Total Posts:77|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Christians and Biblical Laws

Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Anti-atheist
Posts: 213
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 11:04:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

Jesus didn't abolish them he fufilled the contract so we dont have to follow them. Not abolishment
Anti-atheist

Registered genius
Certified butt-f*cker

imabench for fuhrer '13
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/18/2013 11:08:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 11:04:32 PM, Anti-atheist wrote:
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

Jesus didn't abolish them he fufilled the contract so we dont have to follow them. Not abolishment

But the contract did not state that the Messiah was out there to nullify the old laws in exchange for the doctrine of original sin. In other words, Jesus didn't want the laws nullified.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:06:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Their fundamental problem & reasons for their delay in responding, is because there isn't a genuine believer amongst them & you specifically asked for one of them to respond?

ALL & ANY that do respond are frauds and have only arrogated themselves as a genuine believer.

The facts remain that Story book jebus was an eternal Jew!
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:08:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 11:06:33 PM, Composer wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Their fundamental problem & reasons for their delay in responding, is because there isn't a genuine believer amongst them & you specifically asked for one of them to respond?

ALL & ANY that do respond are frauds and have only arrogated themselves as a genuine believer.

The facts remain that Story book jebus was an eternal Jew!

I think you are putting my position a little harshly. I'm really curious where Christians get their Biblical interpretation from.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:13:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."

Where do you get that interpretation?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:15:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
In other words, it's an implied ellipsis such as is seen in the passage in which Paul tells Timothy not to drink water, but wine. I can't remember it but it runs something like this,

"Drink not (only) water, but (also) wine ......"

Same thing when Paul said

Christ sent me not (only) to baptize, but (primarily) to preach the gospel.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:16:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 11:13:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."

Where do you get that interpretation?

From all the other passages which state that in fact Jesus did remove the Mosaic Law. He removed it by fulfilling it, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/19/2013 11:21:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 11:16:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:13:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."

Where do you get that interpretation?

From all the other passages which state that in fact Jesus did remove the Mosaic Law. He removed it by fulfilling it, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.

But where is that in the Bible? Look at the verses directly after Matthew 5:17 -

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.(18-20)

Since its Christ who's speaking, and because he knows his purpose, he wouldn't say this without meaning that Levitican Law should not be superceded.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 2:09:28 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/19/2013 11:21:23 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:16:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:13:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."

Where do you get that interpretation?

From all the other passages which state that in fact Jesus did remove the Mosaic Law. He removed it by fulfilling it, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.

But where is that in the Bible? Look at the verses directly after Matthew 5:17 -

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.(18-20)

Since its Christ who's speaking, and because he knows his purpose, he wouldn't say this without meaning that Levitican Law should not be superceded.

The taking away of the Mosaic Law ... the blotting out ... the removal ... are so firmly entrenched in practically every epistle that I thought it unnecessary to cite them all. it would amount to dozens of allusions.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 4:56:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 2:09:28 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:21:23 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:16:46 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:13:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/19/2013 11:10:39 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 10/19/2013 10:54:02 PM, Subutai wrote:
Can somebody add something relevant to this thread?

Yep, it's a confusing passage if taken alone because the fact of the matter is that Jesus, by fulfilling the Law, did in fact abolish it. In other words, "fulfilling the Law" had the effect of "abolishing it". Jesus came to "fulfill" it - not merely destroy it; nonetheless, by fulfilling it, he did remove it, or "take it out of the way."

Where do you get that interpretation?

From all the other passages which state that in fact Jesus did remove the Mosaic Law. He removed it by fulfilling it, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.

But where is that in the Bible? Look at the verses directly after Matthew 5:17 -

For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.(18-20)

Since its Christ who's speaking, and because he knows his purpose, he wouldn't say this without meaning that Levitican Law should not be superceded.

The taking away of the Mosaic Law ... the blotting out ... the removal ... are so firmly entrenched in practically every epistle that I thought it unnecessary to cite them all. it would amount to dozens of allusions.

You continue to ignore my question. Sure, Jesus my be fulfilling the Levitican laws, but that doesn't mean that the laws are nullified. I have pointed to two verses that prove my case, and there are several more behind them. Provide some actual Biblical evidence.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 5:35:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"You continue to ignore my question. Sure, Jesus my be fulfilling the Levitican laws, but that doesn't mean that the laws are nullified."

I didn't ignore it. I said that perfectly keeping the Law had the EFFECT of nullifying it. Perfecting keeping the Law - and by that I mean living and dying without having broken any aspect of the Law - had the EFFECT of blotting it out ... taking it away ... and any equivalent terms.

I said that I refrained from citing all the passages because it would amount to dozens, and I assume most people are very familiar with them. Nothing is plainer in the entire NT than that the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Law with all its appendages, has been replaced.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 5:38:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"You continue to ignore my question. Sure, Jesus my be fulfilling the Levitican laws, but that doesn't mean that the laws are nullified."

I didn't ignore it. I said that perfectly keeping the Law had the EFFECT of nullifying it. Perfecting keeping the Law - and by that I mean living and dying without having broken any aspect of the Law - had the EFFECT of blotting it out ... taking it away ... and any equivalent terms.

I said that I refrained from citing all the passages because it would amount to dozens, and I assume most people are very familiar with them. Nothing is plainer in the entire NT than that the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Law with all its appendages, has been replaced.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 5:47:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 5:35:57 PM, annanicole wrote:
"You continue to ignore my question. Sure, Jesus my be fulfilling the Levitican laws, but that doesn't mean that the laws are nullified."

I didn't ignore it. I said that perfectly keeping the Law had the EFFECT of nullifying it. Perfecting keeping the Law - and by that I mean living and dying without having broken any aspect of the Law - had the EFFECT of blotting it out ... taking it away ... and any equivalent terms.

I said that I refrained from citing all the passages because it would amount to dozens, and I assume most people are very familiar with them. Nothing is plainer in the entire NT than that the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Law with all its appendages, has been replaced.

Your arguments stay the same every time I ask you. Just because Jesus thought that his prophecy fulfilled the law does not mean that it should be replaced, as he preached against such. Quote me one biblical passage that says otherwise.
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/20/2013 9:00:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/20/2013 5:47:32 PM, Subutai wrote:
At 10/20/2013 5:35:57 PM, annanicole wrote:
"You continue to ignore my question. Sure, Jesus my be fulfilling the Levitican laws, but that doesn't mean that the laws are nullified."

I didn't ignore it. I said that perfectly keeping the Law had the EFFECT of nullifying it. Perfecting keeping the Law - and by that I mean living and dying without having broken any aspect of the Law - had the EFFECT of blotting it out ... taking it away ... and any equivalent terms.

I said that I refrained from citing all the passages because it would amount to dozens, and I assume most people are very familiar with them. Nothing is plainer in the entire NT than that the Old Covenant, the Mosaic Law with all its appendages, has been replaced.

Your arguments stay the same every time I ask you. Just because Jesus thought that his prophecy fulfilled the law does not mean that it should be replaced, as he preached against such. Quote me one biblical passage that says otherwise.

In the first place, fulfill means "to carry out a promise, to do a duty, to satisfy a condition, to bring to an end, to complete." (Webster) Jesus Christ came to fulfill or to bring to an end the promises and prophecies concerning Him in the Law and in the Prophets.

"These are the words I spake unto you, while I was yet with you that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures." (Luke 24: 44-45)

I guess by that you mean that you indeed DO want to see all those passages that I was trying to avoid copying and pasting - even though you know they are there:

"But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we may be justified by faith. Now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor." (Gal 3: 23-25)

"For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law, but under grace." (Rom 6: 14-15)

"For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh, that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit" (Rom 8: 3-6)

"knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified" (Gal 2: 16)

"Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross...let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink or in respect of an holy day, or of the new moon or of the Sabbath days which area shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." (Col 2: 14-17)

"Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think anything as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God; who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit; for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." (2 Cor 3: 5-6.)

"For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law." (Heb 7: 12)

"He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second." (Heb 10: 9)

"For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the freewoman. Howbeit the son by the handmaid is born after the flesh; but the son by the freewoman is born through promise. Which things contain an allegory: for these women are two covenants; one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to the Jerusalem that now is: for she is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: For more are the children of the desolate than of her that hath the husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, so also it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast out the handmaid and her son: for the son of the handmaid shall not inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did Christ set us free: stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in a yoke of bondage. (Gal 4: 22 through 5: 1)

"But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter." (Rom 7: 6)
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Subutai
Posts: 3,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2013 9:44:54 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Alright, I see where you are coming from. But how do you explain Matthew 5:17-20?
I'm becoming less defined as days go by, fading away, and well you might say, I'm losing focus, kinda drifting into the abstract in terms of how I see myself.
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

That is actually very easy to explain.

Christ did not come to destroy teh law, but to fulfil it, to teach his followers a better and mroe effective way of ding what teh law made compulsory,

It is called principle.

Read the rest of Jesus sermon on the mount.

That shows clearly that Christ is not destroying the law but modifying it to a set of principles, telling us that we shouldn't just refrain from doing things, but from even thinking about doing them.

He later summed it up by, in answer to a question from a Pharisee, quoting from two of the verses from the Mosaic law and then explaining what principle, the every principle he taught, does:

Matthew 22:35-40
35 And one of them, versed in the Law, asked, testing him: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbour as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."

Note that at the end he says "On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.".

Fulfil those two simple commands and you have fulfilled the entire Mosaic LAw in principle.

All Christ really did was say "don't obey the law, live it instead".
Composer
Posts: 5,858
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 7:32:55 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
That is actually very easy to explain.
Pity for you that you failed!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Christ did not come to destroy teh law, but to fulfil it, to teach his followers a better and mroe effective way of ding what teh law made compulsory,
The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH so its only literal appearances were inside Story book land!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
It is called principle.
And what a failed principle it is!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Read the rest of Jesus sermon on the mount.
More fallible BS!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Matthew 22:35-40
35 And one of them, versed in the Law, asked, testing him: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbour as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."
YHWH is the Superior correct name according to J.ws

Loving something entirely, leaves no room to love something else equally entirely!

e.g. You can not serve two masters I recall in the Story book Land narrative, so loving a god & loving your neighbour equally is a contradiction!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
All Christ really did was say "don't obey the law, live it instead".
Should any one be living according to the Law then they are also obeying the Law!

Your Apostate J.w Satanic ideology fails again!
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 8:18:16 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 7:32:55 AM, Composer wrote:
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
That is actually very easy to explain.
Pity for you that you failed!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Christ did not come to destroy teh law, but to fulfil it, to teach his followers a better and mroe effective way of ding what teh law made compulsory,
The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH so its only literal appearances were inside Story book land!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
It is called principle.
And what a failed principle it is!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Read the rest of Jesus sermon on the mount.
More fallible BS!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Matthew 22:35-40
35 And one of them, versed in the Law, asked, testing him: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbour as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."
YHWH is the Superior correct name according to J.ws

Loving something entirely, leaves no room to love something else equally entirely!

e.g. You can not serve two masters I recall in the Story book Land narrative, so loving a god & loving your neighbour equally is a contradiction!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
All Christ really did was say "don't obey the law, live it instead".
Should any one be living according to the Law then they are also obeying the Law!

Your Apostate J.w Satanic ideology fails again!

If they are living according to the Mosaic Law as a rigid code, yes, and it is not JW ideology, it is scriptural ideology,

As long as the ideology taught by Christ stand, so does the ideology of The JW, since they are the same thing entirely.

That ideology is eternal.
bulproof
Posts: 25,225
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 10:51:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 8:18:16 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/22/2013 7:32:55 AM, Composer wrote:
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
That is actually very easy to explain.
Pity for you that you failed!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Christ did not come to destroy teh law, but to fulfil it, to teach his followers a better and mroe effective way of ding what teh law made compulsory,
The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH so its only literal appearances were inside Story book land!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
It is called principle.
And what a failed principle it is!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Read the rest of Jesus sermon on the mount.
More fallible BS!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Matthew 22:35-40
35 And one of them, versed in the Law, asked, testing him: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbour as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."
YHWH is the Superior correct name according to J.ws

Loving something entirely, leaves no room to love something else equally entirely!

e.g. You can not serve two masters I recall in the Story book Land narrative, so loving a god & loving your neighbour equally is a contradiction!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
All Christ really did was say "don't obey the law, live it instead".
Should any one be living according to the Law then they are also obeying the Law!

Your Apostate J.w Satanic ideology fails again!

If they are living according to the Mosaic Law as a rigid code, yes, and it is not JW ideology, it is scriptural ideology,

As long as the ideology taught by Christ stand, so does the ideology of The JW, since they are the same thing entirely.

That ideology is eternal.

From Pope Francis.

Someone closer to god than you will ever be.

"In ideologies there is not Jesus: in his tenderness, his love, his meekness. And ideologies are rigid, always. Of every sign: rigid. And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought" For this reason Jesus said to them: "You have taken away the key of knowledge." The knowledge of Jesus is transformed into an ideological and also moralistic knowledge, because these close the door with many requirements. The faith becomes ideology and ideology frightens, ideology chases away the people, distances, distances the people and distances of the Church of the people. But it is a serious illness, this of ideological Christians. It is an illness, but it is not new, eh?"
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 12:03:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 10:51:53 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 10/22/2013 8:18:16 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/22/2013 7:32:55 AM, Composer wrote:
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
That is actually very easy to explain.
Pity for you that you failed!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Christ did not come to destroy teh law, but to fulfil it, to teach his followers a better and mroe effective way of ding what teh law made compulsory,
The biblical jebus is a Historical MYTH so its only literal appearances were inside Story book land!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
It is called principle.
And what a failed principle it is!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Read the rest of Jesus sermon on the mount.
More fallible BS!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
Matthew 22:35-40
35 And one of them, versed in the Law, asked, testing him: 36 "Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?" 37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbour as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."
YHWH is the Superior correct name according to J.ws

Loving something entirely, leaves no room to love something else equally entirely!

e.g. You can not serve two masters I recall in the Story book Land narrative, so loving a god & loving your neighbour equally is a contradiction!

At 10/22/2013 7:04:57 AM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
All Christ really did was say "don't obey the law, live it instead".
Should any one be living according to the Law then they are also obeying the Law!

Your Apostate J.w Satanic ideology fails again!

If they are living according to the Mosaic Law as a rigid code, yes, and it is not JW ideology, it is scriptural ideology,

As long as the ideology taught by Christ stand, so does the ideology of The JW, since they are the same thing entirely.

That ideology is eternal.

From Pope Francis.

Someone closer to god than you will ever be.

"In ideologies there is not Jesus: in his tenderness, his love, his meekness. And ideologies are rigid, always. Of every sign: rigid. And when a Christian becomes a disciple of the ideology, he has lost the faith: he is no longer a disciple of Jesus, he is a disciple of this attitude of thought" For this reason Jesus said to them: "You have taken away the key of knowledge." The knowledge of Jesus is transformed into an ideological and also moralistic knowledge, because these close the door with many requirements. The faith becomes ideology and ideology frightens, ideology chases away the people, distances, distances the people and distances of the Church of the people. But it is a serious illness, this of ideological Christians. It is an illness, but it is not new, eh?"

If Francis had possessed a fraction o f the knowledge of God and Christ I do, that even the youngest JW knows he would not have been Pope.

Pope (Papa in Italian) means "Father" and what did Jesus say about that?

Matthew 23: 9 Moreover, do not call anyone YOUR father on earth, for one is YOUR Father, the heavenly One.

Francis, and others deliberately took on a title they knew only too well was completely forbidden to them by the Christ,.

Pope Francis, as one of the heads of the most guilty of the Apostate Christian faiths has never been anywhere near God, I actually have a god relationship with him and his son, so you couldn't be more wrong, lol. He has certainly tolerated so many of my mistakes in the past, and his son still assists me via holy spirit.

However Francis is both right and wrong. Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits, as is the God whop set them. His words as you quote them are wise sounding words, but it is the wisdom of the world which is very much foolishness with God.

Fortunately the only one who can come between me and God is me, and I have no intention of doing so. His favour is far too important to me to do anything I can avoid that would risk it, and he knows and appreciates that.
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 2:54:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "However Francis is both right and wrong. Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits"

Anna: Oh, brother

MCB: "If Francis had possessed a fraction of the knowledge of God and Christ I do"

Anna: Oh, brother!

MCB: "his son still assists me via holy spirit."

Anna: OH BROTHER!

MCB: "and he knows and appreciates that."

Anna: LOL

Stuff like the above is what got you kicked out.
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
10/22/2013 3:58:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/18/2013 9:55:57 PM, Subutai wrote:
Christians, I have a question for you regarding which laws in the Bible you believe in. I mean this from a true questioning perspective. You all think that the laws laid out in Leviticus were nullified by Jesus's prophecy. But, how to you explain Matthew 5:17?:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Is there any specific Biblical verse that nullifies the Levitican laws? If not, why do you express a disdain for them?

God is the Creator of the strong delusion we're living with in this world. This strong delusion was planned in the mind of God to separate His servants from His created men and get in contact with us while living in this delusion.

God put man's laws into the minds of Jewish men to deceive them from His own laws that no man can obey. This is called the Old Covenant "veil" that will remain in place until the end of this age.

All God's people are born under this Old Covenant so that He could connect with His servants, the prophets and saints, with His direct thoughts that don't contain any deception. So the "veil" keeps men in their lies while we prophets and saints can understand the true thoughts of God as He comes into our mind to command us to confess, repent and whatever else He wants us to do.

Since the prophets were still under the Old Covenant as God used them for His purpose to write prophecies, they didn't have the hidden knowledge to understand the delusion they were in. This hidden knowledge ( Holy Spirit, Christ, Kingdom of God, messiah, etc. ) wouldn't be revealed until God's saints existed in this world, starting with the first saint who Christians call Jesus.

The New Covenant started with us saints when God removes the Old Covenant "veil" that reveals His hidden knowledge. From this hidden knowledge that we can't see until it's put in a language we can understand, such as our language called English, we learn about our heavenly existence, which is invisible to our flesh.

This is why we saints didn't come to abolish the written laws that God had the Jews write to deceive their people into obeying their laws instead of the laws of God that us saints speak and write from. We saints were only here to be used by God to reveal His eternal plan and let us know who we really are in Him. We also learn about the end of this age when God planned on destroying this world with His fire, thus destroying the Old Covenant "veil" that blinded His men from the Truth, which is God and His perfect creation.

This prophecy will help you understand that God's creation will not be under the Old Covenant in the next age when we awaken in new flesh in the New Heaven and Earth. Jesus and all the rest of us saints understand all the prophecies that God had the prophets write because we have the hidden knowledge within our mind to understand them with.

Ezekiel 37
21: then say to them, Thus says the Lord GOD: Behold, I will take the people of Israel from the nations among which they have gone, and will gather them from all sides, and bring them to their own land;
22: and I will make them one nation in the land, upon the mountains of Israell; and one king shall be king over them all; and they shall be no longer two nations, and no longer divided into two kingdoms.
23: They shall not defile themselves any more with their idols and their detestable things, or with any of their transgressions; but I will save them from all the backslidings in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
24: "My servant David shall be king over them; and they shall all have one shepherd. They shall follow my ordinances and be careful to observe my statutes.
25: They shall dwell in the land where your fathers dwelt that I gave to my servant Jacob; they and their children and their children's children shall dwell there for ever; and David my servant shall be their prince for ever.
26: I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them; and I will bless them and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
27: My dwelling place shall be with them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
28: Then the nations will know that I the LORD sanctify Israel, when my sanctuary is in the midst of them for evermore."

The name "Israel" in the prophecies mean ALL God's people in the flesh. "Jacob" in the prophecies mean our invisible existence as God's stored thoughts called energy today. We're created as Jacob ( Heavenly Kingdom) and processed as Israel ( Earthly Kingdom ), which are only illusions that come from processed energy within the brain of each created invisible "being".

Isaiah 43
1: But now thus says the LORD, he who created you, O Jacob, he who formed you, O Israel: "Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name, you are mine.

Ezekiel 39
25: "Therefore thus says the Lord GOD: Now I will restore the fortunes of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel; and I will be jealous for my holy name.
26: They shall forget their shame, and all the treachery they have practiced against me, when they dwell securely in their land with none to make them afraid,

Ezekiel 34
30: And they shall know that I, the LORD their God, am with them, and that they, the house of Israel, are my people, says the Lord GOD.
31: And you are my sheep, the sheep of my pasture, and I am your God, says the Lord GOD."
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 4:09:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 2:54:32 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "However Francis is both right and wrong. Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits"

Anna: Oh, brother

How many scriptures do you want me to show you to demonstrate that.

We can start with Matthew 22: 37-40
37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbor as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."

Those are the "rigid limits", teh way you should worship Jehovah, and the way you should treat your fellow man.

The Apostles and Older men of Jerusalem explained that, after much prayerful deliberation as:

Acts 15:28,29
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"

But as Paul later explained we are to worry about the consciences of others who observe us rather than our own, since we are allowed a certain amount of flexibility as long as we are doing our best.

1 Corinthians 10:25-30
25 Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience; 26 for "to Jehovah belong the earth and that which fills it." 27 If anyone of the unbelievers invites YOU and YOU wish to go, proceed to eat everything that is set before YOU, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience. 28 But if anyone should say to YOU: "This is something offered in sacrifice," do not eat on account of the one that disclosed it and on account of conscience. 29 "Conscience," I say, not your own, but that of the other person. For why should it be that my freedom is judged by another person"s conscience? 30 If I am partaking with thanks, why am I to be spoken of abusively over that for which I give thanks?.

As I said freedom within limits

MCB: "If Francis had possessed a fraction of the knowledge of God and Christ I do"

Anna: Oh, brother!

Perfectly true, he could not have so happily and willingly defied one of Jesus few commands to his followers.

MCB: "his son still assists me via holy spirit."

Anna: OH BROTHER!

Don;t see why they would kick me out for saying exactly what they would say. All Jehovah's Witnesses are assisted by holy spirit depending on the level of their faith, and whether or not they are spirit anionted.


MCB: "and he knows and appreciates that."

Anna: LOL

Of course God appreciates our efforts, trust and loyalty. I now you think he is a fraud, a trickster and a liar, but actually he is very loving and loyal to those who serve him, or try thier best to.

Stuff like the above is what got you kicked out.

As always you could hardly be more wrong, All you have done is proved how little you know about how Jehovah's Witness operate or what they really believe.

Again your shot at point scoring has gone way wide of the mark.

Nope, because all of Jehovah's people work at cultivating a relationship with him, and I promise you they believe everything I do and say. Including ll of the above.

I don't imagine you will have the nerve to read this, but here it is anyway.

http://wol.jw.org...
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 4:18:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 4:09:43 PM, MadCornishBiker wrote:
At 10/22/2013 2:54:32 PM, annanicole wrote:
MCB: "However Francis is both right and wrong. Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits"

Anna: Oh, brother

How many scriptures do you want me to show you to demonstrate that.

We can start with Matthew 22: 37-40
37 He said to him: ""You must love Jehovah your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind." 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 The second, like it, is this, "You must love your neighbor as yourself." 40 On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets."

Those are the "rigid limits", teh way you should worship Jehovah, and the way you should treat your fellow man.

The Apostles and Older men of Jerusalem explained that, after much prayerful deliberation as:

Acts 15:28,29
28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper. Good health to YOU!"

But as Paul later explained we are to worry about the consciences of others who observe us rather than our own, since we are allowed a certain amount of flexibility as long as we are doing our best.

1 Corinthians 10:25-30
25 Everything that is sold in a meat market keep eating, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience; 26 for "to Jehovah belong the earth and that which fills it." 27 If anyone of the unbelievers invites YOU and YOU wish to go, proceed to eat everything that is set before YOU, making no inquiry on account of YOUR conscience. 28 But if anyone should say to YOU: "This is something offered in sacrifice," do not eat on account of the one that disclosed it and on account of conscience. 29 "Conscience," I say, not your own, but that of the other person. For why should it be that my freedom is judged by another person"s conscience? 30 If I am partaking with thanks, why am I to be spoken of abusively over that for which I give thanks?.

As I said freedom within limits

MCB: "If Francis had possessed a fraction of the knowledge of God and Christ I do"

Anna: Oh, brother!

Perfectly true, he could not have so happily and willingly defied one of Jesus few commands to his followers.

MCB: "his son still assists me via holy spirit."

Anna: OH BROTHER!

Don;t see why they would kick me out for saying exactly what they would say. All Jehovah's Witnesses are assisted by holy spirit depending on the level of their faith, and whether or not they are spirit anionted.


MCB: "and he knows and appreciates that."

Anna: LOL

Of course God appreciates our efforts, trust and loyalty. I now you think he is a fraud, a trickster and a liar, but actually he is very loving and loyal to those who serve him, or try thier best to.

Stuff like the above is what got you kicked out.

As always you could hardly be more wrong, All you have done is proved how little you know about how Jehovah's Witness operate or what they really believe.

Again your shot at point scoring has gone way wide of the mark.

Nope, because all of Jehovah's people work at cultivating a relationship with him, and I promise you they believe everything I do and say. Including ll of the above.

I don't imagine you will have the nerve to read this, but here it is anyway.

http://wol.jw.org...

Only us sinless saints are born into the New Covenant while all sinners remain under the Old Covenant "veil" until their bodies perish during this age. Whatever flesh remains on the last day of this age will be destroyed by the fire of God.

Zephaniah 1
18: Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them on the day of the wrath of the LORD. In the fire of his jealous wrath, all the earth shall be consumed; for a full, yea, sudden end he will make of all the inhabitants
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2013 5:08:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
MCB: "and he knows and appreciates that."

Anna: LOL

MCB: Of course God appreciates our efforts, trust and loyalty. I now you think he is a fraud, a trickster and a liar, but actually he is very loving and loyal to those who serve him, or try thier best to.


Anna: Fraud, trickster, and a liar? Methinks you are confusing my opinion of God with my opinion of the WatchTower. Want to see a trick?

AD 30- 33: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"

AD 62: "the Father, who ... translated us into the kingdom of the Son."

WatchTower: the kingdom hasn't come because the gospel had not been preached in "all the inhabited world" and great tribulation has not come yet. If people back in AD 30 thought the kingdom was at hand, they deceived themselves.

There's your "fraud" for you, and it's a dandy one. A major theme - not a little minor incidental - the preaching of the Christ was the imminent establishment of His kingdom. The WatchTower and all millennialists deprive Him of it in order to accommodate their fanciful theories.

MCB: "However Francis is both right and wrong. Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits"

Anna: Oh, brother

MCB: How many scriptures do you want me to show you to demonstrate that.

The Apostles and Older men of Jerusalem explained that


Anna: The "older men" did not explain anything. That's yet another needless mistranslation. It's change just for the sake of change. The passage refers exclusively to the office of elders for the simple reason that "older men" could be relatively ignorant of the gospel. "Older men" could be new converts. "Older men" could include very weak Christians. Only by employing the word "elder" in the sense of the office does the passage make sense. I realize that you are duty-bound to use a perversion. You can't possibly reject the NWT. If you came out and stated the truth about the NWT, you really would be disfellowshipped - for good.

MCB: "But as Paul later explained we are to worry about the consciences of others who observe us rather than our own, since we are allowed a certain amount of flexibility as long as we are doing our best."

Anna: It's not "as long as we are doing our best". It's "as long as we are within the confines of scriptural teaching."

MCB: "As I said freedom within limits"

Anna: The humor was in the statement, "Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits" coupled with the fact that these "rigid limits" are often based upon the whims of men, especially in the WatchTower organization.

MCB: "If Francis had possessed a fraction of the knowledge of God and Christ I do"

Anna: Oh, brother!

MCB: Perfectly true, he could not have so happily and willingly defied one of Jesus few commands to his followers.


Jesus's few commands? We have plenty of commands, either directly or later via the Spirit through the apostles and others. Jesus never claimed to lead His followers into the complete truth, or "all truth" as the scriptures put it. Jesus merely started them on the way: He knew the truth, He IS the truth, and He taught the truth - but He did not claim to teach them all the truth at all. In fact, He told them that He didn't.

MCB: "his son still assists me via holy spirit."

Anna: OH BROTHER!

MCB: Don;t see why they would kick me out for saying exactly what they would say. All Jehovah's Witnesses are assisted by holy spirit depending on the level of their faith, and whether or not they are spirit anionted.


Oh, that's right. They all make the same ridiculous claim, don't they? By the way, how many Witnesses are able to remember all the words that Jesus said to His followers? Somewhere close to zero? So we know the number of "Spirit- baptized" Witnesses: zero. As far as the Holy Spirit, He assists you through the word, through the scriptures, but in no other way.

MCB: "All you have done is proved how little you know about how Jehovah's Witness operate or what they really believe."

Listen, ANY religious group who thinks that Satan somehow miraculous clouds people's minds (which you never once demonstrated from the scriptures), then thinks that the Holy Spirit knocks along and miraculously undoes the miraculous "veiling" by Satan - just so men can understand things that the scriptures plainly say - is off the deep end anyhow.

Here's an example of this fake "holy spirit" guidance that you claim:

Matt 24: 14, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the oikoumene for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come."

Alright. You have based an entire rigmarole - a lengthy, circular collection of nonsense - on the arbitrary translation "inhabited earth". But what if the word does not mean that in verse 14. After all, often it does not carry that meaning. What if the word means exactly what it meant in other passages, and also what it means in other Greek literature at the time: land, i.e. the (terrene part of the) globe; specially, the Roman empire. All the subjects of the empire."

You know the word was used in that manner, and that such a usage is frequent. I can cite many instances of such a use both in the Bible and out of it. See Rom 10: 18,

"But I say, Did they not hear? Yea, verily, Their sound went out into all the earth, And their words unto the ends of the oikoumene."

Same difference. Paul used the same word that Jesus did. What you are doing is arbitrarily assigning one meaning to the word when Jesus said it, then a different meaning when Paul said it. What did Paul mean? Well, he used the word in a limited sense, obviously. Unless one has substantial proof to the contrary, why not say that Jesus intended the same meaning? Huh?

You scream, "You are limiting God." Oh, that's BS. My belief in no way limits God. I never said that the gospel would not be preached to all the inhabited earth, from the North Pole to the South pole, east and west. I AM saying that such is not .. and never was ... the intended meaning in Matt 24: 14.

You certainly have not had much "holy spirit guidance" when it comes to Matt 24 and Luke 21. You make a glorious mess out of it.
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
10/23/2013 12:53:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Going to have to split this again

At 10/22/2013 5:08:57 PM, annanicole wrote:


Anna: Fraud, trickster, and a liar? Methinks you are confusing my opinion of God with my opinion of the WatchTower. Want to see a trick?

Oh you have shown me many a trick in the way you make God's meanings disappear and replace them with your own.

In effect it is the same, since they a re God's representatives on earth, and if you criticise one you are criticising the other since they were chosen by Christ.

However, that's not the point of what I am making.

You claim that all the promises he made for the future are simply figurative teases which make people hope for what is never going to happen.

That is the classical description of a confidence trickster.

He promises an end to all human Government - you say that will never happen.

He promises eternal life in perfection on a paradise earth - you say that will never happen.

He promises perfect health for all humans - you say that will never happen.

He claims to be a loving God - you believe he torments sinners in hell, and use Luke 16 to back that up, the absolute antithesis of a loving creator.

Do you want me to give any more of your false and slanderous accusations of God and Christ?

You claim to believe the Trinity teaching, but don't really believe it since you have already admitted to me that you accept that Christ is in subjection to his father, whereas the Trinity teaching says they are co-eternal, and without that plank the whole structure of the Trinity falls down,

You claim, or have claimed to me in the past that you have, and need, no mentor and belong to no church and yet you later talk about "our prayer book"., which belies what you said earlier.

What do the above two say about your honesty and reliability?

This is as sensible a place as any to split this
MadCornishBiker
Posts: 23,302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/23/2013 1:22:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 10/22/2013 5:08:57 PM, annanicole wrote:

AD 30- 33: "Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand"

It was because the king designate himself was there, "at hand" where the king is, there the kingdom is also.

AD 62: "the Father, who ... translated us into the kingdom of the Son."


Yes because they accepted the rule of that Kingdom even though most of it's kings were still alive and on the earth.

WatchTower: the kingdom hasn't come because the gospel had not been preached in "all the inhabited world" and great tribulation has not come yet. If people back in AD 30 thought the kingdom was at hand, they deceived themselves.

So, what's unusual abut that you deceive yourself all the time, and we all can if we aren't careful. It simply wasn't God's time for them to know different.


There's your "fraud" for you, and it's a dandy one. A major theme - not a little minor incidental - the preaching of the Christ was the imminent establishment of His kingdom. The WatchTower and all millennialists deprive Him of it in order to accommodate their fanciful theories.

You are the only one who gas deprived him of anything by your claims that the Kingdom will not bring what it is promised to bring. Far more serious than accepting that for centuries men have deluded themselves into believing the sort of things you do.

By your claims you deprive God and Christ of any honour at all.



Anna: The "older men" did not explain anything. That's yet another needless mistranslation. It's change just for the sake of change. The passage refers exclusively to the office of elders for the simple reason that "older men" could be relatively ignorant of the gospel. "Older men" could be new converts. "Older men" could include very weak Christians. Only by employing the word "elder" in the sense of the office does the passage make sense. I realize that you are duty-bound to use a perversion. You can't possibly reject the NWT. If you came out and stated the truth about the NWT, you really would be disfellowshipped - for good.

Being "Older men had nothing to do with age. Older men were spiritually "older" more mature, and experienced.

The Apostles went to them for the explanation and clarification because that was what they were there for.

By saying what you do you again deny scripture and call God a liar, just as Satan did in the Garden of Eden.

Anna: It's not "as long as we are doing our best". It's "as long as we are within the confines of scriptural teaching."

And yet Paul was saying that it was OK, in fact a good thing, to risk stepping outside them by eating meat which may well have been sacrifice to idols and not asking about it? In what way does your statement make sense? Everything is much more about effort than success, if it were not none would survive.


Anna: The humor was in the statement, "Christian ideals are flexible, but only within certain rigid limits" coupled with the fact that these "rigid limits" are often based upon the whims of men, especially in the WatchTower organization.

The rigid limits are defined by scripture, though it is true that some interpretation is required when dealing with things and situation that did not exist back then. Is there anything wrong with making an honest effort not to offend God and Christ? Even if that earnest effort may go a step or two farther than it needs? Better to err on the safe side than on the dangerous side, if on has to err at all which is sometimes inevitable.




Jesus's few commands? We have plenty of commands, either directly or later via the Spirit through the apostles and others. Jesus never claimed to lead His followers into the complete truth, or "all truth" as the scriptures put it. Jesus merely started them on the way: He knew the truth, He IS the truth, and He taught the truth - but He did not claim to teach them all the truth at all. In fact, He told them that He didn't.

I have never said that Christ claimed to teach them all the truth. However from Christ we only have two commands, both taken from the Mosaic Law. Everything else is just instructions on how to fulfil them.

However it really is a truism that a hint from God or Christ should be treated with the respect that one would give to a command.


Oh, that's right. They all make the same ridiculous claim, don't they? By the way, how many Witnesses are able to remember all the words that Jesus said to His followers? Somewhere close to zero? So we know the number of "Spirit- baptized" Witnesses: zero. As far as the Holy Spirit, He assists you through the word, through the scriptures, but in no other way.

They all make the same claim, though it is far from ridiculous because it is simply acknowledging that Christ keeps his promise to do just that. Something else you make him out to be a liar in.


Listen, ANY religious group who thinks that Satan somehow miraculous clouds people's minds (which you never once demonstrated from the scriptures), then thinks that the Holy Spirit knocks along and miraculously undoes the miraculous "veiling" by Satan - just so men can understand things that the scriptures plainly say - is off the deep end anyhow.

But far from out of their depths, unlike you who paddles in the shallow end of God's word and does not immerse yourself in it.

After all Christ spoke of demon possession and even cast out demons. Was he lying about that too?

If demons could do it them, they can do it now, even more so since being cast down to the vicinity of the earth.


Here's an example of this fake "holy spirit" guidance that you claim:

Matt 24: 14, "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the oikoumene for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come."

Alright. You have based an entire rigmarole - a lengthy, circular collection of nonsense - on the arbitrary translation "inhabited earth". But what if the word does not mean that in verse 14. After all, often it does not carry that meaning. What if the word means exactly what it meant in other passages, and also what it means in other Greek literature at the time: land, i.e. the (terrene part of the) globe; specially, the Roman empire. All the subjects of the empire."


Nothing fake about that. Of course it means the terrine part of the Globe. How many people live off that part? very few, and even they live on Rivers and in harbours.

Again you change what Christ meant to suit yourself. Again you limit God and Christ to some little local difficulty. If Christ such a liar that he would mean on the local area when he knew precisely where humans lived? Even if he ah only said the "inhabited earth" it still means the same, areas they knew not what of at the time. But he said "!

Of course your belief limits God. He speaks and promises Global, you say he can only manage local, If that isn't limiting God I know not what it. Not only that but you are once again calling God a liar in that he set a tantalising promise before us that he had no intention of fulfilling. Or are you simply implying that he isn't capable? or doesn't care enough?

Either way you insult him and slander him publicly.