I don't need Jesus to be a loving person

by Fester 43 Replies latest jw friends

  • Deputy Dog
    Deputy Dog


    Wanted to start a new topic, one based on the idea of those of us who are naturally loving, naturally kind, and naturally good people, without the bible or without anyone else telling us otherwise.

    You forgot naturally self-righteous! That is what this thread is about isn't it, how righteous YOU are?

  • AGuest

    Dearest Fester... may you have peace! My sincere apologies if I have not fully responded to you - I have been out of town. I will respond to you in a day or so and ask your patience as I get myself back together. Thank you and, again, peace to you!

    A slave of Christ,


  • cyberjesus

    May all of you have peace!

    my point is ... dang i forgot!

    May all of you have peace!

  • AGuest

    Hi Shelby,

    Greetings dear Fester and peace to you!

    You neglected to comment on Isaiah 7:14 and it's placement in Matthew. Let's look at Isaiah 7 and 8 and you tell me why I would be wrong to assume that it's fulfillment is entirely within the context of Isaiah's text....

    Okay, dear one, let’s do!

    First, Ahaz is being told that YHWH will give HIM a sign... The sign is for AHAZ... agree?

    Unfortunately, I do not agree, based on verses 10 and 13 (which you omit here). Ahaz actually rejected the notion of asking for a sign:

    “And JaHVeH went on speaking some more to A´haz, saying: “Ask for yourself a sign from JaHVeH your God, making it as deep as She´ol or making it high as the upper regions.” But A´haz said: “I shall not ask, neither shall I put JaHVeH to the test.”

    Thus, a sign was prophesied for ALL of Ahaz’s subjects, the Jews, but not directly to Ahaz, who chose NOT to put the Most Holy One of Israel to the test. Here is the address:

    “And he proceeded to say: “Listen, please, O house of David. Is it such a little thing for YOU to tire out men, that YOU should also tire out my God?”

    So, the "house of David" here would not have been Ahaz or all of Israel but only the two tribe kingdom of Judah (i.e., Judah and Benjamin), over which Ahaz was king. Isaiah 7:1 This makes up the Jews but does not include the 10-tribe kingdom of Israel (whose king, at the time, was Remeliah – Isaiah 7:1)

    Which two kings did Ahaz dread in Jesus' day 700 years later? Here's the fulfillment EXACTLY as told...

    Certainly you should know: the Jewish king, Herod (Antipas)... and the Roman king, Caesar (Tiberius).

    The true Christian response from most theologians is that it's a "dual prophecy". It's the only explanation

    they can offer to try and explain away the simple fact that Isaiah had a son in the next chapter fitting the

    Assyrian king's demise as told in chapter 7!!

    I'm a little confused that you state "the TRUE christian response," and then seem to ridicule that response. Perhaps I misunderstand your intent; however, I must agree with such theologians and say that you are confusing the antitype with the type: in the prophesy, the child had to learn to choose the good and reject the bad. This is speaking of my Lord, who was NOT born “perfect” in the flesh (Romans 8:3) as some erroneously teach. The child in chapter 8, however, was not prophesied nor born in fulfillment of any prophesy; it was the son born of Isaiah’s relations with the prophetess, who was not a virgin, as the sign prophesied. We know she wasn’t because this was not Isaiah’s first child (Isaiah 8:18).

    Now, concerning the authorship of the gospels.... Who is Luke? As far as we know, only the letters attributed

    to Paul mention him. Luke isn't one of the 12 disciples, so exactly who is he?

    Luke was a physician and historian hired by Theophilus to document (after interviewing those “who were eyewitnesses”) what was occurring between the Jews and those who “belonged to the Way,” later known as “the anointed/chosen persons” (i.e., christians). Luke was not an apostle (nor was Paul) and actually was not even a disciple at first, but merely accompanied Paul from time to time in order to document events. He corresponded to today’s investigative reporter. Luke 1:1-4

    Now... just to show you that Paul and the gospels are definitely separate works and Jesus in the NT definitely

    said that he REJECTS PAUL...

    I am not sure why you make this statement to me. I certainly do not consider Paul to be inspired, of the twelve, or even accepted by the 12… at least, not initially (as to being accepted; indeed, they utterly rejected him at first, due his errors in teachings to the Corinthians). To the contrary, I have posted here MANY times that Paul’s words are to be weighed, even rejected in some instances, that his teachings to the Corinthian congregation on certain matters was so false it almost destroyed that congregation, that he and the apostles disagreed to such an extent that they went their separate ways for 14 years. So, I am not sure where we disagree… except that Paul wasn't entirely rejected by my Lord.

    Jesus congratulates the Ephesian Asian church for rejecting Paul.... How do we know this? Because there

    are only 12 apostles of the lamb according to John, John by the way NEVER mentions Paul in any of his texts...

    Again, I agree that Paul was NEVER one of the 12; however, I believe Paul was indeed chosen by my Lord, but NOT for the reason most believe (i.e., his zeal). He was called to SUFFER for my Lord… to pay for his bloodguilt… and to complete the ministry that WAS dear Stephen’s but whom Paul helped to have put to death. Someone had to go – Stephen was supposed to and was doing so willingly. So, now, Paul had to do Stephen’s work… and undergo Stephen’s sufferings, which Stephen underwent “for the sake of” our Lord.

    There are only 12 apostles of the lamb... Paul is not one of them.

    I absolutely agree and have NEVER said otherwise, dear one. Ever. I have, repeatedly and for years, shared the very same truth.

    Again, I bid you peace!

    A slave of Christ,


Share this