i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
Each day I listen to Michael Savage and Glen Beck , partly because I have conservative values and partly because I think it is funny but the idea of Obama being a bad president is ridiculous.
Bush was a terrible president.
It's funny how Trump supporters brag about record low unemployment rates and now want to tear apart the deals that got the US to this point to begin with.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
The sad part about Trump is it going to take about 7 years for the US to see the effects of his economic policies.
Destroying the economies of your allies and trading partners, screwing the US consumer, inflation and higher interest rates.
It's too bad people of falling it again. It was done under by Nixon and W Bush.
if everything is supposed to be about the lives of children, how can they hypocritically fight to take babies and kill them?
what about the children and their quality of life?.
I consider myself pro life and absolutely hate how the pro choice movement works to devalue human life.
But the reality is there are lots of desperate women in desperate situations and anything unborn child under 12 weeks, fetal pain and viability are not issues.
I guess that's kind of how we reason it. Still I don't like it.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
The unemployment rate has been in steady decline of about half a percent a year since 2012. Plus we are in the middle of seeing the largest generation ( the baby boomers) in US history start to retire.
Some psychological benchmarks of the unemployment have been reached under Trump but the wheels were in motion long before he was in office.
Plus rising wages are soon to be eaten by inflation and tariffs.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
The part that really pisses me about Trump is he is taking credit for years of deficit spending and low interest rates working there way though the system , like he suddenly did something to change things.
Then on top of it his deficits are even bigger than Obama's. If things are so great, pay your bills.
i think he is.
if you don’t want to put reasons for your yes or no, it’s ok. .
your vote,please?
I live in a Canadian border town and most of life the Canadian dollar has been running at about. 75 US or it takes 1.25 to buy an American dollar. Everything in the US was about 25 percent cheaper but my purchasing power was limited by exchanging Canadian dollars. It was a wash.
Everything in the US now basically costs the same price as it does in Canada.. There is no point even looking at buying from the U.S. anymore
I really wish Americans knew how bad the long term results of Trump will be. He is a populist like Hugo Chavez expect he gets to screw up the entire world, not just one country.
has anyone else noticed that in the wt study articles the main point they want you to remember is always somewhere around paragraph 11-14?
it's like a formula.
intro and overview paragraphs 1-4. basic wt stuff 5-8 (not controversial).
I have actually got so good at reading there literature I can actually point to the exact sentence where it is either quoting something out of context or connecting everything though the book of revelations.
I usually find it to be two to three paragraphs of absolute nonsense about nothing. Two to three paragraphs of trashing other Christian denominations, two to three paragraphs of illrevant old testament stories then out of context or book of revelations time.
The entire reasoning book is written like that.
is this a title of diety or did god have a baby?
.
sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.. i am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
Hasn't anyone ever been in a Kingdom Hall and hear someone make a comment like " false religion thinks Jesus is god when he is really gods son ".
The more research i do leads to believe the term son of God is a reference to diety while son of man is a reference to humanity.
is this a title of diety or did god have a baby?
.
sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.. i am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
Is this a title of diety or did God have a baby?
Sorry for being so brief, typing on a phone.
I am kind of interested to see what you have to say.
robert h. countess and john 1:1 in the nwt, part iirobert h. countess made the case in his book that the nwt ‘formulated their own principle’ on the article.
under summary and conclusions, he stated: “chapter four’s conclusions regarding the handling of [theós] indicated that nwt’s translators poorly understood the greek article, and that their principle [theós]=‘a god,’ [ho theós]= ‘god’ is not legitimate.” (p. 92) is countess conclusion correct?this is what the nwt actually said after observing that both moffatt and goodspeed rendered john 1:1c in their translations as “divine.” “careful translators recognize that the articular construction of the noun points to an identity, a personality, whereas an anarthrous contruction points to a quality about someone.” in making this statement, the nw translators also had in mind the grammar by dana & mantey, in which they stated: “when identity is prominent, we find the article; and when quality or character is stressed, the construction is anarthrous [without the article].” (p. 138) also: “there are no ‘rules’ for the use of the article in greek, but there is a fundamental principle underlying its significance – as we have seen in the foregoing section – and this gives rise to a normal usage.” (ibid, p. 141) nowhere did the nwt ever affirmed that this meant [theós] without the article is always equivalent to = ‘a god,’ and [ho theós, with the article is always to be understood as = ‘god.’ even the wts would have to agree with countess that such principle is “not legitimate.” colwell first published his book in 1982, and by then the watchtower had made their position clear enough.
in 1975 the wt wrote: “this does not mean, however, that every time an anarthrous noun occurs in the greek text it should appear in english with the indefinite article.
Once a found out the term " the word " was a reference to the old testament physical manifestions of god, Trying to learn the biblical Greek arguments against " a god " seemed pointless.
John 1 18. No one has seen the father, only the son.
Just read the book of John without watchtower blinders and it is quite easy to see who John thought Jesus was.
