Michelle,
You are sadly mistaken in the way you used both 1 Timothy 5:18 and 2 Timothy 4:1-2.
Look closely at the first one. What does that scripture have to do with the message? It has nothing to do with muzzling the message, but the illustration is used by Paul to show that preachers deserve to be supported materially. But you are so intent on your own will rather than God's will that you hurriedly threw in that text without thinking through what it really means.
Then look at the context of the second scripture. What does it have to do with preaching to persons who are not Christians? The context shows plainly that Paul was advising Timothy how to preach and teach among brethren (inside the church, not outside).
Even though the only word you seem to see in that text is "rebuke," there are other words equally as important. But you prefer to ignore those words, don't you? You don't want to hear about 'convincing' others do you? All you think is necessary is to 'condemn' and tell people off. You don't want to convince with kind, winsome words. You want to show how righteous you are by making other people look small. And you don't want to see the word "longsuffering," do you? You don't think a Christian teacher should take time, be patient and hope for the best, do you?
All you want to do, Michelle, is ignore the Bible completely or try to find something in it that just might -- perhaps, maybe, hopefully -- support your unkind and unchristian point of view. Isn't that true? If you had the Christian spirit, you would not ignore what Jesus said about being at peace with others. You would not ignore what the apostle Paul said about always speaking with graciousness. You would not ignore what Paul wrote about the fruit of the spirit. You have your mind made up that your way -- not God's way, not the Bible way -- is best. Come now, Michelle, admit it! See yourself as you actually are. If you don't like this criticism, think how you make others feel when you and "real one" criticize them.
fjtoth
Posts by fjtoth
-
130"Real one" threatens athiests with Jugement Day! Why do Christians do this?
by Witness 007 in"real one" is a christian on this site and gets involved in many debates with athiests.
on my thread "jesus was just a man" he said:"non-beleivers will see jesus one day and you will not be happy.
" on my trinity thread:".....oh his {gods} existence is established.
-
-
fjtoth
-
130
"Real one" threatens athiests with Jugement Day! Why do Christians do this?
by Witness 007 in"real one" is a christian on this site and gets involved in many debates with athiests.
on my thread "jesus was just a man" he said:"non-beleivers will see jesus one day and you will not be happy.
" on my trinity thread:".....oh his {gods} existence is established.
-
-
fjtoth
Michelle,
Was Jesus "pussy-footing" when he told us to "be at peace with one another"? Was the apostle Paul "pussy-footing" when he wrote that our words should "give grace to all who hear"? Was he "pussy-footing" when he wrote that our speech should "always be with grace"? Was he "pussy-footing" when he said we would be peaceful, kind and gentle if the Holy Spirit is guiding us?By calling the Christian message "pussy-footing," you condemn both Jesus and Paul. And you also condemn the Holy Spirit. If you truly were like Jesus and Paul, and if you truly were under the influence of the Holy Spirit, you would quickly see their point. But you don't! Instead, you prefer to dismiss what the Bible teaches because you think your way is better than God's way.
Admit it, Michelle. That is your real problem, namely, your preference for your own will rather than God's will.
fjtoth
-
130
"Real one" threatens athiests with Jugement Day! Why do Christians do this?
by Witness 007 in"real one" is a christian on this site and gets involved in many debates with athiests.
on my thread "jesus was just a man" he said:"non-beleivers will see jesus one day and you will not be happy.
" on my trinity thread:".....oh his {gods} existence is established.
-
-
fjtoth
Michelle,
You seem to have a problem putting yourself in other people's shoes. If you were honest with yourself, you would admit that you don't like to be criticized, and you would understand that neither does anyone else. Criticism creates resistance, not cooperation.
Jesus put it this way, "Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another." (Mark 9:50) Sadly, it seems that you and "real one" haven't learned what Jesus meant.
Contrary to the disposition of "real one" toward others, Jesus was known as pleasant and easy to get along with: "And all were speaking well of Him, and wondering at the gracious words which were falling from His lips." (Luke 4:22) What falls from the real one's keyboard are unpleasant and haughty accusations, not pleasant and gracious words.
Though you fail to understand, the apostle Paul clearly understood what Jesus meant. That is why he wrote: "Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear." (Ephesians 4:29)
He also wrote: "Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person." (Colossians 4:6) Nowhere did Jesus or the apostles encourage the use of irritating language such as "real one" is fond of using.
Hopefully you will change your view, but at this point I'm starting to doubt it. It is a very sad thing when someone takes it upon himself or herself to condemn others when they don't see 'the rafter in their own eye.' (Matthew 7:3-5) Ironically, you and "real one" want others to change, but you don't seem to realize the need for yourselves to change in order to be more like Jesus.If God's spirit was guiding "real one" we should expect him to display the fruit of the spirit which includes peace, kindness and gentleness. (Galatians 5:22, 23)
fjtoth -
130
"Real one" threatens athiests with Jugement Day! Why do Christians do this?
by Witness 007 in"real one" is a christian on this site and gets involved in many debates with athiests.
on my thread "jesus was just a man" he said:"non-beleivers will see jesus one day and you will not be happy.
" on my trinity thread:".....oh his {gods} existence is established.
-
-
fjtoth
Michelle,
As shown by the criticism coming from both Christians and non-Christians, the expressions of "real one" are offensive to some. Offensiveness does not attract people to the gospel. It turns them away. I think it shows a poor understanding of human nature to think the truth will attract honest-hearted persons regardless of how it is spoken. If the way it is done is offensive, that would result in stumbling people away from Christianity instead of drawing them to it. As Jesus said regarding some who claim to follow him: "Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes! (Matthew 18:6, 7)
We become stumblingblocks if we appear self-righteous and "holier-than-thou." Perhaps that is not the mindset of "real one," but he does give that impression. None of us is Jesus, and none of us has authority to speak the way he did at times. When two apostles decided to call down evil upon unbelievers, Jesus "rebuked them." (Luke 9:51-56) I think he would equally rebuke any of us who think we have the sinlessness and purity of soul that would qualify us to condemn someone else's faith or lack of faith.
Oftentimes it is not our words but it is our conduct that wins others to Christ. "Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles, so that in the thing in which they slander you as evildoers, they may because of your good deeds, as they observe them, glorify God in the day of visitation." (1 Peter 2:12) A Christian wife, for example, can never hope to win her unbelieving husband to Christianity if she nags him about what she believes is "the truth." As Peter wrote: "In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives." (1 Peter 3:1)
fjtoth
http://formerjw.homestead.com -
130
"Real one" threatens athiests with Jugement Day! Why do Christians do this?
by Witness 007 in"real one" is a christian on this site and gets involved in many debates with athiests.
on my thread "jesus was just a man" he said:"non-beleivers will see jesus one day and you will not be happy.
" on my trinity thread:".....oh his {gods} existence is established.
-
-
-
343
I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!
by Witness 007 insome bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!
the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.
now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..
-
-
fjtoth
Jeffro,
You worship an interesting god -- one who moves you to sit on the sidelines and label good discussion as "squabbling" and 'bickering.'
A god who moves you to say in one post that the true God is "imaginary" and to contradict yourself in another post by claiming you never said any such thing at all.
A god who prompts you to claim you want "peace" when you with no good reason go on the attack with words like "smarmy" and "stupid."
A god who instigates you to liken the participants in the discussion to "small children" arguing over "imaginary friends."
A god who inspires you to brag about your supposed "integrity" and to denigrate the character of others.
A god who doesn't give you enough good sense to realize your comments are a rude intrusion and belong in another thread.
Of course, you won't take the hint. You're going to come back (as a man of "peace") with more comments of the same stripe just to show that your supposed "integrity" and other superior qualities deserve to be noticed. Don't blame us if you're ignored for not sticking with the program.
fjtoth
-
343
I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!
by Witness 007 insome bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!
the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.
now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..
-
-
fjtoth
Which is the real Jeffro?
The one who wrote this about God:an entity whose existence is not established
imaginary
you should provide that incontrovertible proof
there is no proof
If god does existOr this?
I did not say that I do not believe in God.
fjtoth
-
343
I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!
by Witness 007 insome bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!
the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.
now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..
-
-
fjtoth
Jeffro,
It's not up to anyone else to convince you that God exists. That is something anyone ought to be able to determine for himself. Romans 1:20-28 says it well: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, ... And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind."
If you cannot see God in his handiwork, he won't allow you to see him in answered prayers or in experiencing the work of his holy spirit in your life either.
If you want to argue about the existence of God, wouldn't it be better to start another thread rather than to divert this already long one into another topic?
fjtoth
-
343
I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!
by Witness 007 insome bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!
the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.
now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..
-
-
fjtoth
Deputy Dog,
Lets leave Jesus out of the equation (since you say he's not God) for a moment. What is the "form of GOD"? Describe for us how God's "form" strikes your vision. Describe the "appearance" of the invisible God. How does one look like an invisible God?
Isn't your question simply a denial of the Bible? The Bible plainly says Jesus is the "image" of God. Obviously that doesn't mean physically as you seem to be insisting. If the Bible says he is God's "image," who are you or I or anyone else to say he is not God's image?
Many bond-servants were not forced into slavery beyond their own will. In fact it was very common for people to willingly do this in that day. This was known as debt-slavery. Many willingly stayed with their masters after the year of jubilee.
You have got to be kidding! Where is your evidence that "it was very common for people to willingly" become slaves? The yearning of every normal person is to be free and independent. People give their lives that others may have that freedom. So who are you trying to kid with a statement like that? As for "debt-slavery," think about it for a moment: Is slavery to pay off debts something that persons entered into because they preferred slavery over freedom? Debt-slavery was entered into as an obligation, not as a desirable choice. Jesus had no debts to pay. Unlike us, he was free of sin and "slavery to corruption," and he enjoyed "the freedom of the glory of the children of God." (Romans 8:21)
Seems to me God the Father had the correct understanding of servant H5650 when He discribes Him In Isaiah 53:11
The mention of "servant" in Isaiah 53:11 has nothing to do with "bond-servant" in Philippians 5:6. Concerning the Hebrew word 'ebed translated "servant," note what is stated in the New International Version Study Bible footnote at Isaiah 41:8, 9: "A significant term in chs. 41-53, referring sometimes to the nation of Israel and other times to an individual. In these passages the title refers to one who occupies a special position in God's royal administration of his kingdom, as in 'my servant Moses' (Ex 14:31; Nu 12:7), 'my servant David' (2 Sa 3:18; 7:5,8), 'my servants the prophets' (2 Ki 17:13; Jer 7:25)."
Also note the footnote at Exodus 14:31: "his servant ... refers to one who has the status of a high official in the Lord's kingly administration."
Also note the footnote at Isaiah 42:1: "In the royal terminology of the ancient Near East 'servant' meant something like 'trusted envoy' or 'confidential representative.'" [The bold faced underlining is mine, and in each example the word "servant" is from the Hebrew word 'ebed, the same word that appears in Isaiah 53:11.]
So, you are greatly mistaken to suggest that the Hebrew 'ebed ("servant") is the same as the Greek doulos ("bond-servant").
So you think he was just putting on a show?
If you got that idea from what I wrote about Jesus being the "image" of God, that must also be the way you interpret those Bible verses that say Jesus is such. Jesus is the reflection of God's very being just as God intends each Christian to be the reflection of Christ: "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified." -- Romans 8:29, 30.
I nerver said He was. I'm saying the parable does not apply, it has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
It has everything to do with what we're discussing. It clearly shows that Jesus is not a doulos, no matter what you want to believe. Despite your feelings, the Bible makes it clear again and again that Jesus was never Almighty God or a doulos. He was simply in the image or "form" of God and in the image or "form" of a doulos.
fjtoth
-
343
I hate the Watchtower but I really still hate the Trinity Jesus is NOT God!
by Witness 007 insome bibles use the term "worship" when refering to jesus...at times people did fall down and bow to him........this doesn't show he was god!
the greek term; proskeyneo, means to prostrate oneself, to bow down and show honour.
now, this was done for jehovah.....and his representatives....jesus israelite kings and priests....but for the honour of jehovah not as creature worship which even angels would refuse.. also i studied the non-biblical early church gospels which really does show a slow decline over 150 years, into the trinity as the watchtower claims...........although i still hate the watchtower society at least i learnt something that wasn't a lie..
-
-
fjtoth
Deputy Dog,
Again there is a big difference between the words.
Contrary to what you say, there is no "big" difference between doulos ("form") and morphe ("image). They can be "used interchangeably," as shown by their interchangeable use in the Greek Septuagint, as mentioned in my previous post. Additionally, at Hebrews 10:1 several translations say "form" instead of "image" when translating eikon.
"The law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form[eikon] of these realities." (English Standard Version)"The law has only a shadow of the good things to come, and not the actual form [eikon] of those realities." (Holman Christian Standard Bible)"The Law ... has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very form [eikon] of things." (New American Standard Bible)"The law has only a shadow of the good things to come and not the true form [eikon] of these realities." (New Revised Standard Version)"The law has but a shadow of the good things to come instead of the true form [eikon] of these realities" (Revised Standard Version)
My argument is not that the words aren't similar in meaning, it's that they are not interchangeable, in this context.
Where do you get authoritative support for saying they cannot be used interchangeably in Philippians 2:6? What determines that it's okay to use them interchangeably elsewhere, but not here?
Elsewhere the Bible says Jesus is the "image" of God:
"Christ, who is the image of God." (2 Corinthians 4:4)
"He is the image of the invisible God." (Colossians 1:15)If other texts say that Christ is the "image" of God, where is the evidence that this text in Philippians 2:6 is not saying the same thing, in view of the two words being interchangeable elsewhere?
Being in the "image" or "form" of God does not make one God or equal to God. Adam and Eve were created in God's "image," but that did not make them God. (Genesis 1:26, 27; 5:1; 9:6) And Christians are in the "image" of God. (1 Corinthians 11:7; Ephesians 4:24; Colossians 3:10) God's intention is that all mankind should be in his "image," but that will never make them God.
Deuteronomy 4:16, 23 is another example that plainly shows "form" is simply another word for "image" or "likeness". The Israelites were commanded: "Do not act corruptly and make a graven image for yourselves in the form of any figure, the likeness of male or female, the likeness of any animal that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged bird that flies in the sky, the likeness of anything that creeps on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the water below the earth ... a graven image in the form of anything against which the LORD your God has commanded you." The "form" of any animal did not equal the actual animal in any sense.
fjtoth