raymond frantz

Joined

• started 230 topics
• posted 1,112 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by raymond frantz

• 
  13

  Daniel 2:42 , is it really unstable democratic governments?

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  in its latest front page article titled “political turmoil that fulfills bible prophecy”, jw.org once again attempts to connect current world events with the vision found in daniel chapter 2, particularly the image composed of various metals.

  their interpretation of daniel 2:42 is laid out in the following paragraph: "the feet of the image are made ‘partly of iron and partly of clay,’ a combination that is inherently weak.

  (daniel 2:42) today, the power of both the united states and britain is weakened by elements within their own societies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  Yes there were! But now it's democratic unstable citizens=clay AND their governents =iron
• 
  13

  Daniel 2:42 , is it really unstable democratic governments?

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  in its latest front page article titled “political turmoil that fulfills bible prophecy”, jw.org once again attempts to connect current world events with the vision found in daniel chapter 2, particularly the image composed of various metals.

  their interpretation of daniel 2:42 is laid out in the following paragraph: "the feet of the image are made ‘partly of iron and partly of clay,’ a combination that is inherently weak.

  (daniel 2:42) today, the power of both the united states and britain is weakened by elements within their own societies.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  

  In its latest front page article titled “Political Turmoil That Fulfills Bible Prophecy”, jw.org once again attempts to connect current world events with the vision found in Daniel chapter 2, particularly the image composed of various metals. Their interpretation of Daniel 2:42 is laid out in the following paragraph:
  "The feet of the image are made ‘partly of iron and partly of clay,’ a combination that is inherently weak. (Daniel 2:42) Today, the power of both the United States and Britain is weakened by elements within their own societies. For example, both countries experience internal conflicts among their own citizens. People violently protest for their rights. Their elected representatives often fail to reach a majority agreement. Because their people are so divided, both governments are at times unable to implement their policies effectively." — jw.org front page article

  This interpretation continues a longstanding Watchtower tradition of equating the iron and clay with modern governments and their citizens. According to their view, the iron symbolizes ruling powers such as elected officials, while the clay represents the general population. However, this reading runs into a critical problem: nowhere in Daniel chapter 2 does the Bible make such a claim. The text never identifies clay as citizens or iron as political leaders. That conclusion is an assumption designed to support a specific narrative.

  When we examine what Scripture actually says about these elements, a different picture emerges. Daniel 2:42 states: “And just as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom will be partly strong and partly fragile.” (NWT). But what does the clay truly represent? The Bible consistently uses clay to symbolize humanity in its earthly, mortal state. Isaiah 45:9 warns: “Woe to the one who contends with his Maker, For he is just an earthenware fragment among the other earthenware fragments on the ground! Should the clay say to the Potter: ‘What are you making?’” Likewise, Isaiah 64:8 says: “But now, O Jehovah, you are our Father. We are the clay, and you are our Potter; We are all the work of your hand.” These passages clearly present clay as a symbol for mankind—not a political class or ideological group.

  The iron, on the other hand, requires a closer look. While metal can occasionally refer to human authority, it often serves a deeper purpose in the biblical narrative—especially when linked to divine or spiritual realities. In Daniel 10, we are introduced to supernatural figures described as the “prince of Persia” and the “prince of Greece,” who are clearly not human but spiritual beings opposing the angels Gabriel and Michael. These represent fallen angels or territorial spirits influencing earthly kingdoms. The use of metal to describe strength, dominion, and spiritual force is not unprecedented. Psalm 2:9 uses iron in a context of divine judgment: “You will break them with an iron scepter, And you will smash them like a piece of pottery.” Iron is thus tied not merely to earthly rule, but to the exertion of divine or even fallen authority over humanity.

  Daniel 2:43 provides the most revealing clue: “Just as you saw iron mixed with soft clay, they will mix with the offspring of mankind; but they will not stick together, one to the other, just as iron does not mix with clay.” Who are “they” who attempt to mix with mankind’s offspring? The passage never says they are human rulers. Instead, it draws a deliberate line between these entities and human beings, implying that the “iron” represents non-human forces attempting to blend with humanity. This language unmistakably parallels Genesis 6:1–4, which recounts how the “sons of the true God” took wives from among human women and produced the Nephilim—a hybrid race that led to the corruption of the earth and the eventual flood. Jesus Himself warned that the last days would mirror the “days of Noah” (Matthew 24:37), suggesting that this fusion of the spiritual and the human would occur again.

  This makes Daniel’s prophecy not just about political instability, but about a spiritual invasion. The final kingdom, represented by the feet and toes of iron and clay, will be characterized by a failed attempt to mix fallen spiritual beings with humanity. It is not simply about divided governments—it is about unnatural unions that defy God’s created order. The weakness of this final empire does not stem from political disagreement but from the inherent impossibility of uniting what God has separated: the spiritual and the human.

  The Watchtower’s interpretation reduces this profound warning to mere political commentary, missing the deeper layer embedded in Daniel’s vision. The true message of Daniel 2:42–43 reveals a chilling repetition of the angelic rebellion in Noah’s day—a renewed effort to mingle with the “offspring of mankind,” which Scripture clearly tells us will fail. Just as iron does not mix with clay, fallen angels cannot permanently integrate with humanity. Their plans, once again, will be brought to ruin.

  The stone cut without hands—representing the coming Kingdom of Christ—will ultimately crush this unnatural alliance. As Daniel 2:44 declares: “In the days of those kings the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed.” The final empire will fall, not because of political unrest, but because of divine judgment against a spiritual rebellion. The real danger is not civil division—it is spiritual infiltration. Let those with ears to hear understand: the image is nearly complete, and the stone is already on its way.
• 
  12

  "Perfect Angels"? A Subtle Shift in Watchtower Doctrine — And Why It Matters

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  "perfect angels"?

  a subtle shift in watchtower doctrine — and why it matters.

  quoted paragraph from the watchtower september 2025, study article 38, paragraph 12:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  As far as I remember this is the first time they discuss Jude 9 without talking about Michael the Archangel, instead they invent this new phrase "perfect angels" which is a follow up to other recent quotes on angels in Watchtowers of the past couple of years. I read the Watchtower for over 40 years and that sounded all different to me and worth mentioning. There is only one time in the Bible where an angel NOT angels are called perfect, and that is for Satan or Lucifer.

  Ezekiel 28:12:"Son of man, sing a dirge concerning the king of Tyre, and tell him, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord Jehovah says: “You were the model of perfection, Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty"
• 
  12

  "Perfect Angels"? A Subtle Shift in Watchtower Doctrine — And Why It Matters

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  "perfect angels"?

  a subtle shift in watchtower doctrine — and why it matters.

  quoted paragraph from the watchtower september 2025, study article 38, paragraph 12:.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  
  

  "Perfect Angels"? A Subtle Shift in Watchtower Doctrine — And Why It Matters

  Quoted Paragraph from the Watchtower September 2025, Study Article 38, paragraph 12:

  https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-study-september-2025/Show-Respect-for-Others/

  Why show respect? (Read 2 Peter 2:9-12.) In his second inspired letter, Peter mentioned that some in the first-century Christian congregation were speaking disrespectfully about “glorious ones,” that is, Christian elders. How did the faithful angels who saw what was happening react? “Out of respect for Jehovah,” they did not utter a single abusive word against the wrongdoers. Imagine that! The perfect angels refused to speak harshly about those arrogant men. Instead, they left it to Jehovah to judge and rebuke them. (Rom. 14:10-12; compare Jude 9.) We can take a lesson from the angels. If we should not treat opposers with disrespect, how much more so should we avoid treating fellow believers with disrespect. On the contrary, we should “take the lead” in honoring them. (Rom. 12:10) Doing so shows that we respect Jehovah.

  ---

  At first glance, this paragraph appears to be a straightforward call for Christian decorum and respect within the congregation. However, beneath its surface lies a noteworthy shift in theological emphasis — particularly in how the Watchtower now presents angels, and even more subtly, in how it appears to distance itself from long-standing interpretations regarding Michael the Archangel and Jesus Christ.

  What Happened to Michael the Archangel?

  Historically, Jehovah’s Witnesses have taught that Michael the Archangel is none other than Jesus Christ himself — in his pre-human existence and even now in his heavenly role. This belief has been emphasized for decades in publications, including the 1984 book “Reasoning from the Scriptures” and the 2010 Bible Teach book. In these, Michael is not merely “an angel,” but the chief of all angels — the singular “archangel” (Jude 9) and the one leading the heavenly armies (Revelation 12:7), which aligns perfectly with Jesus’ apocalyptic role in the book of Revelation.

  So what should we make of this paragraph’s reference to "perfect angels"—a term that not only generalizes the heavenly host but completely omits any mention of Michael or Jesus? This generic attribution to "perfect angels" appears to flatten the hierarchy previously taught, where Christ — as Michael — acted as the foremost advocate and defender of Jehovah’s people.

  Are Angels Really “Perfect”?

  The phrase “perfect angels” is strikingly ambiguous and rare in Watchtower literature. In fact, it’s difficult to find a consistent doctrinal definition for it.

  Are angels perfect? Not in the absolute, unchangeable sense. If they were, how do we account for the rebellion of one-third of them, led by Satan himself? (Revelation 12:4) Clearly, angelic perfection did not equate to moral infallibility. Angels were created with free will — the very thing that enabled some to rebel.

  So why this language? Why the sanitized phrase “perfect angels” in a context meant to contrast respectful versus disrespectful behavior? It could be read as an attempt to project moral superiority onto these beings to serve as behavioral examples — but at the expense of theological precision and consistency with their own past teachings.

  A Subtle Deviation: Downplaying Michael, Elevating Anonymous Angels

  This paragraph contains another telling omission: the complete absence of Michael in its citation of Jude 9. The article references the verse but avoids naming Michael explicitly, even though Jude 9 is the only passage in the Bible that mentions “Michael the Archangel.” In that passage, Michael did not bring a railing accusation against the Devil — precisely the kind of behavior the article is discussing.

  One would expect the Watchtower to use this as another opportunity to reinforce the role of Jesus (as Michael) as the ultimate example of godly restraint and deference. But instead, the paragraph attributes the model behavior to anonymous “perfect angels.”

  This isn’t just an oversight; it’s a theological pivot.

  Is This Angel Veneration by Another Name?

  The tone and structure of this article veer toward something even more subtle — and perhaps more troubling: a form of admiration or exaltation of angels that borders on veneration. The apostles — especially Paul — warned against such tendencies.

  Paul specifically cautioned the Colossian congregation:

  “Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind.” (Colossians 2:18, ESV)

  In a religious tradition so heavily focused on hierarchy, obedience, and channel-based teaching, it’s not difficult to see how a heavy emphasis on angelic example could morph into an undue reverence — especially when angels are described as “perfect” and more virtuous than even earthly elders or “arrogant men.”

  This is especially ironic given that Jehovah’s Witnesses have historically accused other denominations of fostering angel-worship or elevating saints and intermediaries improperly. Could the Watchtower be inching toward the very behavior it once denounced — cloaked in the language of moral instruction?

  From Christ-Centered to Angel-Admiring?

  Perhaps the most striking thing about the quoted paragraph is what it doesn’t say: Jesus is absent. In the past, Jesus — in his identity as Michael — was the paragon of humility and divine judgment. Now, that mantle seems to be subtly handed over to anonymous “perfect angels.”

  Is this a rebranding effort? An intentional softening of the Michael/Jesus identity to accommodate future theological shifts? Or simply a way to redirect the reader’s gaze from Christ to the organizational chain of authority — mediated by anonymous, obedient spirit creatures?

  We don’t know for sure. But when Christ disappears from the example and angels are raised up in “perfection,” readers ought to take note.

  Conclusion: Beware the Drift

  While this single paragraph may appear harmless, it signals a theological shift — a move away from Christ-centered teaching (as historically understood within the Watchtower) toward a more angel-centric moralism. In doing so, it quietly distances itself from the long-held belief in Michael the Archangel as Jesus Christ, waters down biblical clarity on angelic fallibility, and risks fostering admiration for spirit creatures that the apostles warned against.

  The question remains: Why?

  And more importantly: Where is Jesus in all this?

  ‐--------

  If you like this kind of articles i have combined them into a book, currently as The Yearbook

  https://amzn.eu/d/hcemzVC

  
  
• 
  3183

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

  by Simon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  It must have been quite the sight for all those Bethelites watching a lone canoe in peril in the middle of the water with a big fat orange slob struggling for dear life 🤣🤣🤣
• 
  3183

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

  by Simon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  He practised for that at his "protest" in Warwick some years ago 🤣🤣🤣

  
  
• 
  21

  WT AUGUST 2025: NEW LIGHT ON HAILSTONE MESSAGE : IS IT BIBLICAL OR JUST CONVENIENT?

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  https://youtu.be/n_fttvylm-m?si=l44406ohysubkajr.

  so today we are considering, the watchtower's new take on the "hailstone message", and if you don't know what that is , they used to believe that according to revelation 16:21 they would be preaching a hard hitting message during the time of the end.

  now, let's read the verse first from the new world translation: "then great hailstones, each about the weight of a talent, fell from heaven on the people, and the people blasphemed god because of the plague of hail, for the plague was unusually great" now this is their new understanding as it appears from the 3rd paragraph from their new watchtower study edition for august 2025 and their article:when will the preaching work end, has this to say: "our clarified understanding of matthew 24:14 also adjusts our understanding of the hailstonelike message foretold at revelation 16:21. further examination has revealed that the two scriptures complement each other.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  The "hailstone message" is nonsensical i covered that is a previous video. In the past God used hail stones to destroy his enemies so it will be in the future. The Book of Revelation is full of physical disasters that befall mankind during the time of the End so are the 45 pound hailstones. This hailstones message is part of the nonsense Rutherford started where every major event was part of his assemblies and his messages to the world and was repeated in the Revelation Its Grand Climax at hand book
• 
  21

  WT AUGUST 2025: NEW LIGHT ON HAILSTONE MESSAGE : IS IT BIBLICAL OR JUST CONVENIENT?

  by raymond frantz in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  https://youtu.be/n_fttvylm-m?si=l44406ohysubkajr.

  so today we are considering, the watchtower's new take on the "hailstone message", and if you don't know what that is , they used to believe that according to revelation 16:21 they would be preaching a hard hitting message during the time of the end.

  now, let's read the verse first from the new world translation: "then great hailstones, each about the weight of a talent, fell from heaven on the people, and the people blasphemed god because of the plague of hail, for the plague was unusually great" now this is their new understanding as it appears from the 3rd paragraph from their new watchtower study edition for august 2025 and their article:when will the preaching work end, has this to say: "our clarified understanding of matthew 24:14 also adjusts our understanding of the hailstonelike message foretold at revelation 16:21. further examination has revealed that the two scriptures complement each other.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  https://youtu.be/N_ftTVylM-M?si=L44406oHYSuBKajr

  So today we are considering, the Watchtower's new take on the "hailstone message", and if you don't know what that is , they used to believe that according to Revelation 16:21 they would be preaching a hard hitting message during the time of the End. Now, let's read the verse first from the New World Translation: "Then great hailstones, each about the weight of a talent, fell from heaven on the people, and the people blasphemed God because of the plague of hail, for the plague was unusually great"
  Now this is their new understanding as it appears from the 3rd paragraph from their new Watchtower Study Edition for August 2025 and their article:When will the preaching work end, has this to say:
  "Our clarified understanding of Matthew 24:14 also adjusts our understanding of the hailstonelike message foretold at Revelation 16:21. Further examination has revealed that the two scriptures complement each other. How so? The answer lies in how people respond to the Kingdom message. To “those who are being saved,” wrote the apostle Paul, the message is good news, “a fragrance of life.” But to God’s enemies, it is bad news, “an odour of death.” (2 Cor. 2:15, 16) They hate the Kingdom message because it exposes their world for what it is​—wicked, ruled by Satan, and headed for destruction.​—John 7:7; 1 John 2:17; 5:19."
  The Watchtower used to have a very different vibe when it came to interpreting scriptures like Revelation 16:21. Back in the day, they saw the “hailstone-like message” as a real verbal smackdown—a fiery, no-holds-barred condemnation of the wicked, complete with harsh words that would make even the toughest sinner squirm. Think of it as the biblical similar of a fire-and-brimstone preacher screaming at you from a street corner, telling you exactly how much God despises your life choices. It was the kind of message that could make you feel like you’d been hit by an actual 45-pound hailstone, metaphorically speaking, of course. But oh, how the times have changed! Now, the Watchtower is all about playing nice because apparently, they’ve realized that coming across as a nasty cult isn’t a great look when you’re trying to keep the donations rolling in.
  These days, their magazines couldn't be more watered-down if they tried, with front covers that are so painfully inoffensive they might as well be background noise at a dentist’s office. We’re talking titles like “Wars, When Will They Ever End?” or “Racism: Why Can’t We Be More Kind?”—the kind of vague, feel-good topics that make you want to roll your eyes so hard you might see your own brain. Do these articles inspire anyone to stop and think? Hardly. They’re about as effective as a wet paper towel in a hurricane. Passersby don’t even glance at them, probably because they’re too busy scrolling X on their phones to care about the Watchtower’s lukewarm attempt at relevance. Imagine if they actually went for something with some bite, something that would make people stop dead in their tracks—like “Abortion: God Will Kill You for Killing Your Baby!” or “Divorce: God Hates You for Abandoning Your Family!” Now that would get attention. People would be swarming the literature carts, not to grab a copy, but to set the whole thing ablaze in a fit of rage. It’d be a spectacle—carts up in flames, news crews racing to the scene, and the Watchtower plastered across every TV station in the land. They’d be trending on X for all the wrong reasons, but at least they’d be trending, right? Now, that would be a hailstone message worth delivering, and that would secure them a place in God's heavenly kingdom, right?
  Of course, the Watchtower isn’t about to take that kind of risk. Why would they? They’re not here to actually preach a bold message or judge the world—they’ve got bigger fish to fry, like keeping the organization afloat and the money flowing. It’s all about perpetuating their own existence, not rocking the boat with anything that might make them look too controversial. And let’s be real, controversy doesn’t exactly scream “please donate to our cause.” So instead, they churn out these toothless magazines, hoping no one notices that their ministry has become about as relevant as a flip phone in 2025. But here’s the interesting part: a lot of Jehovah’s Witnesses are starting to wake up and smell the irrelevance. They’re asking the hard questions, like, “Why is our ministry so pointless?” or “When are we actually going to preach the end-times judgment message against the nations like we’re supposed to?” These aren’t just idle complaints—they’re the kind of questions that could make even the most loyal Witness start to wonder if they’ve been wasting their Saturdays for nothing.
  Faced with this growing discontent, the Watchtower knew they had to come up with an answer, and boy, did they deliver! Instead of admitting that maybe, just maybe, their approach has been a bit pathetic—lacking any real backbone or meaningful stand for their faith—they decided to pull a classic move: blame the public! According to their new, oh-so-clever interpretation, the whole issue isn’t their fault at all. Nope, it’s all about how people react to the Kingdom message. If the public likes it, then it’s a sweet-smelling fragrance, like a bouquet of roses on a spring day. But if they don’t like it—and let’s face it, most people don’t—then it’s a hailstone message, crashing down on them with all the subtlety of a divine temper tantrum. See how that works? It’s the perfect cop-out! The Watchtower gets to keep doing what they’re doing—churning out bland articles, and avoiding any real confrontation—while shifting the blame onto the very people they’re supposed to be reaching. If the message doesn’t land, it’s not because the Watchtower’s approach is weak; it’s because the public is just too stubborn to appreciate their brilliance. How convenient.
  This new spin ties back to their “clarified understanding” of Matthew 24:14 and Revelation 16:21, where they now claim the preaching work and the hailstone judgment are two sides of the same coin.You see, in the past their understanding was that Matthew 24:14 was the "message of good will" that will be followed by the message of judgement, or hailstone message in Revelation 16:21 during the Great Tribulation and that made alot more sense. Now, with this new understanding, they don't have to swift gears. They can carry on preaching this irrelevant lacklurst message and still call it the hailstone message.It's all about perception. See how that works?
  Matthew 24:14 is all about spreading the Kingdom message, which they’re doing in the most non-confrontational way possible, and Revelation 16:21 is the symbolic fallout for those who reject it. It’s a neat little trick—they get to keep their hands clean while still claiming they’re delivering a hard-hitting message, just not in the way they used to. Gone are the days of fiery rhetoric and bold proclamations; now it’s all about perception. If you’re on board with the message, it’s a breath of fresh air. If you’re not, well, you’ve just been hit with a metaphorical hailstone, and that’s on you, pal. It’s the kind of mental gymnastics that would make an Olympic gymnast jealous, and it lets the Watchtower off the hook for their lackluster ministry while still making them feel like they’re fulfilling some grand prophetic role.
  At the end of the day, this whole debacle just highlights the Watchtower’s priorities. They’re not here to shake things up or challenge the world with a bold, unapologetic message. They’re here to keep the organization humming along, safe, and sound while avoiding anything that might make them look too extreme. Meanwhile, their own members are left wondering why their ministry feels so hollow, and the public remains blissfully unaware of their existence, unless they happen to trip over a literature cart on their way to get coffee. It’s a far cry from the days when the Watchtower wasn’t afraid to deliver a message that packed a punch, but maybe that’s the point. In a world where image is everything, the Watchtower would rather play it safe than risk being seen as the judgmental group they claim not to be—even if that means their message has all the impact of a whisper in a windstorm.
  Now, let’s take a page out of the Watchtower’s playbook and examine how Jesus, the apostles, and early Christians like Paul and Stephen preached judgment with a boldness that would make today’s literature carts tremble. These early preachers didn’t tiptoe around the truth with feel-good platitudes; they delivered God’s message with unapologetic fire, even when it meant facing hostility. Their words, as recorded in the Bible, show a stark contrast to the Watchtower’s current soft approach, proving that real judgment preaching isn’t about playing nice—it’s about speaking truth, no matter the cost.
  Jesus set the tone in Matthew 23:33, directly confronting the religious leaders: “Serpents, offspring of vipers, how will you flee from the judgment of Gehenna?” No sugarcoating there—just a blistering condemnation of their hypocrisy, warning them of fiery destruction. The crowd didn’t exactly roll out the welcome mat; the leaders later plotted to kill him. Then there’s Stephen, the first Christian martyr, who didn’t hold back in Acts 7:51-l53: “Obstinate men and uncircumcised in hearts and ears, you are always resisting the holy spirit; as your forefathers did, so you do. Which one of the prophets did your forefathers not persecute?” The response? His audience “were cut to the heart” and stoned him (Acts 7:54, 58). Paul was just as direct in Acts 13:46, telling the Jews who rejected the message: “It was necessary for the word of God to be spoken first to you. Since you are rejecting it and do not judge yourselves worthy of everlasting life, look! we turn to the nations.” Their reaction? They “stirred up persecution against Paul and Barnabas and threw them outside their boundaries” (Acts 13:50). These men preached judgment with clarity and courage, facing death and exile rather than diluting the message—something the Watchtower might want to ponder the next time they print another bland cover.
  
• 
  19

  What was really going on with Abel? Does anyone find the story of Cain and Abel screwed up.

  by liam in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  ever wonder about the story of cain and abel?

  why did jehovah like abel's sacrifice more than cain's?

  maybe there's a subtle reason why jehovah likes animal sacrifices.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  Excellent question and excellent points raised, I found also the following:

  Some sages, like Ibn Ezra, suggest that God's acceptance of Abel's sacrifice was partly a divine mystery, intended to teach humility and trust. Genesis 4:7 ("If you do well, will you not be accepted?") implies that Cain could have been accepted with the right heart, but Abel's offering aligned more closely with God's will.

  So regardless the kind of sacrifice if Cain approach God with the right heart and with just offering vegetables the account would have been very different. Both sacrifices would have been accepted
• 
  3183

  It's been a long 9 years Lloyd Evans / John Cedars (continued)

  by Simon in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  uh oh, looks like the mega thread gave up the ghost, so while i investigate / fix it just continue the discussion here .... it's been a long 9 years lloyd evans / john cedars.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  raymond frantz

  Oh dear, New Facebook post, Diana has a boyfriend and she is enjoying the sun and sea somewhere in Croatia