PSacramento

Joined

• started 80 topics
• posted 11,008 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by PSacramento

• 
  231

  Name Things JWs Believe That Are Not Actually Biblically Provable

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  here's one example: being a congregation publisher.

  nowhere in the bible does it say you should be a "publisher" and turn in your time if you preach.

  they try to twist the scriptures by saying that numbers are constantly being recorded in the bible so then conforming to the rules of being a publisher is from the scriptures.. yeah, right..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  Chalam,

  I don't think the true shape of the cross matters that much either.

  Besides Barnabas there is even graffiti found dates to the second century that shows a cross too.

  My issue with the WT making the shpe of the cross and issue ( they did it, no one else did) is that, while they are right to say that ANY image shoudl not be worshipped they seem to forget that Paul BOASTED about the Cross and Jesus dying on it, it is NOT a bad symbol but a symbol of love and hope or at least Paul saw it that way.
• 
  53

  This Disturbs Me Most of All

  by cameo-d in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  no, it's not the "claw hand"!

  what disturbs me most of all is the potter's shards.. any coin collector will tell you that the "imperfect" coins are the most valuable.

  any art historian will tell you that the value of a painting is it's originality and uniqueness and the talent that can only come with time, suffering, and perserverence.. it is the oddities and quirks in one of a kind pieces that make them a delight and a treasure.. so why is it that this potter has no appreciation for uniqueness?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  It just seems that everyone has beards !
  Now, I have been know to don a beard ala Maximus in Gladiator on an occasion or two, but this whole "everyone looks the same" thing is creepy...
• 
  231

  Name Things JWs Believe That Are Not Actually Biblically Provable

  by minimus in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  here's one example: being a congregation publisher.

  nowhere in the bible does it say you should be a "publisher" and turn in your time if you preach.

  they try to twist the scriptures by saying that numbers are constantly being recorded in the bible so then conforming to the rules of being a publisher is from the scriptures.. yeah, right..

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  According to the Epistle of Barnabas, the shape od the cross was a "T".
• 
  54

  Romans 10:13

  by PSacramento in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we all know that the passage from paul's letter to romans, romans 10:13 says:.

  "all those who call on the name of the lord will be saved".. now, in the nwt they translate that as jehovah instead of the word "lord", because this is a quote from joel 2:32 and in the ot the tetragrammaton yhwh is used, which the nwt translates as "jehovah" (not only the nwt does that, the asv,yng and dby, do it also in regards to joel).. however, of the 16 translations i have seen, all translate that passage in romans as lords and all the commentaries i have read so far, point to view that paul was applying that passage to jesus, being his name that is salvation.. commentaries by james, fausset and brown, by matthew henry and by barnes, to name only 3.. comments?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  There is nothing LITERALLY wrong with inserting the name Jehovah in that passage, since it is a direct quote from Joel, but it does change the meaning of the context of how Paul was applying that passage.

  The other translations that use the name Jehovah in Joel do NOT use it in Romans.

  To me, I am not a Trinitarian, it is not a case of Jesus being God, or the refute thereof, but a case of Jesus being the fullfillment of that passage in the NEW Covenant.
• 
  60

  Studying "What Does the Bible Really Teach?"

  by homeschool in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i can't believe it.

  i've actually had two studies with my sister from that book.

  yesterday, she told me i was being argumentative.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  I always understood Jesus teaching to use the term "Father" as a way to show the personal relationship we are to have with God.

  I mean, anyone can call me Paul, that's my name, but only my children call me Father, though I prefer Daddy :).

  It shows the true personal relationship we are to cultivate with God, Our Father.
• 
  54

  Romans 10:13

  by PSacramento in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  we all know that the passage from paul's letter to romans, romans 10:13 says:.

  "all those who call on the name of the lord will be saved".. now, in the nwt they translate that as jehovah instead of the word "lord", because this is a quote from joel 2:32 and in the ot the tetragrammaton yhwh is used, which the nwt translates as "jehovah" (not only the nwt does that, the asv,yng and dby, do it also in regards to joel).. however, of the 16 translations i have seen, all translate that passage in romans as lords and all the commentaries i have read so far, point to view that paul was applying that passage to jesus, being his name that is salvation.. commentaries by james, fausset and brown, by matthew henry and by barnes, to name only 3.. comments?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  We all know that the passage from Paul's letter to Romans, Romans 10:13 says:

  "All those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved".

  Now, in the NWT they Translate that as Jehovah instead of the word "Lord", because this is a quote from Joel 2:32 and in the OT the tetragrammaton YHWH is used, which the NWT translates as "Jehovah" (Not only the NWT does that, the ASV,YNG and DBY, do it also in regards to Joel).

  However, of the 16 translations I have seen, ALL translate that passage in Romans as Lords AND all the commentaries I have read so far, point to view that Paul was applying that passage to Jesus, being His Name that is Salvation.

  Commentaries by James, Fausset and Brown, by Matthew henry and by Barnes, to name only 3.

  Comments?
• 
  163

  Is God's name absent in the Christian Scriptures?

  by Spike Tassel in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  perhaps this article will help you know for yourself: http://www.tetragrammaton.org/godsnameabsent.htm.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  SOmetimes we have to deal with what we have and what we have is no mention of the tetragrammaton in the NT, regardless of SPECULATION that it could have been removed, there is no evidence of that and I fo rone don't wanna put the NT into question by speculating that something as crucial (for some) as the Name of God was removed, for if we go down that path we can only speculate about what else was removed...

  That said, Jesus was clear in how he taught us to Pray and how HE prayed and what "name" he Used, ie: Father.

  Truly, based on that, calling our God Father is certainly good enough for me.
• 
  280

  Jesus.....God or God's son?

  by digderidoo in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  following on from a post of sacolton's on a recent thread.

  i hope he doesn't mind me cutting and pasting it as i want to examine it.. was jesus our god?

  consider these two scriptures:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  Spike,

  I agree, we must have Both in our hearts and love both, we love Jesus as the Son of God and we love GoD, Our Father, through Jesus, as our beloved and heavenly Father and creater of All.
• 
  280

  Jesus.....God or God's son?

  by digderidoo in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  following on from a post of sacolton's on a recent thread.

  i hope he doesn't mind me cutting and pasting it as i want to examine it.. was jesus our god?

  consider these two scriptures:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  Worshiping of Jesus = Worship of God.

  1John 2:22-23

  Anyone the denies the son, denies the father, anyone that acknowledges the Son, achknowledges the Father.
• 
  76

  Oldest bible being put online - what will that mean for WTS teachings?

  by Simon in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  (and of course for christianity as a whole).

  http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7651105.stm.

  the problem is ... the oldest bible shows that it's been changed significantly so all the claims about it being gods word are clearly bogus.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  PSacramento

  Narkissos,

  You make a valid point,I used the term "denominations" for lack of a better word and the pint of the printing press is a very good one too.

  Still, when I hear the arguments of today and how "we have the REAL bible" and such, I can't help but wonder if this wasn't also the case in ancient times.

  If we take a look at the concil of Nicea we see people trying to interpret things to answer questions and, typiclaly, going beyond what is plainly stated in the Bible (aprroved scriptures of the time).Just human nature I guess.

  Even now if we look at the majority of Christian denominations, they have more in common than differences.

  Which more Christian would see that.