jp1692,
You nailed it perfectly.
Lord's prayer is not of divine origin--it is full of flaws--hence made by some thoughtless human being.
Posts by venus
-
12Lead us not into temptation
by eyeuse2badub in'lead us not into temptation': why pope francis is wrong about the lord's prayer.
m j c warren, lecturer in biblical and religious studies, university of .
pope francis recently announced that he thinks the common english translation of the lord’s prayer is mistranslated.
-
-
-
-
-
venus
Cofty,
There was no need, in the first place, from going away from what I originally said: “What I LIKED THE MOST ABOUT JESUS IS THAT HE WAS AGAINST CONVENTION AND REJECTED MUCH OF THE SCRIPTURES OF HIS TIME.” When I used the expression “Scriptures of his time” it is simply all scriptures, not just “law” which are just 10 major commandments and around 600 sub laws which are like a drop in the ocean called “Scriptures of his time” which are basically human questions and human answers.
When I speak about ocean, you are restricting it into a drop which reduces the debate into a mere intellectual exercise as happening between atheists and theists which would never end because the way nature is can equally be interpreted in favor of both atheism and theism which means one doesn't have advantage over the other..
-
-
-
venus
Cofty,
In Mathew 15:11 Jesus flouted the law about what is to be eaten--Law says certain flesh as clean and certain as unclean.
Again Jesus clearly flouted the law of Deuteronomy 24:16 (which says sins cannot be swapped) when he said he came to die for the sins of the world (Mathew 20:28; 26:28)
Leviticus 10:9 also he violated in a whole sale
I can give you many ....
-
3
@ all J.W.'s - How true is this "adjusted" scripture!
by The Fall Guy in(matthew 12:32) “....whoever speaks a word against the son of man, it will be forgiven him; but whoever speaks against the g.b.
or the org, it will not be forgiven him, no, not in this system of things nor in that to come.”.
-
-
venus
Yes, you cannot speak against "spirit-guided organization"
-
-
-
venus
Dawkins must have a point because of the following:
Law says ‘you can lend money to the poor, but you should not charge interest’ (Exodus 22:25)
‘Leave something for the poor when glean your vineyard’ (Leviticus 19:10)
But see how far Jesus departed from such superficial Laws when he said: “When you give a luncheon or dinner, do not invite your friends, your brothers or sisters, your relatives, or your rich neighbors; if you do, they may invite you back and so you will be repaid. But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind.” (Luke 14:12, 13) He even indirectly hinted that such laws are not from God (Mathew 5:44-48)
-
-
-
venus
Cofty,
I was reffering to conventions and scriptures of Jesus's time, not limiting only to the Law. Even Richard Dawkins shares this view: “Jesus was not content to derive his ethics from the scriptures of his upbringing. He explicitly departed from them. ... Since a principal thesis of this chapter is that we do not, and should not, derive our morals from scripture, Jesus has to be honoured as a model for that very thesis.”--God Delusion
-
-
-
venus
Cofty,
It is true that Jesus "rejected the way the OT was being interpreted by the Pharisees."
But is also true that he undermined the authority of Bible writers like Moses and mixed two conflicting creation accounts when only either of them is true. (Mark 10:1-9)
When God made Solomon the wisest king that ever lived, stating there would never be another like him (1 Kings 3:12) Jesus simply declared he is greater than Solomon. (Mathew 12:42; Luke 11:31)
Jesus gives no thought to the correctness of what he speaks of OT events/persons. For example, when Ahimalech was the high priest when David ate the show-bread (1 Sam.21:1-6) Jesus declares it was Abiathar who was the high priest when David ate the show-bread. (Mar 2:26)
-
6
And the capital of Israel was ...
by Doug Mason inthe capital of biblical israel was samaria.. jerusalem was the capital of judah/benjamin.. the modern state of israel is not named after the biblical nation of israel.
it is named after a man.
it is named after jacob, the lion of judah, who was later given the name of israel.
-
-
venus
The very inception of Israel is shrouded in mystery. The multiple destruction of their temple with all the scrolls, and even The destruction of secular Library of Alexandria which also resulted in the loss of many scrolls and books .... all gave opportunities to create histories later. They used God for their own purpose--but it backfired. They put it in the scriptures that the very name Israel was given by God. Israel means one who struggles with God till He blesses in return which in the long run did not happen in the case of Israel as a nation. Its capital Jerusalem was described by Jesus as "Killer of prophets" (Mat 23:37). Even now Israel is not in a position to enjoy peace being surrounded by Arab nations inimical to them.
-
31
What's destroying Watchtower!
by UnshackleTheChains infor me, beyond any shadow of a doubt, it's the extreme shunning policy.. at a recent sunday meeting, i listened to a complete brainwashed sister saying how important it was that we stick to the shunning policy even if it is a close relative.. i just thought.
wtf.
there is a big difference between the brainwashed and the awoken class!.
-
-
venus
It is too obvious that shunning policy cannot be of divine origin as it undercuts the most important statement of Jesus in Mathew 5:44-48. Hence it is better that JWs stick to their shunning policy. They do not know how much damage it does to themselves. Hitler used to shoot down messenger that brings a bad news of any mission failed. Hence his own people refrained from giving him such news which gave him a false feeling that he is on the path to the third Reich and believed that he was creating a third German empire. Let WT too behave like Hitler.
-
9
Does the Watchtower favor interpretation over translation, especially in the case of Exodus 15:3?
by Poppy520 inexodus 15:3, "the lord is a man of war: the lord is his name.
" kjv, esv, asv.. exodus 15:3, "jehovah is a powerful warrior.
jehovah is his name.
-
-
venus
I agree with Earnest fully. In some language sweet liver is used in place of sweet heart/darling. Hence a wise translator would try to convey the thought rather than its literal word. You seem to favor the doctrine of trinity hence want Ex 15:3 to be “man of warrior”. But even this would only add to the problem. If Jesus was part of Trinity, it would mean wherever he goes, the other two inseparable parts too were with him. Thus God came down and got crucified himself on the cross instead of manly arranging the crucifixion of Satan the Devil the first sinner. Moreover, story of God the Father putting his son to death, or employing people to do it (for that is the plain language of the story) cannot be told by a parent to a child; and to tell him that it was done to make mankind happier and better is making the story still worse- as if mankind could be improved by the example of murder; and to tell him that all this is a mystery is only making an excuse for the incredibility of it.