Hi Lloyd đ
Your self pity post on Twitter didnât get much response huh? đ˘
slimboyfat
JoinedPosts by slimboyfat
-
11530
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars
by Newly Enlightened inoriginal reddit post (removed).
-
-
-
11
John 5:27 and Harners thesis
by Blotty inconclusion to harners thesis: https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/h7.jpg.
in 1973 a scholar by the name of philip b harner published an article in the journal of biblical literature that would be "revolutionary" he concluded that anarthorous predicate nouns preceeding the verb were primarily qualitative in nature.. in my view harner was correct, though he didn't agree with the "a god" rendering he also disliked the "god" rendering in john 1:1c providing an alternative which bibles like the net have paraphrased (to my knowledge).
one he didn't cover in his thesis was john 5:27 i would say this "authoratative" why?
-
-
slimboyfat
The Jewish Philo of Alexandria did not believe in such a secondary god, and Justin and Origen did not believe either
I guess Iâm mildly curious, but not in any doubt that youâll find a way to contradict the clear statements of Philo, Justin Martyr, and Origen that the Word is a second god inferior to God.
Very appropriately and without any falsehood was this oracular sentence uttered by God, for no mortal thing could have been formed on the similitude of the supreme Father of the universe, but only after the pattern of the second deity, who is the Word of the supreme Being; since it is fitting that the rational soul of man should bear it the type of the divine Word; since in his first Word God is superior to the most rational possible nature. But he who is superior to the Word holds his rank in a better and most singular pre-eminence, and how could the creature possibly exhibit a likeness of him in himself? Philo, Questions and Answers on Genesis II, 62
-
11530
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars
by Newly Enlightened inoriginal reddit post (removed).
-
-
slimboyfat
The whole idea was laughable from the start. I canât even make sense of what he thought his so-called âcaseâ was all about. He never explained what he was really accusing people of, because there was nothing to it, literally nothing but bluster and bluffs, the pattern of his whole life really, so it seems.
-
26
Is WT Using ATTENDANTS At The Conventions To Be: "TOY COPS"
by HiddlesWife ini have heard from a few ppimis and several pimos that the attendants who are stationedly-assigned to the front entrances of the borgvenues (cahs and other arenas) have been checking to see if any persons (members and non-member visitors) have badges.
on the other hand, if these persons don't have one, this is what i was told that these dubs do this: corral around the non-badge-wearing individual and interrogate he/she/them plus questioning them, "why are you here?!".
also, even if that person or persons have an invitation plus showed it to these dubs, these toy cops still do that procedure.
-
-
slimboyfat
Why are you going? If you donât have a badge then I think they insist on giving you one after asking you some questions. I donât think youâre allowed in these days without a badge.
If they were really serious about inviting people with the invitations then youâd think they might mention the badge requirement somewhere on the invitation. As it is vanishingly few people turn up because of the invitations so itâs not a big issue.
-
11530
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars
by Newly Enlightened inoriginal reddit post (removed).
-
-
slimboyfat
Excellent interview here with older people who left the Witnesses and their experience on the âtruth hurtsâ channel.
Why anyone would waste their time watching the garbage videos LE puts out when there are interesting videos like this to watch is a pure mystery. đ¤
-
11
John 5:27 and Harners thesis
by Blotty inconclusion to harners thesis: https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/h7.jpg.
in 1973 a scholar by the name of philip b harner published an article in the journal of biblical literature that would be "revolutionary" he concluded that anarthorous predicate nouns preceeding the verb were primarily qualitative in nature.. in my view harner was correct, though he didn't agree with the "a god" rendering he also disliked the "god" rendering in john 1:1c providing an alternative which bibles like the net have paraphrased (to my knowledge).
one he didn't cover in his thesis was john 5:27 i would say this "authoratative" why?
-
-
slimboyfat
Jewish and Hellenistic culture referred to subordinate divine beings as âgodsâ and it is clear that John was using the word in this sense, the same as Philo, and later Justin Martyr, Origen and others, to refer to a âsecond godâ or âdivine beingâ who is subordinate the one true God.
Any fair reading of the gospel of John as a whole results in the conclusion that Jesus is distinct and subordinate to God.
Jesus said plainly in John 17.3 that the Father is âthe only true Godâ. It is stretching language and logic beyond what it can bear to assert that what Jesus really meant is: âyou are the only true God and so am I.â Has anyone who has ever said âyou are the only (something)â ever meant to imply that they themselves are that something as well? Nobody reading the gospel of John without any knowledge of Trinitarian dogma would ever reach that conclusion by themselves. Itâs complete nonsense.
-
20
Tried unwitnessing at LDS carts today
by joe134cd ini was walking through a market today, and spotted lds cart witnessing.
so i thought, what the hell, iâll give him a go.
i focused on the character of joe smith.
-
-
slimboyfat
I once met a man in a Seventh-day Adventist Church who had been baptised as a Jehovahâs Witness, then a Mormon, and now is a Seventh-day Adventist. Some people seem to collect sectarian memberships like badges. Not a lot of people, but a peculiar minority do. This guy said he left the Jehovahâs Witnesses because they were anti-Semitic and he left the Mormons because all they wanted was his money. He claimed that as soon as he was baptised the Mormons asked for his credit card details while he was still wet from the baptism pool. I asked him why he thought JWs were anti-Semitic because this is something I had not come across. He claimed it was a statement in a Watchtower Study against the Jews. He did not make much sense to be honest. The funny thing was he was also critical about the Seventh-day Adventist Church when I met him (over three years ago, before the pandemic) so he may be onto his next church by now. Whatâs next? The Iglesia ni Cristo maybe? Or a Pentecostal group? đ¤
-
11530
It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars
by Newly Enlightened inoriginal reddit post (removed).
-
-
slimboyfat
The "hotel maid" pictures you referenced were taken with Cara (pronounced "Sara") who is, at least to my knowledge, not a hotel maid. One of the rare enjoyable moments during my trip was spent with her and her friends. We met for dinner, ate some street food, had some drinks, and played some pool at the bar. All the while she was flirting with me - holding my hand, touching my leg, letting me put my arm around her. Then after walking her back to her hotel with her
What a disgusting moron to write that to his wife. Itâs hard to fathom a mind that thinks this is anything to brag about to anyone under any circumstances.
-
11
John 5:27 and Harners thesis
by Blotty inconclusion to harners thesis: https://digilander.libero.it/domingo7/h7.jpg.
in 1973 a scholar by the name of philip b harner published an article in the journal of biblical literature that would be "revolutionary" he concluded that anarthorous predicate nouns preceeding the verb were primarily qualitative in nature.. in my view harner was correct, though he didn't agree with the "a god" rendering he also disliked the "god" rendering in john 1:1c providing an alternative which bibles like the net have paraphrased (to my knowledge).
one he didn't cover in his thesis was john 5:27 i would say this "authoratative" why?
-
-
slimboyfat
To Harner was essentially trying to provide a Trinitarian solution to John1.1c that was more credible than Colwellâs rule because it didnât hold water.
Have you seen the recent article on John 1.1 (apparently the author is a JW)?
https://brill.com/downloadpdf/journals/hbth/44/2/article-p141_2.pdf
-
14
Why didn't God create us to be obviously different?
by SydBarrett ina silly question since i'm an atheist but one i thought of as a kid jw.
why weren't human's created to be obviously different from animals?
among believers there is some sort of universal hierarchy.
-
-
slimboyfat
Isnât the remarkable thing about humans just how different we are from other creatures? I know what you mean in that we are mammals and we are morphologically similar other primates and so on. But in terms of inner life, and our expression of meaning, is there any other creature that even comes close to humans?
Whoâs the scientist who likes to point out that human DNA is only 2% different from other primates, yet in the space of that difference exist Mozart, Michelangelo, and men going to the moon?
Atheist philosopher Raymond Tallis argues strongly that humans are different from other animals in extraordinary ways. See his book Aping Mankind:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2011/sep/16/aping-mankind-raymond-tallis-review
To me, the uniqueness of humans is what makes me suspect that we really are in some sense âin the image of Godâ. As it is, we know of no other creature alive that appreciates the vastness and complexity of existence as humans do, or ponders the nature of existence, or all the other many facets of human consciousness that make us unique. Crows are very intelligent, and elephants have seemingly complex social and emotional lives, to give two examples in nature. Nevertheless humans display such range and diversely intricate social and intellectual lives, on a different scale than other animals, that seemingly set us apart from all other creatures.