Total Posts:31|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Religion for unity

shakya1
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 2:55:26 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There might be different meaning of religion but for me religion is a medium for being united. Religion has a strong power to unite the community, society, country and even the world.
bulproof
Posts: 25,255
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 3:25:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 2:55:26 AM, shakya1 wrote:
There might be different meaning of religion but for me religion is a medium for being united. Religion has a strong power to unite the community, society, country and even the world.
As we can see and have seen throughout mankinds existence.<sarcasm>
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Mysterious_Stranger
Posts: 1,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 10:10:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 2:55:26 AM, shakya1 wrote:
There might be different meaning of religion but for me religion is a medium for being united. Religion has a strong power to unite the community, society, country and even the world.

Yes, unite people, now pass the torch we shall burn heretics together...
Turn around, go back.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 11:58:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 2:55:26 AM, shakya1 wrote:
There might be different meaning of religion but for me religion is a medium for being united. Religion has a strong power to unite the community, society, country and even the world.

It should be, the scriptures demand it.

However can yu tell me of one group of worshippers of any faith which is 100% united wherever in the world they live or were born?

I can, but there is only one. Jehovah's Witnesses. They all believe the same, they all worship the same, they all teach the same, and they all treat each other with the same respect.

None will go to war, partly out of obedience to Christ and partly because if any did, there would be a chance of having to kill a fellow Servant of Christ.

Obedience to Christ?

Yes, Christ ordered us to love our enemies, not to kill them.

Matthew 5:44 However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to pray for those persecuting YOU; 45 that YOU may prove yourselves sons of YOUR Father who is in the heavens, since he makes his sun rise upon wicked people and good and makes it rain upon righteous people and unrighteous.

God loves people of all nations and wants them to turn top him. How can we do otherwise and still say we love him?
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 12:46:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "I can, but there is only one. Jehovah's Witnesses. They all believe the same, they all worship the same, they all teach the same, and they all treat each other with the same respect."

Anna: Why, they aren't united. In fact, they are nothing but the product of a split among the original "Bible Students" started up by Charles Russell after he himself was influenced by Adventist doctrine. Do they all refuse blood transfusions? I think not. Do they all refuse to vote?

Also, there is no way that they all will "teach the same". I've had two Jehovah's Witnesses at my door give me two different meanings to the same verse - and both meanings were wrong. The verse happened to be Rom 1: 17,

"For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith."

And they were standing next to each other when they did it! So no, they don't all teach the same thing - and in fact, such a claim is impossible. I doubt very seriously if ever a time existed when every Christian taught exactly the same thing.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 4:19:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 12:46:19 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "I can, but there is only one. Jehovah's Witnesses. They all believe the same, they all worship the same, they all teach the same, and they all treat each other with the same respect."

Anna: Why, they aren't united. In fact, they are nothing but the product of a split among the original "Bible Students" started up by Charles Russell after he himself was influenced by Adventist doctrine. Do they all refuse blood transfusions? I think not. Do they all refuse to vote?

Also, there is no way that they all will "teach the same". I've had two Jehovah's Witnesses at my door give me two different meanings to the same verse - and both meanings were wrong. The verse happened to be Rom 1: 17,

"For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith."

And they were standing next to each other when they did it! So no, they don't all teach the same thing - and in fact, such a claim is impossible. I doubt very seriously if ever a time existed when every Christian taught exactly the same thing.

They may be the product of a split, but they are most definitely united.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 7:46:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "I can, but there is only one. Jehovah's Witnesses. They all believe the same, they all worship the same, they all teach the same, and they all treat each other with the same respect."

Anna: Why, they aren't united. In fact, they are nothing but the product of a split among the original "Bible Students" started up by Charles Russell after he himself was influenced by Adventist doctrine. Do they all refuse blood transfusions? I think not. Do they all refuse to vote?

Also, there is no way that they all will "teach the same". I've had two Jehovah's Witnesses at my door give me two different meanings to the same verse - and both meanings were wrong. The verse happened to be Rom 1: 17,

"For therein is revealed a righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written, But the righteous shall live by faith."

And they were standing next to each other when they did it! So no, they don't all teach the same thing - and in fact, such a claim is impossible. I doubt very seriously if ever a time existed when every Christian taught exactly the same thing.

MCB: They may be the product of a split, but they are most definitely united.

Anna: Sure they are, MadCornish. And so is every other religious group, by your standards.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/30/2013 7:50:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
why the heck does there have to be 500 denominations of christianity. you're all christians just bloody take it. hug it out, stand in a circle around a fire, and sing "kumbaya" in the sunset
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 5:06:40 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 9/30/2013 7:50:45 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
why the heck does there have to be 500 denominations of christianity. you're all christians just bloody take it. hug it out, stand in a circle around a fire, and sing "kumbaya" in the sunset

There aren't. There is only one denomination of true Christianity, the rest are just Satanically inspired, Apostate fakes designed to confuse the issue and mislead people.

They are doing a pretty good job at that.

Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day.

As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15.

Any who depart from those teachings, however slightly, are the fakes, the Apostates, whether they are of the mislead or the misleading, and will be refused recognition when the time comes, as Jesus said at Matthew 7:21-23.

That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other.

30 years on, though I am not, for reasons I shall not go into, one of their number, I am still obedient to scripture, and still check out everything they teach thoroughly, and still cannot find them wanting.
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 5:18:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Human nature doesn't allow unity, we unite mostly when there is an interest in union.

Unity would follow from agreement, but people are different and differ about every and anything.

Also it doesn't depend on religion, but more on politics and authority.
cybertron1998
Posts: 5,818
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 6:02:44 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 5:06:40 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 9/30/2013 7:50:45 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
why the heck does there have to be 500 denominations of christianity. you're all christians just bloody take it. hug it out, stand in a circle around a fire, and sing "kumbaya" in the sunset

There aren't. There is only one denomination of true Christianity, the rest are just Satanically inspired, Apostate fakes designed to confuse the issue and mislead people.

They are doing a pretty good job at that.

Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day.

As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15.

Any who depart from those teachings, however slightly, are the fakes, the Apostates, whether they are of the mislead or the misleading, and will be refused recognition when the time comes, as Jesus said at Matthew 7:21-23.

That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other.

30 years on, though I am not, for reasons I shall not go into, one of their number, I am still obedient to scripture, and still check out everything they teach thoroughly, and still cannot find them wanting.

Do you know how many times i've heard this?
Epsilon: There are so many stories where some brave hero decides to give their life to save the day, and because of their sacrifice, the good guys win, the survivors all cheer, and everybody lives happily ever after. But the hero... never gets to see that ending. They'll never know if their sacrifice actually made a difference. They'll never know if the day was really saved. In the end, they just have to have faith.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 7:24:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 6:02:44 AM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 10/1/2013 5:06:40 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 9/30/2013 7:50:45 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
why the heck does there have to be 500 denominations of christianity. you're all christians just bloody take it. hug it out, stand in a circle around a fire, and sing "kumbaya" in the sunset

There aren't. There is only one denomination of true Christianity, the rest are just Satanically inspired, Apostate fakes designed to confuse the issue and mislead people.

They are doing a pretty good job at that.

Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day.

As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15.

Any who depart from those teachings, however slightly, are the fakes, the Apostates, whether they are of the mislead or the misleading, and will be refused recognition when the time comes, as Jesus said at Matthew 7:21-23.

That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other.

30 years on, though I am not, for reasons I shall not go into, one of their number, I am still obedient to scripture, and still check out everything they teach thoroughly, and still cannot find them wanting.

Do you know how many times i've heard this?

I have no idea, nor from whom you have heard it.

However in my case I don't just believe it to be true, I know it to be, but still, it is up to you to make up your own mind. Neither God nor I would want it any other way.

I don;t ask you believe me, I simply encourage you to be like the Beroeans and make sure for yourself.

Acts 17:11 Now the latter were more noble-minded than those in Thessalonica, for they received the word with the greatest eagerness of mind, carefully examining the Scriptures daily as to whether these things were so.

That's the important bit, and what you need to do.

If you are a genuine truth seeker God will make sure you recognise it. If not he will leave you to your own devices.

Matthew 4:23,2423 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth, for, indeed, the Father is looking for suchlike ones to worship him. 24 God is a Spirit, and those worshiping him must worship with spirit and truth."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 7:25:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 5:18:55 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
Human nature doesn't allow unity, we unite mostly when there is an interest in union.

Unity would follow from agreement, but people are different and differ about every and anything.

Also it doesn't depend on religion, but more on politics and authority.

Human nature does not, but the power of holy spirit engenders it. As it did with the 1st century Christians, so it does today with Jehovah's Witnesses.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 8:25:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day."

Anna: Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

Look how silly you make yourself appear! You think that the name "Christian" was given to the "true followers of Judaism." Any truth in that statement would have to be by a some metaphorical twist. The name Christian was given to true followers of the CHRIST - not Judaism.

*****

MCB: "As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15."

Anna: Yeah, see Acts 15 - and you'll see a group of Apostles (who no longer exist) and elders who met for the sole purpose of discussing one troubling issue, then as all the evidence shows, disbanded and was never heard from again.

******

MCB: "That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. "

Anna: And they can't even back up their name from scripture. MadCornish just concluded that it doesn't matter! The organization cannot be defended, for he cannot find a scriptural way to support it - financially or otherwise. And the best one of all:

(1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

******

MCB: "So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other."

Anna: 'Tis hard to find anything when you think their leaders are "Spirit anointed" and "led by the Spirit." Catholics see no errors within Catholicism either, do they?

"But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews! How could anyone take you seriously?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 9:32:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 8:25:27 AM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day."

Anna: Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

Look how silly you make yourself appear! You think that the name "Christian" was given to the "true followers of Judaism." Any truth in that statement would have to be by a some metaphorical twist. The name Christian was given to true followers of the CHRIST - not Judaism.

*****

MCB: "As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15."

Anna: Yeah, see Acts 15 - and you'll see a group of Apostles (who no longer exist) and elders who met for the sole purpose of discussing one troubling issue, then as all the evidence shows, disbanded and was never heard from again.

******

MCB: "That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. "

Anna: And they can't even back up their name from scripture. MadCornish just concluded that it doesn't matter! The organization cannot be defended, for he cannot find a scriptural way to support it - financially or otherwise. And the best one of all:

(1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

******

MCB: "So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other."

Anna: 'Tis hard to find anything when you think their leaders are "Spirit anointed" and "led by the Spirit." Catholics see no errors within Catholicism either, do they?

"But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews! How could anyone take you seriously?

It is just as easy to find it whatever. However it is because I fail to find anything that I accept that they are spirit led.

I always remember the injunction at 1 John 4:1, to check everything I am taught in case, like your teachings, it comes from the wrong source.
Scripture so often tells us to check our teachings and not to just accept what we are told, and the JWs encourage just that. IN fact they are the only faith I have ever found that does, you certainly don;t because everything I come up with a scripture to counter your beliefs you either deny it, or ignore it.

That means that they are constantly having to prove their claim to be spirit led to me, as they encourage all who follow them to do. That is why I use more than one translation and why they encourage us to do so.

I know they refer to the NWT 99% of the time, but even in their study articles they turn to other translations at times.

They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it.

It is not as if they or I claim to be special either since there are enough scriptures to tell us that God rejects the "special" and goes for such as I, who know our limitations.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 9:45:14 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I see no questions in your post; therefore, there is not much to answer. However, I do see a few in mine:

(1) "Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

About all you said was:

"They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it."

You said they were "given" the name. I say they made it up. Who gave it to them?

(2) "But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews!

Why is that? Who told you to do such a thing?

(3) (1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

Here's a challenge. Answer the question WITHOUT DELVING OFF INTO YOUR SPECULATIONS AND MUSINGS ON UNFULFILLED PROPHESY. I say you can't respond for one paragraph without it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Fruitytree
Posts: 2,176
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 10:13:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 7:25:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/1/2013 5:18:55 AM, Fruitytree wrote:
Human nature doesn't allow unity, we unite mostly when there is an interest in union.

Unity would follow from agreement, but people are different and differ about every and anything.

Also it doesn't depend on religion, but more on politics and authority.

Human nature does not, but the power of holy spirit engenders it. As it did with the 1st century Christians, so it does today with Jehovah's Witnesses.

Well you are talking about a limited number of people, but unity like this exits with your religion and with other religions and sects, and even other political views... I was more thinking of global unity or at least a national one..
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 10:33:42 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 9:45:14 AM, annanicole wrote:
I see no questions in your post; therefore, there is not much to answer. However, I do see a few in mine:

(1) "Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

About all you said was:

"They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it."

You said they were "given" the name. I say they made it up. Who gave it to them?

(2) "But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews!

Why is that? Who told you to do such a thing?

Scripture does. Just because all power was given to him does not mean he was allowed to us it. He had to fit in with his Fathers timetable. It was after all, his Father's plan he is now in charge of executing.

True followers of Christ are also the true Jews, the "Israel of God Galatians 6:16 And all those who will walk orderly by this rule of conduct, upon them be peace and mercy, even upon the Israel of God.

As Paul also carefully explained in Romans 9 especially verse 6 However, it is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all who [spring] from Israel are really "Israel."

Natural Israel no longer existed in God's eyes.

You said earlier that there was no need to replace Apostate Christianity. Well in that case there was no need to replace Apostate Israel either, but God did, and his son has done it again with Apostate Christianity. Just as his Father did with the Jews so the son has done with Apostate Christianity. He has replaced them and brought the faithful together under a new name.

Now his servants are trying to find other honest hearted ones to join with them, and God will make sure they find all who are suitable.

(3) (1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass

Yes, but shortly in whose terms, mens or Gods?

(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come

Yes they did, in vision, in the transfiguration. There could be no other purpose for it since God doesn't indulge in "party tricks".

(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came

Holy spirit was always there, it was with Abraham, Moses and the other men of faith, and it is with us now.

(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came

As did Jesus when he was on earth and he told the Pharisees that the Kingdom was in their midst, and yet he hadn't even finalised the Covenant for it at that time. Why should the statements of the others not be similar, referring to the King, as the Kingdom?

(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.

No, they have always acknowledge Jesus as king, but they accept the word of the prophecy whihc says he was only alloowed to take up power when it was time for Satan to be placed under his feet, 1914.

(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

No. not musings, just "Reasoning on the scriptures" as the Apostles did Acts 17:2
2 So according to Paul"s custom+ he went inside to them, and for three Sabbaths he reasoned with them from the Scriptures,

Oh I forgot you have already said they didn't use the scriptures, they got it all direct, lol. NO indeed, they got it from the scriptures using the wisdom God provides us through holy spirit.


Here's a challenge. Answer the question WITHOUT DELVING OFF INTO YOUR SPECULATIONS AND MUSINGS ON UNFULFILLED PROPHESY. I say you can't respond for one paragraph without it.

I do not need to speculate, I leave that to you with your inaccurate speculations that it has all been fulfilled.

If prophecy has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled, and all it's warnings are wasted.

Yes I know you think they made their name up, but I don't doubt a lot of Jews thought the Christians just made theirs up to. After all you are every bit as Apostate as the Jews were back then.

However they got it from Isaiah 34:10 and Revelation 3:13. After all Jesus was the foremost witness of Jehovah, his Father. as he said, he made his father's name known, and is continuing to make it known through his servants on earth. That also means, of course, that as well as being witnesses to the original Witness of Jehovah, Jesus, they too were Jehovah Witnesses even if they didn't call themselves such.

The Kingdom was Jehovah Kingdom, is now Christ's and will before too long be Jehovah's once again, then Christ will truly be the Prince of Peace.

The question I asked you, or to be more precise the challenge I set you was to provide one single teachings of Christ or the Apostles that wasn't based on the OT, and I will show you where it comes from.

Even Jesus being called a Nazarene comes from OT prophecy (Isaiah).
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 2:44:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "The question I asked you, or to be more precise the challenge I set you was to provide one single teachings of Christ or the Apostles that wasn't based on the OT, and I will show you where it comes from."

Anna: Why, not a single new moral principle was laid forth in the New Testament in the teachings of Christ. "BASED UPON IT"? What does that mean? If you are planning on my stating a reality in the NT so you can go back and find the type or figure in the OT, I can saved you the trouble of that. I can do that myself, and probably do a better job of it. EVERY teaching of Christ and the apostles was prefigured and shadowed in types and prophesies of the OT, even if very vaguely. That's why the Law and the Prophets were fulfilled in Christ and the church.

But just for the fun of it, you can try this one:

"Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." (Rom 8: 26)

I imagine it'll take quite a stretch and a vivid imagination, plus a little speculation, to find THAT in the OT.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/1/2013 4:11:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 2:44:24 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "The question I asked you, or to be more precise the challenge I set you was to provide one single teachings of Christ or the Apostles that wasn't based on the OT, and I will show you where it comes from."

Anna: Why, not a single new moral principle was laid forth in the New Testament in the teachings of Christ. "BASED UPON IT"? What does that mean? If you are planning on my stating a reality in the NT so you can go back and find the type or figure in the OT, I can saved you the trouble of that. I can do that myself, and probably do a better job of it. EVERY teaching of Christ and the apostles was prefigured and shadowed in types and prophesies of the OT, even if very vaguely. That's why the Law and the Prophets were fulfilled in Christ and the church.

But just for the fun of it, you can try this one:

"Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." (Rom 8: 26)

I imagine it'll take quite a stretch and a vivid imagination, plus a little speculation, to find THAT in the OT.

1 Timothy 6:2-6 "..................

Keep on teaching these things and giving these exhortations. 3 If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, 5 violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain. 6 To be sure, it is a means of great gain, [this] godly devotion along with self-sufficiency."

Given you it once already (again).

Nehemiah 2:1-8 And it came about in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him, and I as usual took up the wine and gave it to the king. But never had I happened to be gloomy before him. 2 So the king said to me: "Why is your face gloomy when you yourself are not sick? This is nothing but a gloominess of heart." At this I became very much afraid.
3 Then I said to the king: "Let the king himself live to time indefinite! Why should not my face become gloomy when the city, the house of the burial places of my forefathers, is devastated, and its very gates have been eaten up with fire?" 4 In turn the king said to me: "What is this that you are seeking to secure?" At once I prayed to the God of the heavens. 5 After that I said to the king: "If to the king it does seem good, and if your servant seems good before you, that you would send me to Judah, to the city of the burial places of my forefathers, that I may rebuild it." 6 At this the king said to me, as his queenly consort was sitting beside him: "How long will your journey come to be and when will you return?" So it seemed good before the king that he should send me, when I gave him the appointed time.
7 And I went on to say to the king: "If to the king it does seem good, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the River, that they may let me pass until I come to Judah; 8 also a letter to Asaph the keeper of the park that belongs to the king, that he may give me trees to build with timber the gates of the Castle that belongs to the house, and for the wall of the city and for the house into which I am to enter." So the king gave [them] to me, according to the good hand of my God upon me.

Nehemiah's prayer was answered even though he ah not had chance to utter it, only think it. That is precisely what Paul is describing at Romans 8: 26.

Where did he get the idea from? The story of Nehemiah's silent prayer that is where.

But as you so arrogantly say, you can do anything better than me. You probably could too, which is why I rely on God's promises to send his spirit t those who need it, echoed later by his son.

Such pride is what stands in your path and prevents you from building a true faith, as well as turning to God for the help we all need.

And he does, as he always has, keep his promises.
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 3:10:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"You said earlier that there was no need to replace Apostate Christianity. Well in that case there was no need to replace Apostate Israel either"

Anna: It's not about "apostate Israel" and "apostate Christianity". It's about the Old Law and the New Law. "Apostate Israel" was not "replaced" by Christianity.

******

MCB: "Scripture does. Just because all power was given to him does not mean he was allowed to us it."

Anna: Your position is that Jesus Christ was given all power and all authority, made the purification for our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Father - yet didn't do anything. And this is based upon what? Old Testament prophesies that were long since fulfilled in Christ and the church? Who calculated this "timetable" - and based upon what? Was not Daniel a prophet?

*****

Anna: " John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass

MCB: Yes, but shortly in whose terms, mens or Gods?

Anna: Well, since "the time was fulfilled" back then, and since men were teaching to men, I'd say "in men's terms". If not, then all of the above simply deceived the multitudes. When one Jew said to another, "The kingdom is at hand", that was a one-on-one conversation. Not a three-way.

I've asked for examples of "shortly come to pass"... "at hand" ... "near" ... etc. meaning centuries and centuries, i.e. this "in God's terms" business, and have yet to see much of anything in response.

******

Anna: " ome to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come

MCB: Yes they did, in vision, in the transfiguration. There could be no other purpose for it since God doesn't indulge in "party tricks".

Anna: SIX DAYS LATER - and three of 'em saw it! "No other purpose"? Men have written on the significance of the transfiguration for millennia. They seem to see plenty of other significance or purposes for it other than the single purpose that you simply assert.

*****

Anna: The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came

MCB: Holy spirit was always there, it was with Abraham, Moses and the other men of faith, and it is with us now.

Anna: The baptism of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, was not "always here" - and THAT is what Jesus was referring to.

"But these things have I spoken unto you, that when their hour is come, ye may remember them, how that I told you. And these things I said not unto you from the beginning, because I was with you. But now I go unto him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou? But because I have spoken these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth: It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I go, I will send him unto you.

And he, when he is come, will convict the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye behold me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world hath been judged.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come. (John 16: 4-13)

THAT is the power - and that is what Jesus referenced when He said the kingdom will come with power.

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1: 8)

*****

MCB: "If prophecy has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled, and all it's warnings are wasted."

Anna: The Law was not wasted - and is not. Lands sakes, I can't believe you would call Isaiah 53, that most beautiful of prophesies, a WASTE. Just a waste.

"Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

Just a waste, according to MadCornish. No use for it. It's now wasted space. What's the matter with you. Are the majestic prophesies of the Old Testament WASTES, simply because you can't get your calculators out and try to speculate on them.

You tell us:

Is Isaiah 53 FULFILLED?

If so, do you view it as a waste?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 3:23:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 9:32:06 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/1/2013 8:25:27 AM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day."

Anna: Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

Look how silly you make yourself appear! You think that the name "Christian" was given to the "true followers of Judaism." Any truth in that statement would have to be by a some metaphorical twist. The name Christian was given to true followers of the CHRIST - not Judaism.

*****

MCB: "As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15."

Anna: Yeah, see Acts 15 - and you'll see a group of Apostles (who no longer exist) and elders who met for the sole purpose of discussing one troubling issue, then as all the evidence shows, disbanded and was never heard from again.

******

MCB: "That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. "

Anna: And they can't even back up their name from scripture. MadCornish just concluded that it doesn't matter! The organization cannot be defended, for he cannot find a scriptural way to support it - financially or otherwise. And the best one of all:

(1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

******

MCB: "So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other."

Anna: 'Tis hard to find anything when you think their leaders are "Spirit anointed" and "led by the Spirit." Catholics see no errors within Catholicism either, do they?

"But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews! How could anyone take you seriously?

It is just as easy to find it whatever. However it is because I fail to find anything that I accept that they are spirit led.

I always remember the injunction at 1 John 4:1, to check everything I am taught in case, like your teachings, it comes from the wrong source.
Scripture so often tells us to check our teachings and not to just accept what we are told, and the JWs encourage just that. IN fact they are the only faith I have ever found that does, you certainly don;t because everything I come up with a scripture to counter your beliefs you either deny it, or ignore it.

That means that they are constantly having to prove their claim to be spirit led to me, as they encourage all who follow them to do. That is why I use more than one translation and why they encourage us to do so.

I know they refer to the NWT 99% of the time, but even in their study articles they turn to other translations at times.

They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it.

It is not as if they or I claim to be special either since there are enough scriptures to tell us that God rejects the "special" and goes for such as I, who know our limitations.

It's impossible for you sinners to check your teachings because you're blocked from the invisible knowledge of God that teaches us saints about the past, present and future that none of the prophets understood. The prophets were still under the Old Covenant so they had the block ( veil ) intact to keep them from the invisible knowledge of God. So only us saints understand the prophecies that were written by the prophets.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 4:14:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 3:23:55 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 10/1/2013 9:32:06 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/1/2013 8:25:27 AM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day."

Anna: Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

Look how silly you make yourself appear! You think that the name "Christian" was given to the "true followers of Judaism." Any truth in that statement would have to be by a some metaphorical twist. The name Christian was given to true followers of the CHRIST - not Judaism.

*****

MCB: "As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15."

Anna: Yeah, see Acts 15 - and you'll see a group of Apostles (who no longer exist) and elders who met for the sole purpose of discussing one troubling issue, then as all the evidence shows, disbanded and was never heard from again.

******

MCB: "That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. "

Anna: And they can't even back up their name from scripture. MadCornish just concluded that it doesn't matter! The organization cannot be defended, for he cannot find a scriptural way to support it - financially or otherwise. And the best one of all:

(1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

******

MCB: "So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other."

Anna: 'Tis hard to find anything when you think their leaders are "Spirit anointed" and "led by the Spirit." Catholics see no errors within Catholicism either, do they?

"But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews! How could anyone take you seriously?

It is just as easy to find it whatever. However it is because I fail to find anything that I accept that they are spirit led.

I always remember the injunction at 1 John 4:1, to check everything I am taught in case, like your teachings, it comes from the wrong source.
Scripture so often tells us to check our teachings and not to just accept what we are told, and the JWs encourage just that. IN fact they are the only faith I have ever found that does, you certainly don;t because everything I come up with a scripture to counter your beliefs you either deny it, or ignore it.

That means that they are constantly having to prove their claim to be spirit led to me, as they encourage all who follow them to do. That is why I use more than one translation and why they encourage us to do so.

I know they refer to the NWT 99% of the time, but even in their study articles they turn to other translations at times.

They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it.

It is not as if they or I claim to be special either since there are enough scriptures to tell us that God rejects the "special" and goes for such as I, who know our limitations.

It's impossible for you sinners to check your teachings because you're blocked from the invisible knowledge of God that teaches us saints about the past, present and future that none of the prophets understood. The prophets were still under the Old Covenant so they had the block ( veil ) intact to keep them from the invisible knowledge of God. So only us saints understand the prophecies that were written by the prophets.

Nothing like as blocked as you are.

1 Timothy 6:2-6 "..................

Keep on teaching these things and giving these exhortations. 3 If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, 5 violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain. 6 To be sure, it is a means of great gain, [this] godly devotion along with self-sufficiency."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 4:22:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 3:10:27 PM, annanicole wrote:
"You said earlier that there was no need to replace Apostate Christianity. Well in that case there was no need to replace Apostate Israel either"

Anna: It's not about "apostate Israel" and "apostate Christianity". It's about the Old Law and the New Law. "Apostate Israel" was not "replaced" by Christianity.

******

MCB: "Scripture does. Just because all power was given to him does not mean he was allowed to us it."

Anna: Your position is that Jesus Christ was given all power and all authority, made the purification for our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Father - yet didn't do anything. And this is based upon what? Old Testament prophesies that were long since fulfilled in Christ and the church? Who calculated this "timetable" - and based upon what? Was not Daniel a prophet?

*****

Anna: " John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass

MCB: Yes, but shortly in whose terms, mens or Gods?

Anna: Well, since "the time was fulfilled" back then, and since men were teaching to men, I'd say "in men's terms". If not, then all of the above simply deceived the multitudes. When one Jew said to another, "The kingdom is at hand", that was a one-on-one conversation. Not a three-way.

I've asked for examples of "shortly come to pass"... "at hand" ... "near" ... etc. meaning centuries and centuries, i.e. this "in God's terms" business, and have yet to see much of anything in response.

******

Anna: " ome to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come

MCB: Yes they did, in vision, in the transfiguration. There could be no other purpose for it since God doesn't indulge in "party tricks".

Anna: SIX DAYS LATER - and three of 'em saw it! "No other purpose"? Men have written on the significance of the transfiguration for millennia. They seem to see plenty of other significance or purposes for it other than the single purpose that you simply assert.

*****

Anna: The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came

MCB: Holy spirit was always there, it was with Abraham, Moses and the other men of faith, and it is with us now.

Anna: The baptism of the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, was not "always here" - and THAT is what Jesus was referring to.

"But these things have I spoken unto you, that when their hour is come, ye may remember them, how that I told you. And these things I said not unto you from the beginning, because I was with you. But now I go unto him that sent me; and none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou? But because I have spoken these things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart.

Nevertheless I tell you the truth: It is expedient for you that I go away; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I go, I will send him unto you.

And he, when he is come, will convict the world in respect of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because I go to the Father, and ye behold me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world hath been judged.

I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come. (John 16: 4-13)

THAT is the power - and that is what Jesus referenced when He said the kingdom will come with power.

"But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." (Acts 1: 8)

*****

MCB: "If prophecy has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled, and all it's warnings are wasted."

Anna: The Law was not wasted - and is not. Lands sakes, I can't believe you would call Isaiah 53, that most beautiful of prophesies, a WASTE. Just a waste.

"Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed?
For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors."

Just a waste, according to MadCornish. No use for it. It's now wasted space. What's the matter with you. Are the majestic prophesies of the Old Testament WASTES, simply because you can't get your calculators out and try to speculate on them.

You tell us:

Is Isaiah 53 FULFILLED?

If so, do you view it as a waste?

Yes Isaiah 53 was fulfilled.

Wasted? On Apostates like you, yes, because you teach a false Trinity.

On those of us who follow all his teachings, and those of the Apostles, no.

We are the ones actually trusting in him and his Father.

We are the ones who know our limitations and how much we need his help support and protection.

We are the ones doing the work Jesus forecast at Matthew 24:14, no-one else is.

we are not the ones tied up over what we want words to mean but are the ones who accept what God used them to mean.

Actually I might just start calling you our very own Korah.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 4:34:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 4:14:12 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/2/2013 3:23:55 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 10/1/2013 9:32:06 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/1/2013 8:25:27 AM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day."

Anna: Ohhhhhh, they were "given" a new name. I thought they simply made it up. Didn't old Judge Rutherford, that renowned charlatan who duped people with his "proof positive that millions now living (in 1925) would never die, come up with it in about 1931? If they were "given" the new name, who gave it to them?

Look how silly you make yourself appear! You think that the name "Christian" was given to the "true followers of Judaism." Any truth in that statement would have to be by a some metaphorical twist. The name Christian was given to true followers of the CHRIST - not Judaism.

*****

MCB: "As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15."

Anna: Yeah, see Acts 15 - and you'll see a group of Apostles (who no longer exist) and elders who met for the sole purpose of discussing one troubling issue, then as all the evidence shows, disbanded and was never heard from again.

******

MCB: "That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. "

Anna: And they can't even back up their name from scripture. MadCornish just concluded that it doesn't matter! The organization cannot be defended, for he cannot find a scriptural way to support it - financially or otherwise. And the best one of all:

(1) John, Jesus, the twelve, and the seventy ALL preached that the kingdom was near, at hand, nigh to you, to shortly come to pass
(2) Some to whom Jesus preached would live to see the kingdom come
(3) The kingdom would not only come, but would come with power when the Holy Spirit came
(4) The Holy Spirit came, the power came, Paul and John both said the kingdom came
(5) WatchTower prophetic musers pontificate that it never happened: Christ was not king. No kingdom came. No kingly or royal priesthood existed. Nothing.
(6) Why? Let Madcornish answer. I think you'll find that his "answer" centers around prophetic musings.

******

MCB: "So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other."

Anna: 'Tis hard to find anything when you think their leaders are "Spirit anointed" and "led by the Spirit." Catholics see no errors within Catholicism either, do they?

"But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth."

It looks to me like you could make a better case for being "Jesus's witnesses": at the time He said that statement (Acts 1: 8), he said that all power had been given to Him, both in heaven and in earth. Yet you run back to Isaiah to a statement made to a bunch of Jews! How could anyone take you seriously?

It is just as easy to find it whatever. However it is because I fail to find anything that I accept that they are spirit led.

I always remember the injunction at 1 John 4:1, to check everything I am taught in case, like your teachings, it comes from the wrong source.
Scripture so often tells us to check our teachings and not to just accept what we are told, and the JWs encourage just that. IN fact they are the only faith I have ever found that does, you certainly don;t because everything I come up with a scripture to counter your beliefs you either deny it, or ignore it.

That means that they are constantly having to prove their claim to be spirit led to me, as they encourage all who follow them to do. That is why I use more than one translation and why they encourage us to do so.

I know they refer to the NWT 99% of the time, but even in their study articles they turn to other translations at times.

They don't use their claims to be spirit led to make themselves seem infallible, as many would, they use that claim, as I do, to explain that the message is not mine and I deserve no credit for it.

It is not as if they or I claim to be special either since there are enough scriptures to tell us that God rejects the "special" and goes for such as I, who know our limitations.

It's impossible for you sinners to check your teachings because you're blocked from the invisible knowledge of God that teaches us saints about the past, present and future that none of the prophets understood. The prophets were still under the Old Covenant so they had the block ( veil ) intact to keep them from the invisible knowledge of God. So only us saints understand the prophecies that were written by the prophets.

Nothing like as blocked as you are.

1 Timothy 6:2-6 "..................

Keep on teaching these things and giving these exhortations. 3 If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, 5 violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain. 6 To be sure, it is a means of great gain, [this] godly devotion along with self-sufficiency."

You sinners use the scriptures without any knowledge of God to know what the religious Romans wrote in their new testament. They added scriptures like the one you used here so that their Christians could use them for selfish reasons to reject the Truth. This is a very simple tactic by sinners who have no knowledge of the prophecies that show all the flesh in this age will perish. I know your flesh that causes you fear and selfishness will burn up on the last day of this age. But your sinful flesh won't allow you to believe that. It tells you that you will survive the fire of God and go to a place called Heaven, which is where God's invisible creation already exists.

Without knowledge of God, you will continue to attack from your flesh to keep your flesh exalted above me or anyone else. I know your spirit is not known by your flesh because your flesh is what keeps you disobedient to the commandments of our Creator. This makes you a sinner and not a sinless saint who is totally obedient to every single command that God gives us each and every second of the day until our flesh is killed according to His eternal plan.

You have no way of knowing what obedience to God's commands are like. All you have is some scriptures written by the religious Romans who added all their religious beliefs in their new testament to totally confuse their Christians. They had to deceive the true believers of the gospel that the early saints spoke. Rome had to kill many believers who resisted Rome's lies after killing the saints but Christians don't want to believe this. They believe they are the true believers and even call t
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 5:30:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "If prophecy has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled, and all it's warnings are wasted."

Anna: "Is Isaiah 53 FULFILLED?"

MCB: "Yes Isaiah 53 was fulfilled."

Anna: Then regardless of my view of it or your view of it, it is of "no more use to use that is the Mosaic Law" - and it is a waste. That's your position on fulfilled prophesy, and you stated it pretty plainly right up there in the first sentence. All I have to do is substitute your Isaiah 53 into your own sentence - and let you muse upon its true value to us:

"If Isaiah 53 has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled"

Isn't that a fine view of things?

Regardless of your other ramblings about "God's Mouthpiece" and their "special understandings", fulfilled prophesy is "of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 5:40:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 5:30:16 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "If prophecy has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled, and all it's warnings are wasted."

Anna: "Is Isaiah 53 FULFILLED?"

MCB: "Yes Isaiah 53 was fulfilled."

Anna: Then regardless of my view of it or your view of it, it is of "no more use to use that is the Mosaic Law" - and it is a waste. That's your position on fulfilled prophesy, and you stated it pretty plainly right up there in the first sentence. All I have to do is substitute your Isaiah 53 into your own sentence - and let you muse upon its true value to us:

"If Isaiah 53 has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled"

Isn't that a fine view of things?

Regardless of your other ramblings about "God's Mouthpiece" and their "special understandings", fulfilled prophesy is "of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law."

I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you.

1 Timothy 6:2-6 "..................

Keep on teaching these things and giving these exhortations. 3 If any man teaches other doctrine and does not assent to healthful words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, nor to the teaching that accords with godly devotion, 4 he is puffed up [with pride], not understanding anything, but being mentally diseased over questionings and debates about words. From these things spring envy, strife, abusive speeches, wicked suspicions, 5 violent disputes about trifles on the part of men corrupted in mind and despoiled of the truth, thinking that godly devotion is a means of gain. 6 To be sure, it is a means of great gain, [this] godly devotion along with self-sufficiency."
annanicole
Posts: 19,787
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 7:29:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Anna: And here's a bit of your literary genius:

"If Isaiah 53 has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled"

The boy just has no use for is because he can't speculate on it. Can't get his sliderule and calculator out and devise some "timetable" from it. Can't get to 1914 from there, can you? Thus, it's useless, defined as:

"not fulfilling or not expected to achieve the intended purpose or desired outcome. Being or having no beneficial use; futile or ineffective. Incapable of functioning or assisting; ineffectual. Of no use; not serving the purpose or any purpose; unavailing or futile"

The majestic psalm of the prophet David, Psalm 118:

"Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the Lord: This gate of the Lord, into which the righteous shall enter. I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it."

Fulfilled - and cited in the New Testament as fulfilled - and now useless. Why, to me it's marvelous to look back 1,000 years and see the sweet singer of Israel envisioning the resurrection of Christ - and noting that the despised man of Nazareth now stands exalted as the chief cornerstone. To a WatchTowerite prophetic seer, it's ... once again ... useless.

And again:

MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Reply: No, ya don't. Those prophesies aren't useless. They are fulfilled - and they are priceless. They promote fidelity and trust in the veracity of the Bible. The WatchTower's prophetic speculations, which have notoriously failed in the past, promote infidelity. That's why you must redefine, retranslate, talk about God's point of view, chronologies, and timetables.

MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Pfffffffffft.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Paradox_7
Posts: 1,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/2/2013 11:19:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/1/2013 6:02:44 AM, cybertron1998 wrote:
At 10/1/2013 5:06:40 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 9/30/2013 7:50:45 PM, cybertron1998 wrote:
why the heck does there have to be 500 denominations of christianity. you're all christians just bloody take it. hug it out, stand in a circle around a fire, and sing "kumbaya" in the sunset

There aren't. There is only one denomination of true Christianity, the rest are just Satanically inspired, Apostate fakes designed to confuse the issue and mislead people.

They are doing a pretty good job at that.

Which is why the true followers of Christ have had to be given a new name, Jehovah's Witnesses, just as the true followers of Judaism had to be given a new name "Christian" to distinguish them from the Apostates of their day.

As you are basically saying, Christ only taught one set of teachings, and the Apostles after him did the same, with the "Apostles and Older Men in Jerusalem" settling any disputes to keep the unanimity. See Acts 15.

Any who depart from those teachings, however slightly, are the fakes, the Apostates, whether they are of the mislead or the misleading, and will be refused recognition when the time comes, as Jesus said at Matthew 7:21-23.

That is why I encourage people to, as God said "try me out and see" by checking out, thoroughly, what Christ's organisation, Jehovah's Witnesses, teach and see if they can accept it. The important thing is, as always, can they back it up from scripture. So far, in 30 years I have found nothing for which their explanation is not more reasonable than any other.

30 years on, though I am not, for reasons I shall not go into, one of their number, I am still obedient to scripture, and still check out everything they teach thoroughly, and still cannot find them wanting.

Do you know how many times i've heard this?

Amen to this ^
: At 10/23/2012 8:06:03 PM, tvellalott wrote:
: Don't be. The Catholic Church is ran by Darth Sidius for fvck sake. As far as I'm concerned, you're a bona fide member of the Sith.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/3/2013 4:21:45 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/2/2013 7:29:16 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Anna: And here's a bit of your literary genius:

"If Isaiah 53 has all been fulfilled then it is of no more use to use than is the Mosaic Law, which is also fulfilled"

The boy just has no use for is because he can't speculate on it. Can't get his sliderule and calculator out and devise some "timetable" from it. Can't get to 1914 from there, can you? Thus, it's useless, defined as:

"not fulfilling or not expected to achieve the intended purpose or desired outcome. Being or having no beneficial use; futile or ineffective. Incapable of functioning or assisting; ineffectual. Of no use; not serving the purpose or any purpose; unavailing or futile"

The majestic psalm of the prophet David, Psalm 118:

"Open to me the gates of righteousness: I will go into them, and I will praise the Lord: This gate of the Lord, into which the righteous shall enter. I will praise thee: for thou hast heard me, and art become my salvation. The stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner. This is the Lord's doing; it is marvellous in our eyes. This is the day which the Lord hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it."

Fulfilled - and cited in the New Testament as fulfilled - and now useless. Why, to me it's marvelous to look back 1,000 years and see the sweet singer of Israel envisioning the resurrection of Christ - and noting that the despised man of Nazareth now stands exalted as the chief cornerstone. To a WatchTowerite prophetic seer, it's ... once again ... useless.

And again:

MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Reply: No, ya don't. Those prophesies aren't useless. They are fulfilled - and they are priceless. They promote fidelity and trust in the veracity of the Bible. The WatchTower's prophetic speculations, which have notoriously failed in the past, promote infidelity. That's why you must redefine, retranslate, talk about God's point of view, chronologies, and timetables.

MCB: "I don;t ramble Anna I speak only truth, unlike you."

Pfffffffffft.

I'm sorry but I don't recall ever mentioning Isaiah 53 as such. as you should realise I was referring to all the prophecies which you claim to be fulfilled, but which were not in the 1st century.

I assumed that you would have the intelligence to realise that but either you haven't or you assume that your readers haven't and won;t see through your deception.

Funny isn't it. You accuse me of rambling and yet when I leave out what should have been an obvious detail you leap on my omission like a cat on a mouse, and with equal malice in your heart.

The "great gain" that you can get from faith and scripture is not, as you seem to think, some form of status, the exact opposite in fact as it truly makes you realise how insignificant we are as individuals and that it is only humanity as a whole that really matters.

Your inherent dishonesty becomes more and more apparent as you employ such half truths in your argumentation.