Posts by mdb

148

Have you ever had a prayer answered?

by nicolaou in

prayer topics seem to be the bandwagon of the moment so i'm jumping on!

seriously, has anyone here asked for something specific in prayer and actually gotten what they asked for?

what convinces you that you wouldn't have got it in any case?

mdb

Yes.

One recent example is my son (9mo. old now). My wife had experienced some abdominal pains around the 32nd week of the pregnancy and the doctors put her on bed rest. During other hospital visits, we were told that she would more than likely deliver by the 34th week if she took it easy, but probablly wouldn't make it much past that time. I prayed for her and our baby - that our son (didn't know at the time he was a he) would be born at full term. I remember a peace came to me about the situation and knew it was from God. I told people that he was going to be born full term because I knew before the time came, that God had answered that prayer. When we went in for the doctor's appointments to check on the progress of the pregnancy, the doctor's were baffled and kept commenting, "you should be having this child right now. We don't know why you aren't."

He was born on the 40th week. Due to a discrepancy in testing, the doctors are not sure if he was a week early or a week late. I say he was born at 40 weeks to the very day, exactly as God planned. One prayer request was that God would get the glory for answering that prayer and again, He gets the glory here.

God answers prayer.

41

Do you believe in sin?

by MsMcDucket in

if so, what is a sin?

who makes the definition?

mdb

Obedience keeps the law. Love knows when to break it.

God is love and love came to fulfill the law, not to break it nor destroy it. Does love "break the law"? Not God's law. If it comes down to a choice of obedience toward God or obedience toward a command given by men and there is no possible way of peace, the command given by men will be broken and the law of God obeyed.

“Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. ~ Matt 5:17-20

Then the captain went with the officers and brought them without violence, for they feared the people, lest they should be stoned. And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest asked them, saying, “Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!”
But Peter and the other apostles answered and said: “We ought to obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus whom you murdered by hanging on a tree. Him God has exalted to His right hand to be Prince and Savior, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are His witnesses to these things, and so also is the Holy Spirit whom God has given to those who obey Him.” ~ Acts 5:26-32

41

Do you believe in sin?

by MsMcDucket in

if so, what is a sin?

who makes the definition?

mdb

You can sin against yourself, your own sense of morals. I've done it and there's nothing worse.

What if your personal morals say it is okay to kill a righteous man and wrong to take care of the fatherless and widows?

What is sin? Whatever is not from faith is sin...

Therefore concerning the eating of things offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other God but one. For even if there are so-called gods, whether in heaven or on earth (as there are many gods and many lords), yet for us there is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and through whom we live.
However, there is not in everyone that knowledge; for some, with consciousness of the idol, until now eat it as a thing offered to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled [Rom 14:14]. But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse.
But beware lest somehow this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to those who are weak. For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never again eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble. ~ 1 Cor 8:4-13

I know and am convinced by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of itself; but to him who considers anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean. Yet if your brother is grieved because of your food, you are no longer walking in love. Do not destroy with your food the one for whom Christ died. Therefore do not let your good be spoken of as evil; for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit. For he who serves Christ in these things is acceptable to God and approved by men.
Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another. Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. All things indeed are pure, but it is evil for the man who eats with offense. It is good neither to eat meat nor drink wine nor do anything by which your brother stumbles or is offended or is made weak. Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God. Happy is he who does not condemn himself in what he approves [1 Jn 3:21]. But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin. ~ Rom 14:14-23

Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence toward God. ~ 1 Jn 3:21

You can sin against your own body...

Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. ~ 1 Cor 6:18

14

Who is sending who?

by mdb in

flee from the land of the north, says the lord [yhwh]; for i have spread you abroad like the four winds of heaven, says the lord [yhwh].

up, zion!

escape, you who dwell with the daughter of babylon.

mdb

lovelylil,

In my bible the New International Version it reads very differently than yours. Which one are you using?

I am using the New King James version (or the KJV), I have the NIV, but I won't use it anymore.

14

Who is sending who?

by mdb in

flee from the land of the north, says the lord [yhwh]; for i have spread you abroad like the four winds of heaven, says the lord [yhwh].

up, zion!

escape, you who dwell with the daughter of babylon.

mdb

If the eternal Son, the Lord of hosts, is not God, how does the Scripture in Zechariah make any sense at all? I'm look to see if anyone has a legitimate, logical, NON-SARCASTIC explanition to the above which aligns itself with the Scriptures. I don't want a "well, Jesus cannot be God because the Watchtower says so". If you don't believe it, how is this verse explained? Yes, the NWT probablly distorts this verse some how, but I'm sure most people here think the NWT is a bunch of garbage anyway (and some think everything is). I'm interrested to know what people think on this specific verse because it is very clear that there are two (2) persons of yhwh here and God says there is no other God but Him. If Jesus was not God, which He claimed to be, then who is this other yhwh of hosts? Jesus also said that the Scriptures speak of Him, but men refuse to come to Him to have life. The OT books are the Scriptures Jesus spoke of.

14

Who is sending who?

by mdb in

flee from the land of the north, says the lord [yhwh]; for i have spread you abroad like the four winds of heaven, says the lord [yhwh].

up, zion!

escape, you who dwell with the daughter of babylon.

mdb

“Up, up! Flee from the land of the north,” says the Lord [yhwh]; “for I have spread you abroad like the four winds of heaven,” says the Lord [yhwh]. “Up, Zion! Escape, you who dwell with the daughter of Babylon.” For thus says the Lord [yhwh] of hosts: “He sent Me after glory, to the nations which plunder you; for he who touches you touches the apple of His eye. For surely I will shake My hand against them, and they shall become spoil for their servants. Then you will know that the Lord [yhwh] of hosts has sent Me. ~Zech 2:6-9 The Lord [yhwh] of hosts sends the Lord [yhwh] of Hosts? Two distinct persons, yet one God, one Lord. If the eternal Son, the Lord of hosts, is not God, how is this possible?

1

"The Lord rebuke you Satan"

by mdb in

who says, the lord rebuke you satan?

and the [angel of the] lord [yhwh] said to satan, the lord [yhwh] rebuke you, satan!

the lord [yhwh] who has chosen jerusalem rebuke you!

mdb

Who says, “The Lord rebuke you Satan”?

And the [angel of the] Lord [yhwh] said to Satan, “The Lord [yhwh] rebuke you, Satan! The Lord [yhwh] who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you! Is this not a brand plucked from the fire?”
~Zech 3:2

[angel of the] : Addition made into the NWT. Any additions added in brackets [] (according to the Forward in the NWT) are to clarify a passage and not add to the meaning of a passage. Does the addition of the phrase [angel of the] change the doctrinal meaning of the verse? It certainly does in this case. Without it, we have the Lord [yhwh] saying to Satan, “the Lord [yhwh] rebuke you”. With the added phrase, we have the angel of the Lord saying, “the Lord [yhwh] rebuke you.” In the verse above, there are two (2) distinct persons of yhwh, but in the NWT, one person of yhwh is removed.

One yhwh is the eternal Son of God, the pre-incarnate Christ. This would go against the Watchtower teaching that Jesus is "a" god rather than God. Therefore, the addition of the [angel of the] to support their doctrinal bias and remove the reference to a second person of yhwh.

3

The last supper: "is" versus "means"

by jstalin in

i was raised catholic, so i was a bit surprised when i attended the memorial last year with my jw friend and the speaker was recounting the last supper.

he quoted mark 14:22 and as they continued eating, he took a loaf, said a blessing, broke it and gave it to them, and said: take it, this means my body.

23 and taking a cup, he offered thanks and gave it to them, and they all drank out of it.

mdb

The translation in the NWT is more than likely incorrect, but I've never looked into that specific verse.

One thing to note: the wine and bread do not literally become blood and flesh while they journey down your gullet - they're symbols and objects of rememberance. Jesus' flesh and blood are spiritual food and drink. If we eat and drink, we have eternal life and will live forever (if we accept His sacrifice and believe on Him, we have eternal life). If we feed on Him, we live.

Then Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is food indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He who eats My flesh and drinks My blood abides in Me, and I in him. As the living Father sent Me, and I live because of the Father, so he who feeds on Me will live because of Me. This is the bread which came down from heaven—not as your fathers ate the manna, and are dead. He who eats this bread will live forever.”
These things He said in the synagogue as He taught in Capernaum. (Jn 6:53-59)

Jesus' body was not literally made of bread, and the emblems we partake of in rememberance of Him are and do not become literal flesh and blood.

Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. (1 Cor 11:27-30)

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.” Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.” (Mt 26:26-29)

And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” (Lk 22:19)

11

So My Husband is Going Through the Guilt Thing Again

by MrsBee in

.

he goes through this every few months.. even though he is a good man, he feels like he isnt doing what jehovah wants him to do, he gets angry sometimes n all that, im like , errra uhh, isnt that a normal human emotion, like jealousy.. he said they are not natural emotions or something like that...

anyhoo.. we get into this discussion about crosses, he says that its a slap in the face to jesus to be "glorifying" his torture

mdb

I cant even get him to read my bible, I have the NIV and if we are doing a study , I will read a verse and then he will read the same verse from the NWT LOL, then Ill say seeeee, its the same... LOLOL... He is not gonna read them... I cant complain too much he isnt going ... I still just look at him sometimes like Im so sorry you think that way

Maybe he'll listen if you read from the KJV. They used to use the authorized version prior to the induction of the NWT. There are old KJV bibles out there that have the Watchtower name on them. You just have to hunt one down at a used book store. Try Abe Books on the internet. That's where I got all my "old" Watchtower bibles from (KIT, 1959 NWT New Testament, 1961 NWT, 1971 NWT). As Carla said, they do contradict. In fact the KIT contradicts itself on the same page when traslating Heb 1:6 (also contradicts from the 1961 and 1971 versions of the NWT).

16

More of Mormon similarities...

by ringo5 in

got this post from an ex-mormon website and the similarities to the jw way of thinking are always enlightening.

i've got lots of thoughts.

there are lots of problems with mormonism, and in response mormons have developed a number of responses to "explain" them.

mdb

I always wanted to know what the holy underwear looks like but they get very offended when you ask about them

Here are your underwear... notice the Freemasonry "rule, square, and compass" stitched into them.