The whole convention is focused on Jesus birth and childhood. Episode 1 is pretty good. The actors and sets and narration is pretty good. And it is good that they are talking about Jesus, so don't knock it.
Rattigan350
JoinedPosts by Rattigan350
-
24
WT CONVENTION RELEASE LIFE OF JESUS
by blondie inhttps://wawa-news.com/index.php/2024/06/14/episode-1-of-jesus-christ-series-set-for-release-at-gfl-memorial-gardens-june-14-16th/ .
episode 1 of jesus christ series set for release at gfl memorial gardens june 14 – 16th.
in new south wales, australia, there exist replicas of regions once visited by the most notable prophet who ever lived.
-
-
-
78
God, one person, or three?
by slimboyfat inthe trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
-
-
Rattigan350
"do you still imagine a conspiracy by evil agents of the Devil"
Must be. How else do people get the scriptures wrong. Make up scriptures and miss the meaning and purpose of Jesus? They elevate him to the status of equal to God when that's not his place.
-
78
God, one person, or three?
by slimboyfat inthe trinity doctrine says god is three persons in one being.. yet the bible says god is one.. gal 3.20 a mediator, however, implies more than one party; but god is one.
niv.
gal 3.20 now a mediator is not for just one person, but god is one.
-
-
Rattigan350
The trinity is a man-made doctrine to take focus and worship away from Jehovah and put it on others that they won't object to.
People say they look to Jesus as being God because of John 1:1. That was written 65 years after Jesus died. What did they believe prior to that? Nothing was said in Acts about trinity or Jesus being God. Infact the opposite. Stephen saw Jesus at God's right hand, not a 3 person God.
The support texts are taken out of context: I and the father are one. Come on, that is contra trinity but they use it.
They rely on Jesus' enemies to get definitions of Jesus such as Thomas statement and the Pharisees.
They say John 8:58 is connected to Ex 3:14. Some pastor made that connection sometime in the past, but why didn't the apostles make that connection?
The trinity has spurious texts added such as 1 Tim 3:16, 1 john 5;7; Matt 28:19.
-
34
How do you find reddit
by joe134cd injust curious but how do the people off this forum find reddit.
for myself i find reddit to be sadly lacking in the jw world.
i just don't find the depth there e.g one sentence replies, trying to be funny.
-
-
Rattigan350
" Why do so many people take issue with John Cedars?"
I didn't like him because he had a beard which labels him as lazy, but now Convention speakers have beards so that takes that reason away.
-
34
How do you find reddit
by joe134cd injust curious but how do the people off this forum find reddit.
for myself i find reddit to be sadly lacking in the jw world.
i just don't find the depth there e.g one sentence replies, trying to be funny.
-
-
Rattigan350
I find reddit by going to reddit.com
"I just don't find the depth there e.g one sentence replies, trying to be funny. I find the language and rudeness there to be over whelming"
I agree with you there. I haven't gone to reddit in a long time. It's just a crowd where the masses get together and jump on the bandwagon.
-
79
John 1:1 in Coptic Translation
by slimboyfat inapparently there has been quite a stir in jw apologetic circles recently about the translation of john 1:1 in the early sahidic version of john.
i don't know if this has been discussed here before - if someone could give a link to a previous thread they know about on the subject that would be great.
here is what i gather: .
-
-
Rattigan350
"The critical point remains: John 1:1 refers to "the Word was God" (theos), denoting Jesus' divine nature, not as a lesser or different deity."
John was stating that the Word, Jesus was a spirit being alongside God. He was not saying that the Word was Jehovah God. He was denoting Jesus' divine history and that he was a lesser spirit being different from God.
-
6
For JW's - Is there ever a legitimate reason to criticize?
by Sea Breeze ini had a jw quote this scripture to me recently: “study to show yourself approved” - great scripture.
but when we point out that former wt leaders didn’t study and were high school drop outs (ct russell only made it to the 7th grade) franz was a college drop out with only 2 hrs.
in koine greek, we always get the same answer - the apostles weren’t educated men either.
-
-
Rattigan350
What does the schooling of Russell and Franz have to do with anything? The scripture "Study to show yourself approved" is about studying the Bible.
-
177
Charles T Russell -a freemason and the connection to the illuminati...
by dolphman inok, i'm not one for conspiracy theories but lately i've uncovered some interesting facts that i think warrant some attention.. first of all, russell was a freemason.
all the early watchtower and books he authored have freemason symbology and art throughout them.
not a big deal i thought, until i read more about freemasons and the so-called "illuminati", a group of 13 families that supposedly control the world.. supposedly these 13 families, such as the duponts, mcdonalds, kennedys, .
-
-
Rattigan350
What does Charles Russell have to do with Jehovah's Witnesses?
-
14
How Much Damage Would You Assess?
by Sea Breeze injust as there is no such thing as a christian who worships satan, there is no such thing as a christian outside of the new covenant “for the forgiveness of sins”.
and he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, drink ye all of it, for this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
- mt.
-
-
Rattigan350
Sea Breeze, you don't know what you are talking about. Why is it that people don't understand the context of mediator?
Is it because people mistakenly think that Paul was the authority on everything?
Paul wrote in specific contexts to specific audiences about specific matters.
-
26
Why Was WT OK with Blood Transfusions for over 65 Years Before Banning?
by Sea Breeze inblood transfusion history.
1665 the first recorded successful blood transfusion occurs in england: physician richard lower keeps dogs alive by transfusion of blood from other dogs.. 1818 james blundell performs the first successful blood transfusion of human blood to treat postpartum hemorrhage.. 1840 the first whole blood transfusion to treat hemophilia is successfully completed.. 1900 karl landsteiner discovers the first three human blood groups, a, b and o.. 1902 landsteiner’s colleagues, alfred decastello and adriano sturli, add a fourth blood type, ab.. 1907 blood typing and cross matching between donors and patients is attempted to improve the safety of transfusions.
the universality of the o blood group is identified.. 1914 adolf hustin discovers that sodium citrate can anticoagulate blood for transfusion, allowing it to be stored and later transfused safely to patients on the battlefield.. 1932 the first blood bank is established at leningrad hospital.. 1939-1940 the rh blood group is discovered and recognized as the cause behind most transfusion reactions.. 1940 the us government establishes a nationwide blood collection program.. so from the beginning of the watchtower being printed in 1879, they were ok with blood transfusions until 1945. what caused this?
-
-
Rattigan350
The thing about blood transfusions is; If it is against God's law, so what?
Has the ground opened up and swallowed anyone who took blood? Has anyone been struck by lightning or gotten leprosy for taking blood? I don't think so.
People receive blood and they live their life and then die normally, and the belief is that they won't get a resurrection. No big deal.
Refusing blood and the person dies and they have a hope for the resurrection; but it hasn't happened yet. So put one's in today, not the unknown future.