>OK, you are going to have to explain this to me. How does an understanding of the historical Sheol and Heaven as known to the ancient Isrealites make me liberal and opinionated? How is such an understanding unintelligent?
It means that you have accepted a position that cannot be proven. You think that the liberal scholarship is correct and it is not, nor is it consistent, nor can their views be proven. They begin with the intent to denigrate scripture and that presupposition is what drives them. You are probably a fan of the Jesus Seminar as well.
Rex
Shining One
JoinedPosts by Shining One
-
55
For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?
by jgnat inme: s***ing one: where have i complained about scripture?
he: then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?
me: as others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different.
-
-
Shining One
-
55
For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?
by jgnat inme: s***ing one: where have i complained about scripture?
he: then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?
me: as others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different.
-
-
Shining One
Dan,
There is no contradiction in the accounts. These are different views from different men for different purposes. If they all said exactly the same thing they you would say that is the reason they are 'fake'. You must be looking at some idiot skeptic site to educate yourself.
Rex -
55
For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?
by jgnat inme: s***ing one: where have i complained about scripture?
he: then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?
me: as others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different.
-
-
Shining One
Jgnat,
I was shared the gospel with my grandmother a week before she died. I did not have to plead. Here is the ultimate reason that I myself got saved. Jesus passed by me as He did the blind man in John 9 and opened my eyes to the reality of His love and saving grace. Many of my oldest memories are of my grandmother reading and telling me Bible stories. She brought me to love God and I ended up loving Him more than the Borg.
If the Lord saved me so that He could use me to reach my grandmother, 50 years a JW, then the whole Watchtower situation was worthwhile. When one is called to be an evangelist sharing the gospel is an incredible experience, responsibility and obligation. Salt and light, that is what we as Christians are called to be. As Christians we are called to a ministry of reconsiliation and for the purpose of sharing the Lord's grace and mercy. I believe (and the denominational stats show clearly) that a church that compromises rather than have an effect on the world will die on the vine. Look at what the Lord says about the 'lukewarm church' in Revelation. Appeasement is a 'slippery slope' and a 'foundation built on sand'. Good works and good service are all part of it. You still think of this as some place where you can be flippant and clever, deluding yourself on the seriousness of your own denigrating of scripture. I pray that changes at some point.
Rex -
39
Perfect, Nearly Perfect, and Mostly Perfect....Religion
by jgnat inkero-kero's goodbye post brought me to mind a common complaint amongst jw apologists, that all we do is bring up the bad stuff and old history.
after all, "nobody's perfect".
well, that would be fine and dandy if the wtbts hadn't set themselves up as the sole mouthpiece for jehovah in these 'last days'.
-
-
Shining One
>This is as it has always been and always will be, this side of glory. Meanwhile (IMHO) you would do well to heed the admonition of our Lord to "judge none lest ye be judged".
You blew the context, LT. We are to judge by clear scripture. Where have I erred in calling her on her own inconsistency? Perhaps you are in the same boat? You look at the same questions that I asked of her and then see if you qualify. BTW, John Gill is pretty good, next to Matthew Henry and C.H. Spurgeon. Did you know that Spurgeon preached the same church as Gill only later?
I have some more englishmen as favorite preachers. Charles Wesley and George Whitefield. It's too bad you Limeys let the country slide right into almost total unbelief with that liberal doctrine, adjustable morals and doctrine that you seem to embrace so much. No more 'salt' and very little 'light'. What does our Lord say in Revelation about the lukewarm church?
Rex -
35
How Jehovah's Witnesses are told to treat disfellowshipped Relatives.
by jwfacts inin another thread it was mentioned the witnesses do not shun disfellowshipped relatives, so i thought i would copy a few articles that show the watchtower says quite definitely that they are to almost totally shun relatives, along with some examples that i know personally.
i personally know many that have not been contacted by their parents for years;my cousin was my best friend, and for a year before my disfellowshipping week after week i spent hours with her and her child, who spent 4 months of his first year in hospital.
on the day of my disfellowshipping i was informed that i am no longer welcome there, and i have not seen my second cousin for 6 months now.
-
-
Shining One
Hey,
Islam is much qucker and more merciful when you leave them! They just kill you on the spot.
Rex -
55
For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?
by jgnat inme: s***ing one: where have i complained about scripture?
he: then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?
me: as others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different.
-
-
Shining One
Jgnat, this is from an exchange we had awhile ago
>Goody, a challenge.
You seem to be flippant about serious discussions that involve eternal souls. I recently told you that the idea is not to 'win' debates by semantics but to win souls.
I asked you this: Q. I wonder why you claim to be Christian when you consistently ignore scripture and context?
>Your answer: A. I am a follower of Christ. Not a follower of Bible. There's a difference.
Our only actual knowledge of Christ is from scripture and history. You contradict yourself by belittling the Bible, which is where your knowledge of Christ comes from.
I asked you this: Q. Are you saying that trying to respect and obey scriptural commands is somehow incorrect for Christians?
>You answered: A. Trying to defend the bible as infallible as God is infallible is doomed to failure. You are forced to believe that the world is a flat disk supported on pillars, sheol below, and a dotted tent above, Heaven. This is what the Isrealite ancestors believed, and this is what the OT references to Sheol and Heaven are based on.
Your foundation for belief is then without any intelligent support according to your compromised, liberal opinionated exegesis.
I then asked: Q. What do you use as the standard to justify ignoring some scripture and embracing others?
>You answered: A. Two scriptures I use as my touchstone; Love God, love others as myself. And second, if it bears good fruit, we got it right.
If you do not believe the word of God then how can you know that you are being obedient, but actually believing YOUR OWN IDEA of who God is? How do you define, 'good fruit'? What STANDARD do you have to judge 'good fruit' other than your own biased axioms?
I then asked: If you don't believe that it teaches the truth of Almighty God, then how can you claim to be a follower of Jesus Christ? Q. The 'inconsistencies' that you claim exist are typically reconciled.
>You answered: A. Yes, but at what cost? If I took all scripture literally, I should be wearing a headpiece as I speak to you. I am not. Modern apologetics "explain away" this requirement, but by doing so, they lose their integrity. If the bible is infallible, then there should not be anything to "explain away".
You assert another violation of scripture with disdain: that being "always be ready to give an answer for what you believe" and I believe that Peter also said that "We do not follow cleverly contrived tales". The apostle Peter asserts the reliablility of scripture as does Jesus. JESUS CONSISTENTLY affirms the reliability of scripture.
I then said: Q. Christians do not have to explain nor account for all alleged 'inconsistencies' to gain the upper hand in apologetics.
>You responded with: A. True, if they are defending their faith. If, on the other hand, they are trying to defend the bible as infallible, they must certainly explain every inconsistency. Without relying on modern work-arounds. This is because athiests also have available to them full texts of the bible and rightfully so can call us to account.
Here you are again denying the obligation of the believer and with a falsehood. We, as Christians do not have to have every answer for every question. You also do not understand the difference between 'infallibility' and 'inerrancy'. You put up a 'straw man'. Inerrancy cannot be proven because we have no means to see the original documentation. We can only point out the reliability of texts when compared!
Infallibility deals with principles and not the inerrant details. By the way, you are in direct violation of the affirmed creeds of the early church on scripture reliability.
I then asked: Q. 'Twisted doctrine' is the result of interpreting scripture out of context. Perhaps you can explain to us the basis you use to judge another Christian's obedience to scripture and why they should not do so?
>Your reply: Q. I gave three examples. Four including the headpiece. The JW abstension from blood is another. The JW's insistence that God's heroes weren't such bad guys after all, by explaining away their indescretions. Such as David's murder of Bathsheba's first husband.
None of the above apply. These are misapplications. Scripture readily points out the faults of it's characters.
I then asked: Q. Again, if you do not hold scrpture to be factual,
>A. Scripture is factual now? Scripture to back that up, please.Q. ....on what basis do you claim to be Christian?
Here is the Jgnat 'merry go round' of semantics in operation.....
>Your next response:A. I .....am.....a.......follower......of......Christ. I am reasonably certain that Jesus' instruction got to us fairly intact. I am confident in following his example, and take the cross if necessary.
That is totally inconsistent. You assert that you are 'reasonable certain' yet you readily and consistently deny the very Word that forms the basis for your belief.
>You then added: Q. * I've seen abusers use the bible to force their victims to "forgive" them and remain in an abusive situation. How can a Christian accomplish this without being a cultist, like you and I came out of? Surely you are not comparing orthodox Christianity with Jw-ism, are you?
Sarcasm and misrepresentation of my statements.
>Then you said: A. I was never a JW. The examples of which I am speaking were in an evangelical church. I am saying that ANYBODY can use the bible as an offensive weapon, if they are diabolical enough.
Agreed on that point.
Now. here is another example of your compromise:
>You said: Q. * I've seen evangelicals bully a deathbed conversion in order to "save" the poor soul waiting to die.
I said: Perhaps you can tell me why Romans 3.23; 6.23; 5.8; 10.9-11, John 3.3;. 3.5;, 3.16, Eph. 2.8-9 do not apply to every individual alive and why a evangelical is wrong to compassionately share scripture with another soul? What part of Matthew 28.18-20 and Acts 1.8 are you too 'good' to observe and obey?
Then you replied with this:
>A. I saw it. It was shameful. I know in my heart of hearts it was wrong. Now, I share my faith in all kinds of situations. But I do it when the person is relaxed and in possession of all their faculties. If a person is not in a frame of mind to write a will, why would we coerce a deathbed conversion from them?
You assume coercion and the gospel is much simpler than a will is! This is filled with misleading statements and assumptions, shame on you for using this kind of tactic to deneigrate persons who have enough COMPASSION to share the promise of eternal life in heaven with a person who has not yet received Christ. How in the world do you KNOW THAT SOMEONE DYING is not 'in possession' of their faculties? That is wicked, plain and simple.
I then said: Q. We are told to not seek to be a teacher of scripture unless we are called to do so. Remember that there is a heavier responsibilty and weightier judgement for those who teach error or 'stumble others'.
>A. Are you suggesting I 'stumble others' with my opinion? In my opinion, your arrogant presentation of "Christianity" does more harm.
Your attacking of me and consistently siding with those who are unbelievers does 'stumble others'. I am not 'arrogant' because I give God the benefit of the doubt!
>Then you said: BTW, I consider my gift to be "encourager". At least one poster here has thanked me for turning her to God and away from disillusionment.
Praise God for that and I hope it is Him using you in this way. Now, let me tell you the rest of the story.
My grandmother, a JW for fifty years, the one who introduced me to scripture, PRAYED TO RECIEVE JESUS ON HER DEATHBED. I got a lucid few minutes with her and she saw Jesus for the first time in her life, ON HER DEATHBED. She listened to a granson whom she had lost all hope in and shunned for years. My wife and I visited with her and she got saved by the Lord. JWs who were due to arrive about the time we were seeing her got wrong directions to the nursing home from my mother, another JW of many years who has given her heart to Jesus! Praise the Lord of Glory for what He does through those who believe in Him. The lesson herein: never doubt the saving power of the God of the Bible. Share your faith in season and out of season, just because it is possible a divine appointment!
I don't hold your statements in unforgiveness. You had no way of knowing the rest of the story.
Rex -
55
For Sh***ing One - Do I represent Christ Properly?
by jgnat inme: s***ing one: where have i complained about scripture?
he: then you have now changed your mind and believe that all scripture is inspired?
me: as others have already helpfully pointed out, questioning and complaining are completely different.
-
-
Shining One
>Me: That may be true, but it does not follow that if you are offensive you are representing Christ properly. I believe the Holy Spirit has sent me to give you a message, to prick your conscience, and to learn a new way of presenting the message that brings healing instead of hurt. Your reaction is proof that my message is needed.
You have not given me that message at all. You have given a message to those who are perishing that they can have it 'both ways'. You appplaud and encourage compromise, then when called on it you go off into semantics instead of dealing with the real issue: the eternal souls of those who would find more reasons not to believe because of your own belittling of the word of God.
Rex -
39
The Bible. Despite many reasons to dismiss it why do so many believe?
by nicolaou ina man cannot walk on water, truly dead people do not come back to life and 1 + 1 will never equal 3. these are just a few of the absurd impossibilities that one must swallow and accept in order to 'believe' the bible.. why does the belief that the bible is 'truth' persist?.
men cannot survive a fiery furnace unscathed, the sun cannot stand still in the sky and donkeys cannot speak hebrew.
unless you believe the bible.
-
-
Shining One
I have been a witness to healings done in a church and out of a church. No question at all about the miracles. The Catholic has compiled and affirmed thousands of miracles.
Rex -
39
Perfect, Nearly Perfect, and Mostly Perfect....Religion
by jgnat inkero-kero's goodbye post brought me to mind a common complaint amongst jw apologists, that all we do is bring up the bad stuff and old history.
after all, "nobody's perfect".
well, that would be fine and dandy if the wtbts hadn't set themselves up as the sole mouthpiece for jehovah in these 'last days'.
-
-
Shining One
>On the contrary, aren't we judged by the "Word"? (Rom.14:10-13; Heb.4:12, 13) There's surely a mile of difference between Him and a dusty tome?
If the Bible is just a 'dusty tome' to you, what is the foundation for your own intelligent belief and how can it be consistent? You say you are a Christian and I do believe that. If you cannot rely on scripture to be accurate and true (in context) then how can your foundation be laid upon the Chief Cornerstone and the foundation of the apostles?
Rex -
39
Perfect, Nearly Perfect, and Mostly Perfect....Religion
by jgnat inkero-kero's goodbye post brought me to mind a common complaint amongst jw apologists, that all we do is bring up the bad stuff and old history.
after all, "nobody's perfect".
well, that would be fine and dandy if the wtbts hadn't set themselves up as the sole mouthpiece for jehovah in these 'last days'.
-
-
Shining One
>Well, that would be fine and dandy if the WTBTS hadn't set themselves up as the sole mouthpiece for Jehovah in these 'last days'. My JW hubby brings up what he considers fatal flaws in my church's doctrines as why he could never participate in our worship. I wonder, how are the JW's any different?
No hijack, I just pointed out her own hypocrisy as she regularly points out 'fatal flaws' in her own religion's statement of belief.
Rex