" we are the cause of our destruction *(it's quoted different in the bible) / i believe that 9/11 was a bad day, we cry & mourn & move on, we get over it, i got over 9/11 in under 24 hours & to be honest i'm sick of hearing about it.... now i also understand that millions was not paying attention before 9/11 & they still aint paying attention.. if people would wake the hell up and read the bible they would already know that god already warn us to listen to him, and be on guard 24/7 cause that devil which we call satan exist and on the move to overthrow billions........ where is your faith?
jesus clearly said that not to sorrow for the dead, cause they will get resurrected when the messiah comes back- john 5 verse 28,29.. so get over it and heed jesus words....
but if people would heed christ words, and God words, and pay attention then the sorrow will decrease and joyful times will increase......
Which God should we pay attention to? Bin Laden's God and his prophet Mohammed or your God and his son Jesus? Maybe the problem is placing to much hope in the afterlife, and forgetting to live in this life.
pseudo
to mark this weekend's district convention in sydney, australia, we are asked to cast our minds back in time and remember those district convention days with a certain nostalgia.
so, are you ready to begin that walk down memory lane?
settle back with a cuppa with me and reflect awhile.
I have to add this one
"Wandered through the Halls or went outside."
I found myself doing this constantly.
Looked around, wondering "Why?"
I remember one time when everyone was standing for a long time after a song or for some reason. I got tired of standing, so I thought "now this is really stupid". I sat down, and watched the rest of the zombies just standing there waiting to be told to that they could sit. I was never a Witness, but just went to please the Wife, so I was always looking around, wondering "Why?"
pseudo
in a group on yahoo, i'm involved in a discussion about the deity of jesus.
i've asked the witnesses there to give a specific definition of the word god (in reference to jesus) in john 1:1. so far they have not responded.
i was wondering if any current jws or or former jws here could give me a the proper watchtower definition/view.
I think I have figured out.
Jesus is a god, but there is only one God "Jehovah". But Jesus can be called a god because there are really many gods like Satan and the Worldly Authorities. But these are not really gods but false gods because there is only one "True God". Of course Jesus is not a false god but just a lesser god. Even though he is not "The God" he is truely a god, unlike so-called gods who are really false gods. Isaiah even goes so far as to call him "mighty god". So now that we've determined that we have "The God" Jehovah and the lesser mighty god Jesus. It must be pointed out that Jesus is really the Archangel Michael. So it basically boils down to just one God and they are the one True God Jehovah and the other lesser mighty god Micheal the Archangel aka Jesus.
It couldn't be any clearer.
pseudo
in a group on yahoo, i'm involved in a discussion about the deity of jesus.
i've asked the witnesses there to give a specific definition of the word god (in reference to jesus) in john 1:1. so far they have not responded.
i was wondering if any current jws or or former jws here could give me a the proper watchtower definition/view.
Thanks for your thoughts everyone,
The big problem I seem to be having with their discussion is that the meaning seems to be in a constant state of change depending upon the line of reasoning. When challenged with the concept of only one god, they counter with the idea that there are many gods (basically anyone or thing with authority). When it is suggest that he is not a true god they state that in fact he is a god just not "The God". The only response so far that seems to work the best with JWs beliefs is that the word god should be viewed as an adjective (such as "Divine"). If this is the case, it still does not answer the question of whether Jesus is a god or not. I don't get it, I'm still confused.
pseudo
in a group on yahoo, i'm involved in a discussion about the deity of jesus.
i've asked the witnesses there to give a specific definition of the word god (in reference to jesus) in john 1:1. so far they have not responded.
i was wondering if any current jws or or former jws here could give me a the proper watchtower definition/view.
Hi everyone,
In a group on Yahoo, I'm involved in a discussion about the deity of Jesus. I've asked the Witnesses there to give a specific definition of the word god (in reference to Jesus) in John 1:1. So far they have not responded. I was wondering if any current JWs or or former JWs here could give me a the proper Watchtower definition/view. I've quoted The American Heritage Dictionary for a start.
Thanks,
pseudo
god (gd) noun
1. God. a. A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent,
omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal
object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions. b. The force,
effect, or a manifestation or aspect of this being. c. Christian
Science. "Infinite Mind; Spirit; Soul; Principle; Life; Truth; Love"
(Mary Baker Eddy).
2. A being of supernatural powers or attributes, believed in
and worshiped by a people, especially a male deity thought to
control some part of nature or reality.
3. An image of a supernatural being; an idol.
4. One that is worshiped, idealized, or followed: money was
their god.
5. A very handsome man.
6. A powerful ruler or despot.
Excerpted from The American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language, Third Edition 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
i asked this q in another thread but thought the question might fit in better over here in bible research .
thinking out loud again.
it doesn't seem to matter what bible you read, unless you're looking for discrepancies in translation it's not easy to just abandon the big picture.
Plum,
Am I understanding you right? Those two subjects are the major reason you chose to chuck the entire Bible?Not exactly, those two subjects more or less started the process of examining the rest of the Bible and finding that there are reasonable explanations to show that it is nothing more than a work of Man. If only one part of the Bible can be shown to be incorrect then the entire Bible can be questioned. For example: If it can be shown that Moses did not write the Torah, then this brings to question the authority of someone like Jesus, who quotes Moses and assumes that he is the author.
Without getting into to much detail the following are some of the problems I've found with the Bible.
Some of these points by themselves could be explained away, but these and many other points when combined provide strong evidence against the Bible as God's word.
How do you feel about other so called "Inspired" writings? Do you think the Bible was a knock off of prior writings or do you think all writings said to be inspired by God or a higher life-force are just story's/fairy tails? I would have to go back and read over some of your posts because I can't remember if you stopped believing in God completely or not. Sorry, I don't make notes of who still believes and who does not etc. etc. so I have to ask.
Other writings. Apocrypha, OT pseudopigraphia, NT Apocrypha:
Most are obvious fictions and just add more evidence that Men alone could have produced the writings of the Bible.
Hope this answers the questions.
pseudo
i asked this q in another thread but thought the question might fit in better over here in bible research .
thinking out loud again.
it doesn't seem to matter what bible you read, unless you're looking for discrepancies in translation it's not easy to just abandon the big picture.
It doesn't seem to matter what bible you read, unless you're looking for discrepancies in translation it's not easy to just abandon the big picture. Unless you didn't really buy it to begin with, starting at childhood.
I was raised as a Baptist, and I never once really doubted that the Bible was God's word. I started having serious doubts after my wife (now ex-wife) became a Witness and started trying to convert me. The more Witnesses showed me that some of my former beliefs were incorrect, the more I wanted to know the "Real Truth". I had to start from scratch and base my new beliefs on facts and not what someone had taught me as a child. After studying Biblical Criticism, I realized that there were reasonable explanations to how the Bible could have be composed not by inspiration but by mere Men. Many of the cornerstones of the Christian religion, such as the fulfilled prophecies, no longer seemed convincing. The problems with the Biblical Flood and the fact that the book of Daniel is obviously a pseudopigraph are the two main points that convinced me that the Bible is just a clever book of stories.
pseudoxristos
edited for spelling and clarification
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 1 September 2002 19:33:36
i think that i read somewhere that jws believe that the magi who followed the star were 'evil' .
is that the case - if so how did they figure that?
paduan
Yadirf,
You seem to have commented on everything in my post but the one sentence that had a question mark on the end of it.
Is there really a problem with it moving if it was only an illusion?
In your reply to Lee's post you said:
There are answers to those questions you know.
We are still waiting for the answer, instead of your comment about his question.
One could just as well ask: Why didn't God prevent Satan from tempting Eve to begin with, rather than wait until after the harm had been caused only to then have to furnish his son Jesus as a sacrifice in order to set matters straight in the end?pseudo
i think that i read somewhere that jws believe that the magi who followed the star were 'evil' .
is that the case - if so how did they figure that?
paduan
Good point Lee.
Yet another reason to show that the author of Matthew was not writing a historical account, but a symbolic story meant to show that Jesus was the expected Messiah. He probably never expected it to be picked apart like this.
I have always wondered why an all-powerful God is portrayed as acting in such an indirect manner. The account of the Flood is also a situation where God could have acted in a more direct manner. Why would God go to all of the trouble to have Noah build an Ark, collect all of the animals, then flood the entire world. Force Noah and his family to care for these animals for a year. Then finally when the floodwaters recede have Noah immediately sacrifice some of those animals just to please him. Wouldn't it be easier for God to just snap his fingers and be done with all of the evil people?
pseudo
i have observed that posters have some neat formatting tricks.
the things i have observed that i would like to know how they are done are: (1) highlighting text in different colors (2) importing running sites and displaying html files right in the post.
......... whats the secret?
What happens when you embed this page into itself?
http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=35388&site=3
oops that was the link button, trying again.
Ok, not quite what I expected, but interesting anyway. Clicking refresh seems to mess up the formating at the top of the page.
Hey, thats more like it. HIT STOP IF IT KEEPS GOING!!!!!!!
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 25 August 2002 23:4:20
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 25 August 2002 23:11:29
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 25 August 2002 23:21:21
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 25 August 2002 23:23:14
Edited by - pseudoxristos on 25 August 2002 23:25:24
