Debator says: What modern Dictionaries say is not the issue. The point here is the bible meaning of "inspiration" any Jew or Christian knows the Bible books/letters are special cases of this and why no other books/letters written at those times are consider inspired. This specific ability stopped with the apostles. If you start blurring it, why would we even use the Bible? You are deconstructing the Bible by denying that inspiration can specifically happen.
Heaven forbid! I think God's word is always welcome, or should be. If we find an ancient text that the early Christians regarded as scripture, I would accept it as part of the canon and binding upon the church. In other words, I've never expected the limitations of the 66 books of the Bible to be a Providential restriction. Two books in the Bible I would rid the Canon of are Ecclesiastes and the Songs of Solomon. Ecclesiastes was not written by a prophet, nor do I believe the author to be either Solomon or David. Thus, it is not inspired of God, and yet it somehow contains your primary scripture to "prove" that man doesn't continue on after death! Yet it's clear that it's merely a philosophical book, not at all an eschatologicalwork. But like I said, if it goes, so does your doctrine of soul sleeping.
Song of Solomon also was an inspired work, only not inspired of God. It has beauty and structure, but it does not show "Christ's love for the Church!" Yeesh! Nowhere does the Lord state that all scripture has been given and that no more of His word will be revealed. When He rules upon the Earth, please tell me that you don't think He's going to just sit around all day making daisy chains with the chldren!
And that words can be inspired/straight from God and this is what Deut 18 is refering too, Jesus the messiah would have this specifically and hense why we have 4 gospels written about what he spoke to us.
Don't quite get your point here. "The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken...." If you say that this is the Christ, you certainly won't get any complaints! If you believe it's the JW leadership, I do take issue in that Moses was a single man. The combined church leadership was not!
As for Sabbath this is a side issue but Sabbaths ended with Jesus because he is fulfillment of the sabbath he is our Lord of the sabbath.
I agree. In fact, I woship on Sunday. But where in the Bible did Jesus, the Lord of the Sabbath, ever specifically change the sabbath from the seventh day to the first? I've never seen i
I am not arguing that every religion believes they are the one, it simply goes with the territory but being God's people means knowing him and Jesus his son and doing God's will. It is not enough just to say you are. Christian religions use a 1000 scriptures to do with God's name but they still don't use it.
And neither do you, my friend! I personally believe that God the Father (Elyon/Elohim) distanced himself from mankind when man sinned in the Garden of Eden. Elyon could no longer communicate with mankind and an intercessor was needed. So Elyon appointed his only begotten Son, Jehovah, to be the intercessor, and there are many scriptures to illustrate this. In Psalm 110:1-2, who was David's Lord when it said, "The LORD saith to my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand til I make thine enemies thy footstool." One God is saying to another God, Sit thou.... David only had one Lord, and it was Jehovah, which, by the way, was identified in Hebrew scripture by YHWH, the tetragrammaton. You believe the anglicized form of that tetragrammaton is Jehovah, but that's quite a stretch. In the Old Testament, Jehovah will come to judge the nations, but in the New Testament it says that the Father has committed all judgment to the Son, and that He (the Father) "judges no man" (see John 5:22) In the Old Testament Jehovah is the first and the last, while in the New it's Jesus who is the Alpha and Omega. It goes on and on. In short, you guys have misidentified Jehovah as the Father.
