Rex B13

Joined

• started 49 topics
• posted 695 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Rex B13

• 
  30

  For Princess and any others curious

  by Rex B13 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is strictly for those who want to know how to become saved.

  22 this righteousness from god comes through faith in jesus christ to all who believe.

  there is no difference, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  Satan Saint,
  You said you were not any longer a believer, didn't you? It sure seems like it....
  Copeland and Hinn are both 'ut in left field, no, the parking lot' s my friend "1" used to say. Their theology is bunk, to put it mildly.
  Rex
• 
  34

  Horror of horrors.....

  by Tatiana in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i know that while being a witness, we were not really allowed to watch horror movies, or anything that smacked of demonism.

  anything supernatural.

  my question is, what movie or movies, since leaving the society, has really scared or upset you?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  What about the stark reality of Blair Witch?
  Rex
• 
  30

  For Princess and any others curious

  by Rex B13 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  this is strictly for those who want to know how to become saved.

  22 this righteousness from god comes through faith in jesus christ to all who believe.

  there is no difference, .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  OK, Princess.
  What belief system as taught to you by your parents (and probably her parents also) had considerable influence on your eventual growth into a valuable and responsible member of society? Was it the flawed Watchtower or the Word itself?
  Are you going to teach your children this valuable guideline or teach them to 'live for today, tomorrow may never come' and our selfish 'me first' culture? (Think about it, the question is rhetorical and I don't expect an answer.)

  You asked:
  >. I read your post. I am curious about the interpretations you added between scriptures. Also, when you say you won't even have the desire to be saved unless called upon by the father, what do you mean? Are we all to believe we are just waiting to be called? Is god watching us and waiting for the perfect moment to call on us? What if we die before he calls? Eternal death?

  This is where we get into the Arminian vs the Calvinist argument. Neither one is vital for your salvation. Think of it this way: If God is Almighty in power and all knowing, if He is truly sovereign (in contol of all) then would he not also predestinate our lives yet give us free will to choose or not to choose Him?
  Haven't you seen in scripture where he hardens those who will chose NOT to obey Him and He draws those who will do so? As Paul says in Romans, NONE of us are good, none of us would choose God on our own. That is why 'grace through faith' is entirely a work of God and not by our own merits or 'works'. (Eph. 2.8,9)

  >What proof do you have to back up the statement that to "fall short of the glory of god" means eternal separation from him? (Romans 3.23; 6.23) Could this not just mean that we fall short of his glory in that we can never attain his perfection, he is god and we are human?

  You have part of it. We are only 'perfect' in the covering blood of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. This event literally was God paying the full price for our sin, caused by the fall of man. Until we are 'saved' we are 'objects of wrath'. If we honestly ask for salvation, He will give it (Romans 10.9-11).

  >You gave no proof that death mentioned in Romans is more than physical.

  I have the hisorical proof as backed up by the experts, whom the society chose to ignore in their own apostacy and cultism.

  >My point is, you can't prove it is one way or the other. You have not proven the immortal soul with this scripture.

  I proved it in the 'book' that you failed to read. This is important stuff. We are talking about your eternal life, as is your much villified sister-in-law. I believe you when you say that 'she is a pain', if she is one of those who always prattles on about 'God did this or God said that' when God did no such!
  Take care of those sweet little kids!

  For Mulan,
  Are you really giving up the fine example of Jesus life and teachings because you cannot rationalize Old Testament judgements? Rhetorical: Do you really want your daughter not to teach her children this inherently valuable guideline for meaningful living? Surely you are not so bitter that you cannot find a style of Christianity that meets your viewpont?
  Rex
• 
  42

  Islamic Violence not new.....

  by Rex B13 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  in response to norm norwig's usual wide brush of generalization,that sweeps in all religion as causing all the problems of the world....... a prophet finds honor at last.

  by cal thomas.

  syndicated columnist.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  OK, Jdubla, let's view these alleged, 'rock solid' arguments:

  Re: Islamic Violence not new..... Sep 30, 2001 10:55:33 AM

  From Alan:
  >Poor Rexie. Obviously I've hit a sore spot, since you're rising to new emotional heights. You can no longer manage even a semblance of cogent argument.

  Rex: Simply put, you are a liar. You are either too stupid to understand the difference in teachings between the religious writings (of Christianity as opposed to Islam, duhhhh)

  >This is gobble-de-goop. What the hell is "the difference in teachings between the religious writngs"? Perhaps you really mean to say, "the difference between what Christians say and what Christians practice"? Or perhaps, "the difference between what the Bible says and what most Christians practice"?

  Here's a start, JDub.
  Alan is using a misrepresntation to base his argument. He is lumping in with true Christians (those who try to follow Christ) and what I call, 'cultural Christians', or those who claim to be Christian yet do not display obvious efforts to be 'Christian'.

  Alan: Try to focus and be clear, Rexie. Otherwise you're just ranting. But you always do that, so why should this be different?

  R: What kind of argument is this, Jdub? Is it 'rock solid'?
  
  : or you are a liar. We all know you aren't stupid, don't we?

  Alan: Some have said that. Few have said it about you, though.

  R: Rock solid, yeah right! LOL

  : Any comparison betweeen claimed Christians who violated the teachings of God's word and Islamic fundamentalists who are simply FOLLOWING THE TEACHINGS of their own sacred writings shows your lie.
  
  Alan: You have a serious problem understanding the Bible, Rexie. The Bible teaches not only by word, but by example. When the Crusaders went off and killed tens of thousands of "infidels", what were they following?

  R: Another example for you, Jdub. The crusaders were following a directive by political rulers, including the POPE of an apostate, human led institution, they were NOT FOLLOWING CHRIST.

  ALAN: Jesus' words about loving your neighbor, or the example set by God's people the Jews in killing tens of thousands to clear out the Promised Land?

  R: Old Testament dispensation; God ordering judgement, which is His business. The N.T. clearly sets a new dispensation for the church age and I really can't see the apostle Peter leading an army, can you, Jdub?

  Alan: Is there any difference between the Conquistadors' killing thousands of pagan Indians in God's name and the Jews' killing thousands of Caananites in God's name? Not a bit. Both were justified as being religiously necessary. Of course, the fact that massive plundering of wealth and land might have had something to do with it is just a minor point.

  R: Another 'rock solid' argument, Jdub? God did not order the Spanish action; God did order the deaths of the occupants of Canaan due to their own refusal to repent from their horrid practices. Where is the massive wealth and land in Palestine,Alan? BTW, those poor indians in Mexico practiced ritual sacrifice of babies and virgins, as well as the murder of any war prisoners as part of the rituals. Then we have canabalism as an added nicety! Rock solid, again, eh Jdubla?

  Alan: Or is it? Just remember that in both cases the conquerors wrote the history. Both thought they were doing God's will and both wrote their histories in those terms.

  R: Uh no, that's not correct at all. The Bible is the sole revelation of God and the Spanish were supposed to be following it. Nations of the OT either repented or got judged, by God and not man.

  Alan: In reality the motivations of the Conquistadors and the Jews were the same: to get land and plunder the wealth of the inhabitants and to kill them off. The justifications were the same: God wanted them to do it to further the religion of the conquerors. The histories were the same: "We killed to further the interests of God's kingdom and the fact that we succeeded proves that God backed us."

  R: What a load of misinformation. The jews never did occupy all of the land, it was mostly desert and the wealth gained was primarily from Egypt. There was a heck of a lot more gold in the Americas. The Jews are also embarrasingly honest in their own histories, which Alan the whiz fails to note. Another 'rock solid' argument, Jdub?

  Alan: Most of the laws the Jews had that said "be nice to others" were restricted to being nice to other Jews. Gentiles were fair game for killing unless they happened to live among the Jews and obey most of their laws.

  R; There were always proselytes from the nations, God spared Nineveh from judgement when they repented, the Jews were to be a 'light to the world' as Paul pointed out in Romans 3 and they failed miserably, as their own judgement shows!

  Alan: By the time Christianity came along none of the participants had any political power, so we have no idea how they might have acted had they got such power. But we get a pretty good idea by looking into Christian writings, where death and destruction on an apocalyptic scale are the norm.

  R: The 'triumphant entry' and the fact that the pharisees did not want to kill Christ during the sabbath showed that they feared losing their own power! Yet, God led them into doing just that.
  The N.T. has no 'Jihad'. Only God can do this concerning the 'end times' prophecy, as Alan fails to note! What about the day to day lifestyle, Alan baby, what are the TEACHINGS of Christianity?

  Alan: Do you even understand where the word "apocalyptic" comes from, Rexie? From "Apocalypse" or "Revelation", which book contains scenes that make what the Jews did look innocent.

  R: The book of Revelation is primarily a WORSHIP SERVICE occuring at the end of time. What is literal and what is not is up to much debate, Alan baby. Dominionists teach that the advent of God's Kingdom will be gradual and voluntary with little bloodshed, contending that much previously taken as literal is entirely figurative. More 'rock solid' arguments, JDubla?

  Alan: In reality the God of Islam and the God of the Bible are both war Gods, Gods who demand killing in his name when he commands it. Both the Bible and the Koran contain plenty of "be nice to your neighbor" stuff, in addition to the "kill apostates" stuff. The only difference among followers is how they interpret and apply the various aspects, and whether individuals decide that their particular God is speaking personally to them.

  R: Individuals do not decide that God is speaking to them unless it is wholly within the context of the New Testament! Where is the comparison, Alan, and why do you confuse corrupted Arabian Kingdom law (the Koran) with the Law Covenant?

  : Where is the 'jihad', led by man on earth, Al baby?

  Alan: You're asking the wrong question, Rexie sweetie. The 'Bible God jihad' was in Caanan. A new one will be the killing of most of the human race in the near (according to Fundies and JWs) future (the Apocalypse doesn't specify when).

  R: When are you going to practice solid exgesis and quit contending that the Law Covenant is still in force? Now, on the Apocalypse:
  If that's the way it happens, don't you mean? Oh and if all of the evil of the world and those who perpetrate it were to be destroyed by God, would you COMPLAIN about it, Alan baby? WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON? Again, where is the 'Jihad' proclamation in the N.T. and why is it that Muslims have to force people to stay in their religion?
  
  : When are you going to quit lying about the life of Christ and the individual's resposibility to God for his actions while living on earth?

  Alan: Some Christians interpret the Bible to mean that they should avoid killing and should be nice to their neighbors. Others do not and historically have not. Many kinds of conduct can be justified by reference to the Bible.

  R: The biggest lie of all is right here. Alan knows full well that OUT OF CONTEXT, single scripture exgesis is not valid for a belief system! Alan also again fails to draw a distinction between Christ's example and that of Moahmmed, who robbed and plundered caravans to gain his followers. Islam is inherently based on an evil corruption of O.T. scripture. Just like Hitler practiced, the best lie is a lie with a little truth in it.

  : You intentionally blame all Christians for the acts attributed to our basic depraved nature!

  Alan: Not at all. People of any faith or non-faith can be depraved. History proves that the "be nice" passages in the Bible are cast aside whenever the need arises.

  R: Horsepucky! You still confuse human weakness and inherent depravity with actual teachings and practice that have biblical support.

  Alan: The founder of one of the foundations stones of modern fundamentalism, John Calvin, murdered people who did not accept his teachings. So did those paragons of Biblical morality, the Puritans. So have other "pure" Christians down through history. Do you reject Calvin for murdering people? No, you embrace him.

  R: Another solid argument, Jduba? Calvin's theology rises or falls on it's relation to scripture taught in context. If an author or scholar was also a 'murderer', or became a murderer (and I will let God judge that), does that mean his work is incorrect based on his failures as a human being? No, that is a stupid argument, is it not JDubla? BTW, all are depraved, not just some.

  Alan: You prove that modern day fundamentalists would just as easily kill people who disagree as did Calvin, the Puritans and plenty of other Christians who treat others according to the Golden Rule only so long as the others subscribe to their beliefs.

  R: LOL, this is ROCK SOLID reasoning? How does a belief system based on literal fundamentals of the life of Jesus Christ equal to people who would 'kill those who disagree'?
  
  : The fact that dweebs like you live in a free country and critisize the main religion in that country without fear speaks volumes to your lying slander.

  Alan: I've got news for you: the United States was not founded by Christians but by Deists.

  Crap, T.J. and a couple of others? This country was 99% Christian who tolerated Deists and their odd ideas! Had this country been the ACLU atheist dream it would reflect it in the laws. The laws of our country have much scriptural influence and you know it. T.J. owned slaves also, did he not, Alan? I guess he was not a paragon of virtue either, was he?

  Alan: Deists reject the God of the Bible. It was the Deists and their supporters who put in place the freedoms we enjoy. Nor is the United States in any sense a Christian nation. Various Christian slogans that appear on money or wherever, various Christian practices of the past and present such as opening Congressional sessions with prayer, are mere window dressing designed to placate the Christians in government.

  R; Rewriting history again Alan. Yes, I will agree we are founded on freedom and our experience of the hegemony by the Anglican backed British helped form this idea. Make no mistake, Christians very much formed the government, along with thsoe who were not.
  
  Alan: Here's an illustration of how, in your blind haste to prove something, you contradict your yourself: you refer to Christianity as "the main religion" in the United States, yet your words above prove that you don't consider the majority of U.S. Christians to be Christian.

  R: I'll admit this. I should have qualified my statement to reflect this. A person can generally reflect a value system that is not of their character. They BELIEVE they are 'Christians', yet, in practice they are not really 'living the life'. Still, there is a morality taught and the influence of the Holy Spirit is noted here.

  Alan: You certainly don't consider the Catholic Church Christian, yet Catholics are the largest single Christian denomination.

  R: Actually, it is an institution just like any other church. There are saved and unsaved within any denomination. We, as Christians, have a freedom to move to any church that seems reflect our own conscience and outlook. No, I do not condemn Catholicism and it does have the main teachings correct. It just has a lot of 'add ons'.

  Alan: And if we embark upon a case by case examination of all other denominations, you'd reject the majority of them because they don't go along with all of the beliefs of the Southern Baptists. For example, various Protestant denominations such as the Methodists and Presbyterians have formally accepted a form of the dreaded "evolution", which you condemn belief in. Most Protestant denominations outright reject the young-earth creationism that is fundamental to Southern Baptist belief.

  R: Speculation; where is the proof, Alan?

  Alan: As Henry Morris, himself a member of that denomination likes to say, Christians who don't accept YECism are counterfeit Christians

  R: One man's opinion, Alan. I can fully accept the salvation of those who are saved by grace through faith, regardless of their views in the grey areas. YEC and OEC, intelligent design are 'grey areas' that exist within the literal vs figurative arguments.

  Alan. So, Rexie, how many "true Christians" does that leave in the U.S.? And let's see you tell us again, just what is the main religion in the U.S.?

  R: 'Christianity' by the poll results, 'non-denom' by the actual lifestyles observed, 'who knows?' by the view of Jesus Christ, who will judge all!

  : Ah, but you were raised to be unappreciative of the deaths of Catholics and Protestants who died to keep your butt free, right Al baby?

  Alan:As a JW, of course. But of course, plenty of others besides Catholics and Protestants died to keep our butts free. Naturally, for you they don't count.

  R: They (cultural Christians) were the overwhelming majority and they generally believed they were Christian. "No man hath greater love than to die for his friends'. All who died count and I know some atheist who 'got God' real quick in a foxhole!

  : I suppose you would even march in protest of your country taking military action agains those responsible for the deaths in terrorist attacks, right?

  Alan: As a matter of fact, just Friday night I participated in a Red Cross benefit and for the first time in my life sang songs like the National Anthem. So even someone raised as a JW can become reasonable. There's even hope for you, Rexie. You just have to get rid of that fundamentalist, us-or-them, JW-style, exclusivist mindset and learn about things beyond the extremely narrow scope of Southern Baptism

  R: It was my turn for a cheap shot, I apologized for it.
  Southern Baptist teachings lean toward a moderate view of things, totally liberal regarding church and state separation (religious freedom, not ACLU discrimination). We at least try to back up our views in the context of scripture and are so far removed from JW cultism as to be very little comparison.
  .
  AlanF
  Edited by - AlanF on 30 September 2001 10:56:49

  Rex
• 
  21

  Taliban not original--Moses 1st

  by patio34 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hope you're having a swell evening.

  there are two christian young women from the u.s. who are imprisoned in afghanistan for trying to make converts.

  of course, it seems astonishing to folks here in the u.s.. it seems things have come full circle, because in the law of moses if someone came to you talking about another god besides jehovah, even your 'wife lying in your bosom,' you were to report them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  The Lady Julie said:

  Rex, my love,

  You said:

  :If Christians (and Jews) are so terrible, why do you not see US advocating a return to Old Testament law?

  >Well I can give you an answer for this. See, history tells us this has been tried before. Remember the Crusades? Where the valiant knights of Christendom went to slay the heathen and recapture the holy land?

  My lady, God forbid thee critisize Hizzoner the Pope! My order, the Knights of the Temple, were founded in the blood washed streets of Jerusalem in the late 12th century. The facts of historical context:
  1) The apostacy that began when the church evolved into a political entity was in full force. Do the acts of barbarity sound Christ-like at all? If not, then the perpetrators were probably NOT Christians
  2) Did Jesus at anytime suggest that His followers would take up arms to bring his kingdom to the earth?
  3) Does any New Testament writer advocate this?
  4) Do you realize that the apostasized church forbid the reading of scripture, yes, and even kept practically anyone from doing any more than rudimentary reading and writing?

  >Well where in the heck do you think they found the justification for that? It wasn't in the NT, no siree.

  Very good, my love!

  >That leaves the OT. And inasmuch as one could consider the era where the Crusades took place to be "barbaric times" I am sure all will agree they were still more enlightened times than OT times.

  Just because they found justification, out of context, does that in of itself convict the author of the Book? After all, He reserves the rights to judgement, whether He does it Himself or delegates the authority.

  >No Rex, we have seen Christendom try to implement some of the OT ways and it was a mistake. Unfortunately, though it is admitted by most believers that the things the OT condones are much too barbaric to be of any use in these "civilized" times, it is still not admitted by those same believers that the OT is one long tale of barbarism.

  And it is totally irrelevant to the revelation of Christ Jesus as Messiah in this world, is it not?

  >I guess I'll never fully understand the intricate dance that goes on in your head my dearly beloved.
  Julie

  Ah, but that is what so attracts you to me, the mystery within my madness and the method of my logic!

  As Always,
  Protector of the Temple
  Geoffrey De Boullion
  Jerusalem, 1156 A.D.
• 
  21

  Taliban not original--Moses 1st

  by patio34 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hope you're having a swell evening.

  there are two christian young women from the u.s. who are imprisoned in afghanistan for trying to make converts.

  of course, it seems astonishing to folks here in the u.s.. it seems things have come full circle, because in the law of moses if someone came to you talking about another god besides jehovah, even your 'wife lying in your bosom,' you were to report them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  With all of this whining about Christians and Muslims being the same I wonder why:

  Muslims have to force their adherents NOT TO CONVERT under threat of death, yet Christians need no such threat to reamin Christians? In fact, Christianity spreads even more, the more you try to stamp it out!
  Christians support the idea of free nations; Muslims support their own version of 'theocracy'; Atheist Communists also do not support the idea of freedom.

  Christianity was thriving (underground) in the old USSR, as it does in China!

  It seems to me that Atheists and Muslims lay in the same bed regarding freedom!
  Rex
• 
  21

  Taliban not original--Moses 1st

  by patio34 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hope you're having a swell evening.

  there are two christian young women from the u.s. who are imprisoned in afghanistan for trying to make converts.

  of course, it seems astonishing to folks here in the u.s.. it seems things have come full circle, because in the law of moses if someone came to you talking about another god besides jehovah, even your 'wife lying in your bosom,' you were to report them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  Hi TJ,
  The Law Covenant applies to the dispensation period of that time. It is not part of the church age. You are comparing apples and oranges. If Christians (and Jews) are so terrible, why do you not see US advocating a return to Old Testament law?
  BTW, how in the world would you know what a nation in barbaric times required in order to survive as a nation? Some of these laws were practiced used as a 'threat' to keep people from practicing things harmful to the very core of their nation's existence.
  Veneral diseases (like AIDS, hepatitus today) were FATAL and the only way to prevent their spread was for women to stay with ONE MAN. As usual you have absolutely no evidence as to how these laws were enforced or judged by competent judges, do you?
  I guess ex-jw are just as bad as jw with ignoring or even understanding CONTEXT, eh TJ?
  Rex
• 
  47

  saved at a Promise Keepers convention

  by Princess in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my husband and i have a friend who credits the lord with every good thing that happens in his life.

  he is really a nice guy, unmarried, no kids and is now in remission from non hodgkins lymphoma (again, credit to the lord).

  what do you think about people who credit the lord for every good thing that happens to them?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  Princess asked:
  >Rex, you never answered my question about why you have to understand Jesus claimed to be god in order to attain salvation.

  NIV John 6:35-48
  35 Then Jesus declared, "I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never go hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty.
  36 But as I told you, you have seen me and still you do not believe.
  37 All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away.

  Jesus Himself offers redemption; He is one with the Father (who is God); salvation is eternal (37); the Father draws those ones (37) and that's for FunkyDerek.

  38 For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me.
  39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all that he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.

  Again, eternal salvation. Again, Christ's will is God's (the Father) will and we know that Christ has emptied Himself (from Phil. 2.6-11, look it up in a reputable translation); Again, eternal salvation (39).
  
  40 For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

  Recognition of Christ's deity is part and parcel with Salvation!

  41 At this the Jews began to grumble about him because he said, "I am the bread that came down from heaven."
  42 They said, "Is this not Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, `I came down from heaven'?"
  43 "Stop grumbling among yourselves," Jesus answered.
  44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
  45 It is written in the Prophets: `They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me.

  More statements showing Jesus making the claim that He is God, yet not God the Father, clearly separate persons. Again, the Father draws and God the Son teaches, 'comes to me'; to be taught by God!
  Christ also say, 'I will raise him up on the last day', which is only something that God can do!

  46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.
  47 I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life.
  48 I am the bread of life.

  More confirmation of the facts above. Jesus did in fact, claim to be God, yet He claimed to be a separate person from God (the Father).

  NIV John 8:56-59
  56 Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."
  57 "You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"
  58 "I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
  59 At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

  The crowning confirmation that Christ did indeed claim to be God and the pharisees reaction to this claim!

  KJV John 8:24-29
  24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

  Do you believe that Christ is God? No? You shall 'die in your sins'; without salvation.

  25 Then said they unto him, Who art thou? And Jesus saith unto them, Even the same that I said unto you from the beginning.
  26 I have many things to say and to judge of you: but he that sent me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I have heard of him.

  Again, this shows that without Christ you 'die in your sins', which is a metaphor for 'eternal damnation' and this is consistent in all New Testament scripture, 'death' is 'eternal damnation'.

  27 They understood not that he spake to them of the Father.
  28 Then said Jesus unto them, When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he,

  "I am he" is another confirmation that Jesus is Yahweh, almighty God.

  > and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.
  29 And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him.

  The subordination of Christ (the Son, voluntarily from Phil 2.6-11 and Heb. 1.1-10) to God the Father and again their 'oneness' is displayed in an obvious fashion.

  You see, Princess? I did not have to cut and paste, now did I?
  Rex
• 
  47

  saved at a Promise Keepers convention

  by Princess in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  my husband and i have a friend who credits the lord with every good thing that happens in his life.

  he is really a nice guy, unmarried, no kids and is now in remission from non hodgkins lymphoma (again, credit to the lord).

  what do you think about people who credit the lord for every good thing that happens to them?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  Princess,
  What, I am arrogant because I press the issue? Maybe you are afraid that I am correct, as is your sister-in-law who is trying to help you and your mother? You know what? I see the JW and ex-JW attitudes toward those who are 'born again', the sneering contempt born of Watchtower teachings doesn't die easily.
  Your are just trying to weasel out of your own laziness. I posted information from MY RESEARCH that I have posted here before, so quit claiming it is a 'cut and paste' as if it is some method of cheating. You are just fogging the issue.
  I posted scripture used as a general guideline to show the gospel to those who don't know it. It speaks for itself as it is in context to the question of salvation. There are only two types of souls left at judgement: the lost, who will suffer eternal separation from God according to their deeds; the saved, who are found in the book of life and will be judged (with rewards) as to their deeds.
  Salvation is solely determined by your free will action to the gospel; accept or reject.
  That is the white throne judgement of Revelation. Forget your JW or New Age ideas of 'we're all good and we all go to the same place', you are being lied to if someone claims it is biblical.
  I posted plenty of scriptural proof for the immortal soul, you ignore it, so be it.
  Rex
• 
  21

  Taliban not original--Moses 1st

  by patio34 in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  hope you're having a swell evening.

  there are two christian young women from the u.s. who are imprisoned in afghanistan for trying to make converts.

  of course, it seems astonishing to folks here in the u.s.. it seems things have come full circle, because in the law of moses if someone came to you talking about another god besides jehovah, even your 'wife lying in your bosom,' you were to report them.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Rex B13

  Hi Everyone,
  Don't just quack away at what you think are the comparisons, cite specific examples of Taliban acts and the Law Covenant. While you're at it, bring in the actual Judges rulings from apocryphal writings of Judaism......
  My point? You are again making accusations using gereralizations probably gleaned from atheist web sites, which consistently ignore the context of Old Testament times vs modern 'civilized' rules of law.
  The Koran itself is a corrupted version of corrupted Arabian Kingdom law, which was a corruption of Hebrew law!
  Rex