An Old Argument.... does it hold water?

by AK - Jeff 1495 Replies latest jw experiences

AGuest

Aguest...I gotta say I liked reading your post 8182...And I do believe that you are genuine in your belief. Actually, I enjoy most of your posts.
Thank you, dear ST and, again, peace to you!
I do not however understand You or Tecs reasoning about the name Jesus..its a bit twisty for me.
I understand. Perhaps we (you and I) can "untwist" it, together. Let's see, shall we?
If men have twisted the name (which I find plausable)...
Yep!
and we cannot be saved by calling on it...
No, not saying that at all. Some will be saved by doing good to those who DO call on it. Those who DO call on it... can also NOT be saved... if they "profane" the covenant they have with the One who goes by that name.
again I say to you, that very few, other than the few here and others you may know can be saved if this is important. Most of the world will never even hear or know this name.
ALL would hear... if they only asked. People ask for all KINDS of things: they want to know "how did we get here?" and "Who/where are you, God?" and "What happened when...?" and "What's GOING to happen... and when...?" and all manner of "stuff." They want to the know the truth, yes... about stuff. They do NOT want to know, however, GOD'S truth. THAT request... isn't often among the things man wants to "know." Since that Truth IS Christ... "he" really isn't something, or rather, someONE... they really want to know, either.
But it is as HE said: "THIS means everlasting life... their KNOWING you, the TRUE God... AND THE ONE WHOM YOU SENT FORTH." Not knowing of. Not knowing about. KNOWING. Literally. Not "technically," because they "heard" of him... or someone ELSE [claims to] know him and so they also know him by proxy.
KNOWING someone, though... means knowing their NAME. THEIR name... not the name that others may call him/her. Someone can't say they KNOW someone, if they don't even know their TRUE name:
"Yeah, ya'll know who I'm talking about: Pookie!"
"Pookie? Who's Pookie?"
"You know, that dude who lives over on B Street!"
"Oh, yeah, Pookie! Pookie Jackson, right? Yeah, I know him! Hey, why do they call him Pookie?"
"Well, folks been calling him that for years. That's what everyone calls him, so that's what I call him. Sometimes he answers, sometimes he don't."
"What's his REAL name?"
"I dunno, I just call him Pookie, 'cause that's what everyone else calls him."
(Of course, Pookie's REAL name is something like Alowishus Ebenkanezzar Daryl Rashad Jackson...)
I know you stated above that many other people from other religions know this name...but if God actually wanted it to be known wouldn't we hear it somewhere, anywhere else other than just here?
If you WANTED to, yes. If you WANTED to know the true name, it would not be withheld from you... unless you intended to profane it. But... you knowing of it would have to start somewhere, would it not, if your scenario is accurate? While I learned it from my Lord... it is out there, in MANY places. Including many Bibles. It's just in the "commentaries" and "footnotes." You may find it spelled with a "Y"... versus a "J", though... which is another error, but a minor one...
Which then leads me to reason that if only a few are called,
MANY are called, dear one - few a chosen, though...
why put humans through all of this? Why allow the suffering?
The Most Holy One of Israel isn't putting humans "through" all of this; humans CHOOSE this. It is the consequence of "us" trying to do things... without "law". The law... of love. That is the result you see most times. Not always.
Why not just choose the people he deems worthy and be done with it?
Briefly, (1) no one is deemed worthy (for all have sinned) and so it is due to UNdeserved kindness... mercy; and (2) even those chosen COULD... choose... to turn away and prove the Adversary right: that it's only when God does for us, prospers us, and protects us that we "love" Him... but let us suffer to any extent... and we WILL curse Him... to His face. If JAH stepped in and put a "hedge" around us, then the Adversary is right: we would love Him for it, but ONLY for it (because we are selfish, self-serving, weak, puny lot). The accusation is that if the hedge is REMOVED... and we are subjected to suffering... we WILL curse HIM (God) for it... even if that suffering is of our own doing or someone else's (including his - the Adversary's... but not God's).
Again, some here prove THAT "truth" as to themselves... on a daily basis. Repeatedly. Without reservation. Blatantly, even. We all must answer for ourselves (and/or our children who are unable to answer for themselves... which is not as common as you may think. Even children can show more faith and than many adults. Historically have, some).
I know the old 'he desires all to be saved'...but hell, he already knows who will be saved.
No, He doesn't... except to the extent that OUR individual track records so indicate. Even Christ's faith, loyalty, and integrity wasn't "fulfilled"... until he gave up his life... and blood. At ANY moment, he could have said, "Okay, enough! I give! UNCLE! I ain't doing this, especially not for a group of folks who hate me anyway. To HECK with this - I'm NOT going!" Could have. Because... he had free will. That he DIDN'T could be prophesied... because of the knowledge the Father had about him (the Son)... BEFORE he ever came HERE. Although a different body... same spirit.
Why let all those children suffer in the process? How can there be any justification for that?
The ability to give them life... again... WITHOUT suffering... can justify it, dear one. Just as Christ said, "I lay down my life and I take it up, again"... he can... and will... raise up those children who loved him (in spite of what the adults in their lives said/did/told them/made them do, etc.). Either him, directly... or those who belong(ed) to him.
Since I am not qualified to save myself... I am not qualified to check the hand of One(s) who ARE so qualified. But I trust them... both. They've never given ME reason NOT to... although man has, on MANY occasions.
I don't believe that you make stuff up, and the mental health comments just annoy me,
Again, thank you... and as to both!
my questions and ideas are aimed at understanding not aimed at your mental health or anyone elses here.
And thank you TRULY for that! I do appreciate it, truly!
Again, peace to you... and I hope this helps. Of course, if you have more questions, I would tell you... go to HIM: either Christ himself... or God, THROUGH Christ. LISTEN... and then put FAITH in what you "hear." However, if you feel unable to do that... please, let me know and I will share what I am able to, to the extent I am able, as best I can.
YOUR servant, and a slave of Christ,
SA
AGuest

smugly watch others in their fruitless search
Few things on this site "hurt", dear Size (again peace to you!), but I have say, honestly, that this does. Because we're absolutely NOT smugly watching others in their "fruitless" search, but TRYING to tell them where... or rather, WHO... to search FOR. As openly... and honestly... as we can. With very little reservation. VERY little. If ones (perhaps you, for example) don't WANT to be told... yet, experience a "fruitless" search... who is that on? AND if they don't even believe what they're searching for EXISTS... or aren't even SEARCHING... well...
That you make this statement, then, is... [almost] incomprehensible. As is the next:
Being able to say "I don't know" is the only stance where a complete absence of smugness is possible.
And I have said... many, many times... that I DON'T KNOW this stuff, that it is NOT mine. Yet... not good enough...
Ah, well...
Again, peace to you, always, dear one!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
ShadesofGrey

If someone is smug about finding Christ then I very much doubt that they actually found Him, or perhaps they did and somehow forgot where He was, Who He is. I do not see smugness as a fruit of the Spirit.
Aguest...I gotta say I liked reading your post 8182...And I do believe that you are genuine in your belief. Actually, I enjoy most of your posts.
I do not however understand You or Tecs reasoning about the name Jesus..its a bit twisty for me.
If men have twisted the name (which I find plausable)...and we cannot be saved by calling on it...again I say to you, that very few, other than the few here and others you may know can be saved if this is important. Most of the world will never even hear or know this name. I know you stated above that many other people from other religions know this name...but if God actually wanted it to be known wouldn't we hear it somewhere, anywhere else other than just here?
Which then leads me to reason that if only a few are called, why put humans through all of this? Why allow the suffering? Why not just choose the people he deems worthy and be done with it? I know the old 'he desires all to be saved'...but hell, he already knows who will be saved. Why let all those children suffer in the process? How can there be any justification for that?
I don't believe that you make stuff up, and the mental health comments just annoy me, my questions and ideas are aimed at understanding not aimed at your mental health or anyone elses here.
I did not learn Christ's Hebrew name from this forum, but learning it did in fact teach me something about Him and draw me closer to Him. That does not mean, however, that those who have not learned this are not His people... not at all. And I will tell you something else. None of us have it all right.
ShadesofGrey

It is nothing about me, it is not about Tammy. We are no more special than you, dear atheist. You have been given the same gift.
You see, when I was a JW I was proud of being one of "God's chosen people".
But now, as a Christian, why would I be proud? It is nothing I have done. He has done it all for me.
Few things on this site "hurt", dear Size (again peace to you!), but I have say, honestly, that this does. Because we're absolutely NOT smugly watching others in their "fruitless" search, but TRYING to tell them where... or rather, WHO... to search FOR. As openly... and honestly... as we can.
Yes, that did hurt and couldn't be further from the truth. When children play hide and seek, and one is found, if that child tries to help the seeker find the other players, does that make them smug?
If we are trick or treating and I get the best candy haul at a certain house, should I keep it to myself or tell you where to find it too?
Someone complemented me recently... on another forum and I told them in no uncertain terms that the glory goes to God. Someone complemented Tammy on these forums, saying that they see more God in her than they do in God. I said that is because God is in her heart... the same God that you could ask into your heart. They thought that was judgemental? I thought that the above is what I was saying. It is here... you can have it too.
tec

Yes, that did hurt and couldn't be further from the truth.
Yes, it did hurt. I let it go, laughed it away, left the site for a couple of hours - hoping Size was just teasing... and I think he said that he was, though I'm still a bit unsure from his comments.
It hurt because it is NOT what is happening here. Not on this end.
Peace,
Tammy
AGuest

None of us have it all right.
Absolutely correct, dear SOG (the greatest of love and peace to you!). NONE of us. Which is why leaning upon our OWN understanding... rather than allowing ourselves to be taught by means of the anointing that is IN us (1 John 2:26)... and giving the glory OF and credit FOR that teaching to the One to whom it rightfully BELONGS... is... dangerous. THAT is what has led to religion's "hold" in and on this world.
If one has so received such anointing, however, then one can only share what the Holy Spirit GIVES them THROUGH that anointing... as to spiritual things... or risk LOSING that anointing. Possbily even blaspheming AGAINST the Holy Spirit. Thus, one CANNOT speak a lie... as to things OF the Spirit... and remain IN him... or his spirit in them. It just doesn't WORK that way.
And what if one perhaps has received it, but has not yet been "led" to where another is IN that spirit? Should the one led further refrain from speaking truth because of the others? Perhaps: all things are lawful, yet not all things are advantageous, true. However, it is BETTER, is it not... for LOVE to prevail and for the one led "further" to do, as did Priscilla and Aquila, with Apollos... "expound the Way of God... MORE ACCURATELY" to such ones... doing so in kindness, mildness, peace... and long-suffering?
And if one has NOT received such anointing with holy spirit... wouldn't the understanding of that one BE limited (as sometimes shown here)? And shouldn't others question the "spirit(s)" by means of which such ones are speaking of/teaching as to these things... and "test" the "inspired expression"... if they don't claim to even BE led by holy spirit (the anointing in them)?
I mean, isn't all of this what "the Bible" SAYS? It is. Folks are just counting on the fact that many... so many... haven't a CLUE as to what the Bible DOES say. And these far, far outnumber "us."
Again, I hope this helps... and bid you peace!
YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,
SA
ShadesofGrey

I wish peace and love to abound here for all of us who have been so damaged by religion.
For Christians:
What I have found interesting, is that all of us need something different to draw us to God, and He is faithful. He will be sure we get it. I needed to see that the "faithful slave" was taking Christ's place as mediator, and then I read 1 John. I tried telling my husband. It didn't really help him. Then someone who I had contacted called my husband and expounded a few scriptures to him in the reference bible, showing how the NWT was mistranslated. and BOOM! He called me to tell me that Jesus is Lord.
For my dear friend Shelby: I have seen these things. I think you are explaining far more than is needed, and you certainly have no need to justify yourself to me.
all things are lawful, yet not all things are advantageous
YES and
There is a time to be silent and a time to speak.
Love,
Shades
sizemik

Few things on this site "hurt", dear Size (again peace to you!), but I have say, honestly, that this does. . . . AGuest
It's not designed or intended to hurt Shelby. I'm sorry if it does. It was a general observation made of some who possess knowledge (or anything else) that others don't have. Like I've said, it applies to the scholar and believer alike. It's human nature. When others don't "get it" or disagree . . . the fault must necessarily lie with them, in order for us to retain our self-satisfaction (in the broad sense) . . . that's the smugness I'm talking about. It's for whom the shoe fits . . . not anyone specifically.
Being able to say "I don't know" is the only stance where a complete absence of smugness is possible.
I'm glad you agree . . .
sizemik

I've read some agnostics (or I don't know people), who end their I don't know with a "and neither do you, and if you think otherwise, you're fooling yourself. . . . tec
Those people aren't saying "I don't know" . . . they're saying "I know better than you" . . . and are the opposite of "I don't know" in the context I referred to it. When we become convinced of something . . . it carries a smugness and glibness along with it . . . it's human nature. Accepting that, and making allowance for it in ourselves and others, helps us to see issues more clearly . . . and debate them, rather than simply defending what we currently believe.
In respect to the OP . . . there have been very few answers here to the subject itself. A huge number of responses, and countless assertions, defending currently held beliefs . . . but few actual answers. That's just my opinion.
ShadesofGrey

Those people aren't saying "I don't know" . . . they're saying "I know better than you" . . . and are the opposite of "I don't know" in the context I referred to it. When we become convinced of something . . . it carries a smugness and glibness along with it . . . it's human nature. Accepting that, and making allowance for it in ourselves and others, helps us to see issues more clearly . . .
I agree.
What you said about smugly sitting back and watching others is a completely different thing.
In respect to the OP . . . there have been very few answers here to the subject itself. A huge number of responses, and countless assertions, defending currently held beliefs . . . but few actual answers. That's just my opinion.
I agree.

An Old Argument.... does it hold water?

Share this