Newly Baptised Witness won't hold back the news about the Kingdom and witnesses to the Pope.
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"]
Yerusalyim
JoinedPosts by Yerusalyim
-
3
Door to Door reaches to the Top
by Yerusalyim innewly baptised witness won't hold back the news about the kingdom and witnesses to the pope.. yerusalyim.
"vanity!
it's my favorite sin!".
-
-
Yerusalyim
-
2
Silentlambs and 25 July
by Yerusalyim insl,.
can we still look forward to the details of the story on 25 july?
if not, then when, also, anymore word on what the "what do they have in common" post.. yeru.
-
-
Yerusalyim
SL,
Can we still look forward to the details of the story on 25 July? If not, then when, also, anymore word on what the "What do they have in common" post.
Yeru
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
69
Christmas Star = Satan?!
by reagan_oconnor ini was talking with my husband the other day about the jw's belief that the "christmas star" that guided the magi to christ was the doings of satan.
he didn't believe me; this is what i found in the "my book of bible stories" (copied verbatim from cd-rom).
who do you think made that new star to shine?
-
-
Yerusalyim
Badges? We don't need no stinking badges!
thanks ianao. MERRY CHRISTMAS.
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
4
Christmas 1926 Brooklyn Bethel
by Okidok in.
what if everything is an illusion and nothing exists?
in that case, i definitely overpaid for my carpet.. woody allen
-
-
Yerusalyim
Kick it or pinch it fred?
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
69
Christmas Star = Satan?!
by reagan_oconnor ini was talking with my husband the other day about the jw's belief that the "christmas star" that guided the magi to christ was the doings of satan.
he didn't believe me; this is what i found in the "my book of bible stories" (copied verbatim from cd-rom).
who do you think made that new star to shine?
-
-
Yerusalyim
Friday,
Just because I refuse to accept the drivel you repeat from the Faithless and Indiscreet Slob (aka BORG) neither makes me ridiculous or dim as you would have it. It does, however, point to the fact that you're having a hard time using any scripture to prove your point.You can not discredit Isaiah 60 as a Messianic passage, and if it is Messianic you have to accept that the only time Frankincense and Gold are mentioned in connection with The Christ is when people from the east (the magi) brought it to Jesus. ANd you won't concede that point.
Your premises is based ENTIRELY on conjecture. You've accepted the BORG line as gospel inspite of the facts.
You ignore rational correlary between the fact that Satan used something God created (the tree) for evil, and the idea that Satan used a star to accomplish an evil (and since God is the only creator He created the star).
God KNEW this was going to happen, the slaughter of the babies, it was prophecied, it was also prophecied that someone from the east would present Gold and Frankincense to Messiah. I only see the Magi doing this.
As to the Catholic Encyclopedia, remember, not everything written in a Catholic Publication is considered doctrine. I know as a Witness this is a hard concept to to grasp, but work with me.
It is notable, and so very, very strange, that these three commentators didn’t have as much as one single comment to make with reference the all-important verse 6, of Isaiah 60. Wow!!! … just think, 3 much- respected commentators here JUST DIDN’T GET IT!
Well, they may not have gotten it, but the Catholic Church did A LONG TIME before any of these Johnny Come Lately's were around.The fact that the Magi stopped in Jerusalem shows only that they were playing by the rules of the day. And if ya look closely at a map, Jerusalem is on the Road to Bethlehem. To NOT have stopped to see Herod would have been a smack in his face.
[QUOTEHave you already forgotten what I have told you, or is it that you wish not to remember? I had said, quote: ... the Bible is silent as to where the “star” come from. [For that reason, therefore,] it is left up to our discretion to determine the source of the “star”, by reasoning upon all the facts that can be gathered.
Indeed the bible is silent as to the source of the star in that passage, but I seem to remember that only God can create, and Satan can only perform illusions. The bible calls it a star, not "what appeared to be a star"
The WatchTower has built upon this silence an entire doctrine that scripture itself denies. It was foretold. Again, if the Society left it at just that, SILENCE, form your own opinion, that would be fine, SILLY, but fine. Instead, the Borg has created a whole doctrine on it that must be accepted.But when it comes to the “star” the Bible doesn’t directly say who the source of it was. So, as I’ve already stressed, all that is left for one to do, that is if one is concerned enough to want to know, is to gather all the facts available and make a judgment based upon those facts.
But "one" didn't do it, the society has done it, and if someone disagrees with this publically they would be disciplined if not DF'd.WHy does the NWT add the word "WOMAN" to Isaiah 60, it isn't there in the Hebrew. Then again, the Borg is used to adding words to scripture. The reason not many mention this in reference to the Magi is because until the BORG came along, no one ever doubted that the Magi were led by a star that had God as the source.
You insult my brothers and sisters, by charging them as being a bunch of gullible-good-for-nothings, and then you claim that I’m “dear” to you
I said "good-for-nothings"? Where? When? I did INDEED imply gullible, one would have to be gullible to accept the mindless drivel put out in the WatchTower.
I do indeed hold you, and all people, especially sincere people, but no, ALL people as "dear" if for no other reason than that God loves you. But again, rather than sticking to the issue, you attack me, my sincerety, my intelligence and not what I've pointed out.
I said,The bible does NOT in fact, say that the star led them to Jerusalem, it was the diplomatic thing to do to go to Jerusalem.
and you said,You emphasize a very good point here, but at the same time you’re nitpicking
NITPICKING? No, that is the entire point. Satan has the ability to to take something GOOD and use it for EVIL. The bible does NOT say that the Star led them to Jerusalem. The Magi stopped there because a) it was on the route, b) it would have been seen as RUDE at best and HOSTILE at worst for the Magi NOT to have stopped in to see Herod. God knew that Satan would tempt Adam and Eve with the Tree, yet left it there, they failed. God knew that because of the star that Herod would be tempted, HE FAILED.NOW THEN, had the star led ASSASINS to Bethlehem, no problem I would agree with you. As it is, it was SCRIPTURE and not the Magi, who told Herod that Bethlehem was where the Messiah would be born. Are we then to conclude (using your reasoning) since SCRIPTURE led Herod to Bethlehem, that this prophecy was of Satan? BY NO MEANS!
Arguments from the silence of scripture in the way you and the BORG use it in this case is just plain silly.
Their following that star resulted in the slaughter of all the male infants in Bethlehem … it’s therefore absurd – ABSOSUTELY ABSURD -- to attribute the star to God. God would have foreseen the tragedy and not took them via Jerusalem
[He would have corrected their course so as to make absolutely sure that they didn’t go there] if it had been Him that had been maneuvering the star. As it is, the way you would have it -- attributing the star to God -- you are making God responsible for the deaths of a huge number of children, which of course is not true at all.BULL HOCKEY DUDE. Using that line of reasoning, GOD KNEW that Adam and Eve would eat the fruit and therefore GOD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEATHS OF BILLIONS OF HUMANS. Again, it was SCRIPTURE that lead Herod to Bethlehem, not the Star, not the Magi. SO is SCRIPTURE from Satan? Hardly.I had made the point that if the “star” had been of God’s doing, then, since He would have obviously known beforehand that all those infants were destined to die as a result of that star having led the Magi to Herod, then God Himself therefore would be the one to blame for the deaths of all the children that were slaughtered.
But God DID know before hand, it was prophecied. In a sense, the mere BIRTH of the Christ led to this slaughter, so do we blame God for it by having Jesus born there, NO, we blame Herod for his hate. Not a star, and not the Magi, HEROD gets the blame.Yes, it’s true that they were instructed by the king to go to the exact town where the prophecy said the Messiah was to be born. And so, no, it’s quite clear that they didn’t absolutely need the star in order to know where to go insofar as the town was concerned. But, it looks as if Satan was so eager to maintain their excitement (because of his serious stake in the matter) that he was more than willing to go out his way to accommodate them by causing the star to become manifest again upon their having left out of Jerusalem.
and this is found exactly WHERE in scripture? Satan is not mentioned at all in this exchange. The fact is, Herod didn't need the Magi or the Star either one in Bethlehem, HE KNEW where the Christ was to be born because of SCRIPTURE.You’re not citing the Bible accurately, Yeru. (Will you be honest enough to admit that? Or will you conveniently ignore it like you did all the times up above.) You are ignoring the fact that the “star” was first seen again by the Magi upon their leaving out of Jerusalem:
Where have I not cited the bible correctly? The Star did NOT lead them to Jerusalem, rather Custom and Hospitality and Diplomacy DICTATED they go there.
As to Isaiah 59 and 60 being Messianic,,
From the west they shall revere the name of the Lord and from the east His presence. For He shall come like a hemmed in stream which the wind of the Lord drive on; He shall come as redeemer to Zion, To those in Jacob who turn from sin, declares the Lord
Isaiah 59:19-20Hmmm "Redeemer...those who turn from sin, sounds kinda like Messiah to me, the context remains the same throughout Isaiah 60 as well.
Does it look to you and the rest of the world that I have accepted the Society’s proclamation in spite of scripture?
Yes, frankly it does!No, the Society is not pretending to be an expert of any sort. What they’ve said is very reasonable. If it hadn’t been, I wouldn’t have quoted their work.
Because everything Friday says is reasonable, right? NOT!deaths that came about in association with that “star”. Now, since it was Jehovah God that inspired that prophecy to begin with, then he obviously had read the future beforehand regarding events having to do with the one which he would send to earth in behalf of mankind. Because of having seen the future in that regards, if He had been the one behind the “star” then that would make Him the guilty culprit for the deaths of some of the very ones that he sent his Son here to save.
The star had nothing and HEROD had EVERYTHING to do with the death of those innocents.He knew [YOU KNOW]beforehand that he would be debating with a hardhead that was impenetrable. Besides, you had your mind made up from the start that you were going to claim that, and you just wanted to pick my brains; I knew that. What HAS been proven is what you can’t see that has been proven, Yeru. You’re blinded by your involvement with the world, and you love it that way. And, no, you don’t “draw from scripture” anything at all that proves that Isaiah 60:6 is connected to Matthew 2:11, or any other part of Matthew’s account for that matter. You and Matthew Henry ought to be buried in the same cemetery. You need me to find out where he’s buried for you?
And you are what, the model of open minded scholarship, I think not. Is Matt Henry buried next to Russel's Pyramid?What some people will do when they get backed into a corner while involved in a debate!!! Wow!!! Can’t you think of some way out of this, besides making your wife undergo surgery?[/QUOTE] Ending on a note of humor?
Since we are both hard headed, since neither will convince the other, since we have both made our points (even if yours is wrong) need we continue to debate the same spiel over and over? it's up to you.Yeru
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"[/b]
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
9
nyc priest reveals confession
by orbison ininteresting, a nyc priest has revealed a confession re:murder which has allowed the courts to appeal the outcome,,,all i can find at the moment,,,just happened today.
w
-
-
Yerusalyim
I recieved this from my daily religious news summary I receive, Crosswalk Crosswalk.com [ [email protected]]
Twelve years after Jose Morales and Ruben Montalvo were sentenced to 15
years in jail for murdering Jose Rivera in New York City, a Jesuit
priest has come forward to testify that the two men are innocent. Father
Joseph Towle revealed that in 1989 he was called to the home of a
teenage boy, Jesus Fornes, who told the priest he was the person who
murdered Rivera. Towle had encouraged Fornes to go to authorities with
his information, and Fornes did. But he was too late. A jury never heard
his direct testimony, and Morales and Montalvo were convicted.For the next eight years, Towle remained silent, feeling that it was his
moral obligation to do so. In 1997, however, Jesus Fornes was murdered.
And with Fornes' death, Towle believed that it was time for him to come
forward with his secret. Towle disclosed his story in May 2000, and
Morales' attorney filed a new appeal.But before he even took the witness stand Tuesday, prosecutors began
questioning the legitimacy of his testimony, saying that it was
impermissible under church law for Towle to make his statement. They
cited his sacred responsibility to keep confessions secret. The
Archdiocese of New York, however, gave its full support for Towle's
decision to come forward, noting that what Fornes had told his priest
was not a formal confession.Judge Denny Chin of the Federal District Court in Manhattan is expected
to make his decision on Morales' appeal in two weeks.Yeru
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
20
Mother Troubles
by joelbear inmy mother called tuesday night.
as many of you know, i have chosen to stop communication with my family as of the beginning of this year.. my mother has called 4 or 5 times to talk, but i have not called her, my father or my brother or anyone in his family.
all of them are witnesses of varying degrees.. i tend to go into a deep depression each time my mother calls.
-
-
Yerusalyim
Joel,
Can I recommend a counselor for yourself. Honestly, it would help. Abandonment issues are really tough to deal with, trust me. Even if she didn't ever really leave. See a counselor, and have the counselor tell you how better to communicate with your mom.
Yeru
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
69
Christmas Star = Satan?!
by reagan_oconnor ini was talking with my husband the other day about the jw's belief that the "christmas star" that guided the magi to christ was the doings of satan.
he didn't believe me; this is what i found in the "my book of bible stories" (copied verbatim from cd-rom).
who do you think made that new star to shine?
-
-
Yerusalyim
BB,
You might have a point, you might not. If the Society wasn't so insistent on claiming that the whole Magi deal was the work of Satan and just said, "it's open to interpretation" then the subject would be dropped. As it is their insistence that this is from the Devil is so bogus as to make me shiver. The Jews and most orthodox Christians do indeed point to Isaiah 60 as refering to the Messiah. Then again, the Jews do not see Jesus as the fulfillment of the messianic promise.
That does not make their interpretation of what is and is not messianic prophecy invalid though.
YeruYERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
4
When in Rome......
by ISP in............don't do as the romans do!
prostitute bites off client's testicle after special request .
an italian has had his left testicle bitten off by a prostitute who claims he asked for a special service.. the 25-year-old was having sex with the prostitute, named as jasmine, in cassino, near rome.. she says she bit him when he asked for the service, il nuovo website reports.. the man was helped by clients of prostitutes nearby who took him to hospital.
-
-
Yerusalyim
No one else has said this yet?
I think she's bitten off more than she can chew!
Yeru (who has his legs crossed with sympathy pain)
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"] -
58
What's wrong w/JW's?
by GodRules ini would sincerely like to know what is so wrong with jehovah's witnesses.
i invite anyone to post here.
please use facts not personal opinions.. i am not interested in dates, the blood issue, nor the disfellowshipping issue since i am conviced that these do not prove that they are wrong.. i am weighing in to see if you as an opposer of jehovah's witnesses have the facts or not.
-
-
Yerusalyim
RULES,
The single biggest problem with the Society is that it claims to be God's organization, but offers no proof of this. On the BLOOD issue, The bible forbids EATING blood, not taking it as a transfusion, BIG DIFFERENCE.
Also, the Society is wrong on HELL, THE TRINITY, the 144,00, the Memorial.
Hey GR, if Jesus came back in 1914 why does the Society still hold the memorial since Jesus said to do it UNTIL HE RETURNS.???The Society has gotten much more wrong than it has right.
Yeru
YERUSALYIM
"Vanity! It's my favorite sin!"
[Al Pacino as Satan, in "DEVIL'S ADVOCATE"]