Posts by NeverKnew

22

Millions now living will never die

by MrFreeze in

yes, rutherford proclaimed in 1918 that "millions now living will never die.

" well it's been 95 years since.

how many 95+ year old people are alive on earth today?

Paul's rationale...

by NeverKnew in

as a non-jw discussing "the only true" christianity with jws, i brought up romans 14 for obvious reasons.

after reviewing the chapter as a whole and asking appropriate questions, i went back up to verse 11 and sincerely asked, .

"by the way, how are comparative verses like romans 14:11, isaiah 45:23 and phillippians 2:9-11 interpreted in your faith with the same language being attributed to the father in the ot and jesus in the nt?

NeverKnew

These are just two of many that seem to make a distinction between the two so not a trinity.

Hmm... are you telling me that that's the reasoning? Otherwise, I'm not clear on the statement. The Trinity does not deny a distinction between the Father and Son.

I had a heck of a time in a discussion about the Sodom and Gomorrah story some time ago. In order to explain the story, my jw friends were adamant that the passage meant for me to understand that the "Lord" depicted in the passage was actually "a representative of the Lord." I asked if there was a way to understand this passage without adding this "intended meaning" and was told "of course not!"

Then I asked why God's inspired messenger repeatedly missed opportunities to include that in chapters 18 and 19... The response was because the answer should be obvious since no one has ever seen God.

*sigh* ok

My goal is not to argue the existence or non-existence of a Trinity. When I read the Bible leveraging the Trinitarian lense, the Bible in it's entirety makes sense. Without it, it seems like there are these hanging chads. It's okay to have a perspective that's different. In the interest of understanding the perspective, I just want to know what one does with the chad.

I've gotten used to this site, but I will definitely check out the other site.

Hi, Mr. Freeze! :)

15

Classic 1969 footage from the BBC on 1975...

by wizzstick in

found this on you tube:.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4as2abu8cm4.

relevant jw bits are from:.

NeverKnew

Insightful...

19

My Grandma passed away

by Kool Jo in

jw
friends

good day all:.

while at work a couple days ago, i got a call that my grandma passed away.

she would've been 86 next week, but she still lived her life...so i'm getting emails ect from my home congregation from folks just checking up on me.

NeverKnew

Aw, KoolJo... sorry to hear that!

On the church note... I am REALLY glad you got to experience reality! As for the happiness and warmth? I can assure you, it's genuine. :)

20

Paul's rationale...

by NeverKnew in

as a non-jw discussing "the only true" christianity with jws, i brought up romans 14 for obvious reasons.

after reviewing the chapter as a whole and asking appropriate questions, i went back up to verse 11 and sincerely asked, .

"by the way, how are comparative verses like romans 14:11, isaiah 45:23 and phillippians 2:9-11 interpreted in your faith with the same language being attributed to the father in the ot and jesus in the nt?

NeverKnew

Okay, gotta get practice ...

Why does John 1:23 quote Isaiah 40:3 and apply it to what John the Baptizer did in preparing the way for Jesus Christ, when Isaiah 40:3 is clearly discussing preparing the way before Jehovah? Because Jesus represented his Father. He came in his Father’s name and had the assurance that his Father was always with him because he did the things pleasing to his Father.— John 5:43; 8:29 .

Doesn't this infer that the inspired writer of Isaiah got the message wrong and that he should have written that a representative of God would come? Or did God change his mind about coming....

Am I bordering on disrespectful?

InChristAlone, it's good to hear I'm not alone. I get pretty frustrated but Londo and others are pretty good at prepping me. I read that the NWT has blurred the similarities in these verses so I've been careful about that landmine. Thanks for the NWT variation!

OMG Sarah! We almost went to blows over that seizure thing! Now, one friend has read and studied the sentence so seriously he's to the point of being INCAPABLE of absorbing the sentence without the WT lense. WHY'D YOU TAKE ME BACK THERE???? NOW I'M TICKED AGAIN... LOL THEN he said that OTHER TRANSLATIONS use the same word? I asked him WHICH ONE IS THAT????

Another research project I guess....

NewlyEnlightened... Good point!

41

Introducing Myself

by DilloTrace in

jw
friends

i'm new to this forum and wanted to give everyone a shout out.

i've been a silent observer of this forum for a long time, but now i feel it's time for me to break the silence and get involved.

i've been inactive since november of last year.

NeverKnew

Hey, Dillotrace!

Welcome! Excited to have yet another perspective in a forum where everyone's perspective is entirely right and entirely wrong all in one thread!

20

Paul's rationale...

by NeverKnew in

as a non-jw discussing "the only true" christianity with jws, i brought up romans 14 for obvious reasons.

after reviewing the chapter as a whole and asking appropriate questions, i went back up to verse 11 and sincerely asked, .

"by the way, how are comparative verses like romans 14:11, isaiah 45:23 and phillippians 2:9-11 interpreted in your faith with the same language being attributed to the father in the ot and jesus in the nt?

NeverKnew

As a non-jw discussing "the only true" Christianity with JWs, I brought up Romans 14 for obvious reasons. After reviewing the chapter as a whole and asking appropriate questions, I went back up to verse 11 and sincerely asked,

"By the way, how are comparative verses like Romans 14:11, Isaiah 45:23 and Phillippians 2:9-11 interpreted in your faith with the same language being attributed to the Father in the OT and Jesus in the NT? Wouldn't that have been heretical? and Paul did this repeatedly so, according to that which you've always known, what was Paul's reasoning?"

So, they're going to get back to me. It's only been two weeks and I've talked to one of them every day. I'm sure they're working on a VERY THOROUGHLY researched explanation.... maybe there's a peer review that has to happen first.

Can anyone prep me with a simplified WTS explanation for Paul assigning descriptors to Jesus that were said to belong only to God?

13

Contributing factor to Roman Catholics converting to JW

by NeverKnew in

my jw friend once asked that if churches were so great why did so many roman catholics convert to his religion.

now i have some semblance of an answer!.

i spoke with a professor who definitely had some familiarity with the wts.

NeverKnew

GromitSK and Juan:

You might agree that there is an inherent mistrust across all churches for people who rail against other denominations. It's considered inappropriate and disrespectful. I'm blown away when I read JW material that speaks condescendingly about other Christians. That's foreign to me.

Grom, I suspect we'd be more educated on defending our denominational affiliations if we were trained like the JWs to do so. But then... I see where arrogance and hatred towards others would easily creep in. "Love" at this point would be lip service and we'd be loving only those who think like us.

Most non-JWs are unaware of JW beliefs and challenges. I really wish that weren't the case.

And also with you, Juan

3