A STUNNINGLY simple question about JOHN 3:16 "For God so Loved the world."

by Terry 384 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Deputy Dog

  Perry Wescott & Hort were both dead long before the NASB was tranlated. So how can you blame them? That Greek word is the same both Texts Do we agree that the important thing to see here is, they were "made subject" by God "not willingly"? I'd like to address this again

  God at no time subjected the human race to a "hopeless" situation.

  What would you call this?
  

  Eph 2:12

  That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:

  Looks like "futility" to me. Why was this verse not on your list? It seems this scripture captures the fundamental character of fallen man as well.

  Deputy Dog, Certainly man cannot save himself, I agree But, that isn't the same as saying mankind as a whole was hopeless. The hope extended in Genesis 3:15 was no doubt a basis for Abraham's faith and it was issued before the sentence was executed. Doctrianlly, the wording of the KJV seems superior to me.

  Not wanting to split hairs hear. Don't you agree, that faith is a gift from God, given only to believers? And if God gives no faith, then there is NO HOPE.

  God bless you as well.
• 

  AuldSoul

  hamilcarr: Since cooperation apparently raises our species' fitness, I would affirmatively claim larger spheres are better .

  Cooperation also improves our ability to destroy our environment and our capacity for self-destruction. Spheres of cooperation expanded more rapidly than adaptation rates (to the rapid societal evolution) can accomodate makes self-destructive incidents or even incidents destructive to the species much more likely.

  Charisma can bend cooperative humans to almost any task, provided the moralistic considerations are properly framed. If extraspecial evolution is correct then good and bad are beliefs, even if such are instinctive beliefs . . . not realities. Without knowing the eventual outcomes of our choices the judgment of what is good and what is bad is purely subjective.

  Consider this: Should Hitler have been killed as a baby?

  Millions of Jews would have been spared a horror that should never have been visited on anyone, ever. But the example of Hitler and our guardedness against ever allowing something like that to occur again has possibly helped prevent far worse genocides and atrocities that might have otherwise occurred. Had Hitler died as a baby those six million and more Jews would have been spared and perhaps our entire species would have later been extinguished, or several nations of people.

  Should Hitler have been killed as a baby?

  I don't know whether that would have been good or bad and neither do you, neither does any other human. We cannot ever know whether any choice we make or fail to make will produce a net cost to our species or a net gain to our species specifically because we do not know the long-term effects of any of our choices.

  Therefore, unless something can speak on the matter from a perspective that is less limited than the human perspective, morals are a figment of chance. They don't actually exist.

  Respectfully,
  AuldSoul
• 

  restrangled

  Auld Soul....your argument about Hitler:

  Consider this: Should Hitler have been killed as a baby?

  Millions of Jews would have been spared a horror that should never have been visited on anyone, ever. But the example of Hitler and our guardedness against ever allowing something like that to occur again has possibly helped prevent far worse genocides and atrocities that might have otherwise occurred. Had Hitler died as a baby those six million and more Jews would have been spared and perhaps our entire species would have later been extinguished, or several nations of people.

  Should Hitler have been killed as a baby

  It has prevented no worse genocides or atrocities! Consider what has gone on in the Middle East and Bush's attempt to stop the genocide by Sadam Hussien. Sadam has been hung and yet there is more of the same all over the world. Bush has committed his own atrocities under the guise of war. Denying the Geneva Convention agreed upon by many nations years ago. The Us ignores the atrocities happening anywhere else in the world, because oil dollars are not involved.

  The United States continues to fund with money and weapons anyone they see fit to fight their present enemies. These same enemies may at any given moment become our present allies. Tax dollars are thrown to the wind at the whims of current administration officials.

  Hitler was evil, but so are many men today, and Bush is fast making a reputation for himself along with former presidents that didn't get called on what they did in secret.

  So many Dirty deeds by Dirty little boys playing the big shot for their countries.

  r.
• 

  White Dove

  So, umm...who is the collector of the ransom? God collected it but shouldn't the devil have been paid, instead? God owned it (Jesus' life) in the first place as the one who died was already his. So, Adam and Eve sinned. They and kids pay. God kills son to rescue kids (us). God collects son's death as ransom to himself. ILLOGICAL! Wouldn't the ransom for people be paid to the devil, instead? I mean, he stole humans to begin with so the price to buy them back ought to be umm...I guess by them or by God umm...paid to the devil, not to God! Right?
• 

  R.Crusoe

  Yeah, some of this stuff doesn't quite add up!

  If satan does exist ( which I admit I don't feel anymore cuz I got other conditioning elesewhere which feels more natural) then why is it so tough for god to not just delete him and put the world to right and say to us all if you step outa line I will revelation style zap you??

  I mean the fear is already there in folowers so what difference would it make speeding the whole thing up?

  Or is god looking for natural love and feeling connected to nature?

  Or are we just all a lottery on a roll of winners and losers?

  My emotions say the nature route!

  My pain says the lottery!
• 

  Perry

  Real One, I don't want to split hairs either. But, to answer your question about the list of scriptures: they were all the instances of the occurrence of the word vanity in the King James bible. By reading the scriptures and replacing the word futility in place of vanity, a person can see if it fits or not. I think that it shows that vanity is a much better word. ----------------- To answer your question about who subjected man to vanity: I believe it was Satan, but by permission or allowance by God of course. Satan himself was vain, being enamored by his own beauty. After the Fall, humans reflected their "father's" nature. ---------------- As far as wescott and hort being the culprits or not, they made over 3000 changes to the Greek text and were on the translation committees of the first english bibles to use the word futility instead of vanity. They weren't even born again Christians. They were involved in the occult. ALL modern transalations are based on their work. ---------------- All things considered this point is one of the smaller doctrinal changes they introduced. They made thousands of changes, most targeted at fundamental Christian doctrines. ---------------
• 

  restrangled

  Wd....

  In the long run, according to scripture the devil does pay above everyone else. He dies (permanently), and everyone else gets to live.

  You just have to ignore the JW take on it to see the big picture......some have died in the short term but will be brought back. Of course this is all based on belief in God and the Bible.

  If not, none of it makes sense.

  r.
• 

  Deputy Dog

  Perry

  Real One, I don't want to split hairs either.

  Wow! I can tell just how seriously you look at these threads.
• 

  Perry

  The ransom is a WT contrivance. It is totally NOT CHRISTIAN. Its purpose is to provide for a DECEPTIVE alternate explanation IN PLACE OF WHAT JESUS SACRIFICE ACTUALLY WAS. And that explanation is this: IT IS YOU THAT SHOULD BE UP THERE ON THAT CROSS. ------------------------------------ Christ POTENTIALLY took YOUR place. It is his end of the bargain in the BLOOD COVENANT that he made with the ELECT. ------------------------------------ IF YOU DO NOT ACCEPT CHRISTS' OFFER to take YOUR DUE PUNISHMENT FOR YOU, THEN YOU WILL HAVE HELL TO PAY. -------------------- EITHER WAY, SOMEONE ALWAYS PAYS THE PIPER IN GOD'S ECONOMY. HE IS NOT A SLOPPY BOOKEEPER. ------------------ This IS why it is called the Good News of Peace. The offer is still on the table for people to make peace with God by means of him punishing his spotless, sinless son in YOUR place. ------------------- We simply never got the "good news" from the WT, in part because we never got the bad news. We were deceived and vainly made our worship about ourselves instead of about God's judgement and mercy through Jesus.----------------------------------- I strongly urge anyone who has not asked Christ to take your punishment for you, in your stead, to do so as soon as possible. This is not about joining some religion, THIS IS ABOUT JUSTICE BEING SERVED.
• 

  Terry

  Well!

  I've just been sitting on the sidelines watching, reading, waiting and becoming amazed.

  Four pages of posts!

  It would seem the simplicity of the question has knocked some people off kilter.

  So, God doesn't need a "basis" for loving man? Why, then, did God need a basis for punishing him? What did God give reasons for cursing him? Why did God always explain the basis for his plagues and floods and other maladies?

  It seems obvious God acts according to basis and does not deviate at all!

  The one thing the prophets of old did non-stop is explain, explain, explain the basis for what was about to come. It all devolved down to REASONS.

  That is what seems silly to me about saying God doesn't need a basis for loving the world. Of course God (of all living beings!) would be of the most necessity to give a reason and provide a basis for so loving the world.

  I ask again. I repeat my question.

  ON WHAT BASIS can God suddenly love mankind when man is without merit in God's eyes?

  Even humans need a basis on which to act when making friends, making enemies, falling in love, hating. There are reasons.

  God throughout history gave endless descriptions of the worthlessness of humanity ("what is mortal man that you keep him in mind?).

  What sane person would value what is worthless?

  A perfect God with perfect standards who has enumerated lists of obsessive compulsive behaviors which must be performed perfectly by people in order to have a basis for ritual forgiveness COULD NOT POSSIBLY act without basis, reason or principle.

  JUSTICE cannot be abandoned by the inventor of perfect law.

  JUSTICE requires each living thing get what it deserves (and not get what it doesn't.) Or else--there is no basis at all for JUSTICE itself.

  It becomes a sham, a whim of capriciousness.

  This would not be the actions of the highest being imaginable.

  When certain folks here tire of blaming me for being such a God-hater (I don't hate God. I'm agnostic) and stop avoiding answering by claiming God needs no basis----then please get around to simply answering the question.

  FOR GOD SO LOVED......

  Why?