome!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  pomegranate

  You are right, Pom.

  Ya think?

  The sheep should not BLAME the sheep.

  You are correct ma'am.

  And I don't think I did.
  Really? This is exactly what you said to Viv:

  Aguest said, "Who, then, really "allowed" them to hurt you? Did not you yourself.. .'"
  
  In the above, you are SQUARELY putting the blame on top of her.
  
  Then you say this:

  Aguest said, "In a sense, I did blame the 'victim' here. Perhaps I shouldn't have, just as I cannot blame my "children"

  You admitted you DID blame her, and gave an example of YOUR children.

  Now you say, "I don't think I did."

  Do you honestly know what you are saying? I'm beginning not to believe so. Is this typical of the "spirit" that is talking to you? You know, I came out of an organization that pulled that very same kind of trick. Yes, No, Yes, No, Yes, No...Sorry, I don't buy YESNO for an answer anymore.

  I simply tried to lovingly redirect the erroneous blame that a "sheep" had put on God, the Father of Christ (which apparently it's okay to do).

  I don't believe blaming the victim is loving in any sense of the word. Blaming Father or Christ is not the way to go either.

  Seems to me, though, that blaming God is sort of Adam-ish and not very Christ-like.

  Adam never blamed God. Where in the Bible does it say that?

  So, if you are comparing sheep, as you seem to be doing, perhaps you are right: we should not hold Christ's sheep accountable; we should just blame Christ's Father.

  I believe you have something bass akwards. Put blame where blame belongs, in the lap of Satan.

  Yes? Do I have that right?

  No, you have it all wrong.

  (Seems to me though that blaming God isn't very sheep-like either. But what do I know. I'm only a slave.)

  No it isn't. But I believe you are both missing the mark. You are blaming her, and she is blaming God.
  
  Two wrongs don't make a right.

  I know where to put my blame.

  Edited by - pomegranate on 12 August 2002 7:56:6