I think the problem is that you are afraid to engage anyone who stands to offer a serious challenge to the things you believe. You are afraid of a examination of scripture because there is no way to defend your theology. I guess all I can do is leave you to you ignorance. I shall say no more about it.
Jehova's Witness Beliefs?
- Thread starter oyster67
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Oh. Ähem. Sorry. It looks like I may have the wrong end of the stick. Your comments looked very like the sort JWs make when arguing that Jesus died on a stake rather than on a cross. Their own bible translation defeats that argument. They also say that the cross is pagan (and this led to my misunderstanding). Moving right along though. As you were!
What I find interesting is Jesus. He could make the argument plain and simple, a question of his authority, to dominate and command his people. He did not. He could have told his deciples to take down every word he spoke and write it as the perfect source of authority. He did not. He could have had the gospels as a forensic analysis of every action and deed. He did not. Ever wondered why? Because the problem is us, our hearts, our attitudes, our failure to grasp the simple realities of love, need and pain. Jesus can be everything, but unless we change, understand, go through the steps one by one, we will never have fellowship with him. We are like a ship adrift in an ocean, a storm all around and a rope is flung from a passing ship and a voice says, "Grab hold and I will pull you over". The issue is will we grab hold, and why we grab hold.
Oh well forgive me then oldhermit, i thought what was hidden from the wise and prudent shall be revealed to the babe and suckling?, i thought the Bible was supposed to be easy understood, going by your take on things, one has to be a scholar or academic, how is the layman like me supposed to understand?, we have no chance, also, why should we tow the line or tread behind the academic?.
How about those in authority explain the Bible for the layman?
Defend my theology?, what on earth?, i'm a bad man from the badlands who is trying to correct his ways, what chance does i the layman have?, really. I'm iclined to say stick it, why should i believe you?, on who's authority do you have that you know the absolute truth of what scripture is really saying to the reader?.
How about those in authority explain the Bible for the layman?
Defend my theology?, what on earth?, i'm a bad man from the badlands who is trying to correct his ways, what chance does i the layman have?, really. I'm iclined to say stick it, why should i believe you?, on who's authority do you have that you know the absolute truth of what scripture is really saying to the reader?.
Last edited:
Because in the day, that practice of death on the cross was the most disgraceful of punishments, saved for thieves and murderers and all that Jazz
...like the thief on the Cross.
They were trying to disgrace Jesus as much as "humanly" possible.
The English term cross derives from the Latin word crux. The Latin term crux literally means "in general, a tree, frame, or other wooden instruments of execution, on which criminals were impaled or hanged" and "in particular, a cross"
The English term crucifix derives from the Latin crucifixus or cruci fixus, past participle passive of crucifigere or cruci figere, meaning "to crucify" or "to fasten to a cross.
Crucifixion was often performed to terrorize and dissuade its witnesses from perpetrating particularly heinous crimes. Victims were left on display after death as warnings to others who might attempt dissent. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful, gruesome, humiliating and public.
(hence the term excruciating, literally "out of crucifying")
...like the thief on the Cross.
They were trying to disgrace Jesus as much as "humanly" possible.
The English term cross derives from the Latin word crux. The Latin term crux literally means "in general, a tree, frame, or other wooden instruments of execution, on which criminals were impaled or hanged" and "in particular, a cross"
The English term crucifix derives from the Latin crucifixus or cruci fixus, past participle passive of crucifigere or cruci figere, meaning "to crucify" or "to fasten to a cross.
Crucifixion was often performed to terrorize and dissuade its witnesses from perpetrating particularly heinous crimes. Victims were left on display after death as warnings to others who might attempt dissent. Crucifixion was usually intended to provide a death that was particularly slow, painful, gruesome, humiliating and public.
(hence the term excruciating, literally "out of crucifying")
Last edited:
According to some, the Christian use of the cross did not begin until the time of Constantine, three centuries after Christ. Archaeologists have not found any Christian use of the symbol before that time.
The New Testament does not specifically describe the instrument upon which Christ died, The Greek word xulon, translated "tree" can mean a stick, club, tree, stake, or other wooden articles.
There is absolutely no evidence that God's true church ever used the cross symbol for any purpose. Nowhere does the Bible command its use. It surely would if God expected this of Christians.
Satan could have scripture manipulated quite easily.
The New Testament does not specifically describe the instrument upon which Christ died, The Greek word xulon, translated "tree" can mean a stick, club, tree, stake, or other wooden articles.
There is absolutely no evidence that God's true church ever used the cross symbol for any purpose. Nowhere does the Bible command its use. It surely would if God expected this of Christians.
Satan could have scripture manipulated quite easily.
S
Isaiah 42:8
"I am the LORD, that is My name; Iwill not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images.
Jeremiah 16:21
"Therefore behold, I am going to makethem know-- This time I will make them know My power and My might; And theyshall know that My name is the LORD."
Ezekiel 25:17
"I will execute great vengeance onthem with wrathful rebukes; and they will know that I am the LORD when I lay Myvengeance on them."
"I am the LORD, that is My name; Iwill not give My glory to another, Nor My praise to graven images.
Jeremiah 16:21
"Therefore behold, I am going to makethem know-- This time I will make them know My power and My might; And theyshall know that My name is the LORD."
Ezekiel 25:17
"I will execute great vengeance onthem with wrathful rebukes; and they will know that I am the LORD when I lay Myvengeance on them."
Or was it a tree? or pole?, seems the common punishment might have been as written in scripture, in those days,
[h=1]Deuteronomy 21:22-23 MEV[/h]If a man has committed a sin worthy of death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, [SUP]23 [/SUP]then his body must not remain all night on the tree, but you must bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) so that your land may not be defiled, which the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.
NIV version
If someone guilty of a capital offence is put to death and their body is exposed on a pole, [SUP]23 [/SUP]you must not leave the body hanging on the pole overnight. Be sure to bury it that same day, because anyone who is hung on a pole is under God’s curse. You must not desecrate the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
NKJV
“If a man has committed a sin deserving of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, [SUP]23 [/SUP]his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance; for he who is hanged is accursed of God.
That's just a few Bible versions, there are more that say the same thing
[h=1]Deuteronomy 21:22-23 MEV[/h]If a man has committed a sin worthy of death and is executed, and you hang him on a tree, [SUP]23 [/SUP]then his body must not remain all night on the tree, but you must bury him that day (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) so that your land may not be defiled, which the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance.
NIV version
If someone guilty of a capital offence is put to death and their body is exposed on a pole, [SUP]23 [/SUP]you must not leave the body hanging on the pole overnight. Be sure to bury it that same day, because anyone who is hung on a pole is under God’s curse. You must not desecrate the land the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance.
NKJV
“If a man has committed a sin deserving of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, [SUP]23 [/SUP]his body shall not remain overnight on the tree, but you shall surely bury him that day, so that you do not defile the land which the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance; for he who is hanged is accursed of God.
That's just a few Bible versions, there are more that say the same thing
R
Luke 9:23 If anyone wishes to come after Me, he must deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow Me.
Jesus said "cross". He never said tree or stake or pole.
He said cross and He meant cross for a reason. Because He was talking about the crucifixion cross.
It would be silly if He said, you must take up your tree and follow Me. Or you must take up your pole and follow Me.
Jesus said "cross". He never said tree or stake or pole.
He said cross and He meant cross for a reason. Because He was talking about the crucifixion cross.
It would be silly if He said, you must take up your tree and follow Me. Or you must take up your pole and follow Me.
Last edited:
-
Proprietary lingo creates a very serious language barrier. For example; when
a normal person hears the word "resurrection" they think of Christ's crucified
body returning to life. Not so in Watch Tower lingo. In its "speak"
resurrection indicates not Christ returning to life; but Michael the arch angel
returning to life.
As another example: when normal people hear the words "Jesus Christ" they
think of a man; but not so in Watch Tower lingo. In its "speak" Jesus Christi
ndicates not a man; but an angel.
The problem is: the Watch Tower Society uses all the Christian terminology
in common use; but it has redefined the meanings of those terminologies.
Walter Martin, author of Kingdom Of The Cults, was asked on numerous
occasions "Why is it that when I am talking with a cultist he seems to be in
full agreement with what I am saying; but when we are finished talking, I
am aware of a definite lack of communication, almost as though we were not
talking the same language?"
Well the answer to that is: they were both speaking in English; but their
respective definitions of the words were not always the same; ergo: they
were saying the same things; but their minds were not hearing the same
things.
=====================================
Proprietary lingo creates a very serious language barrier. For example; when
a normal person hears the word "resurrection" they think of Christ's crucified
body returning to life. Not so in Watch Tower lingo. In its "speak"
resurrection indicates not Christ returning to life; but Michael the arch angel
returning to life.
As another example: when normal people hear the words "Jesus Christ" they
think of a man; but not so in Watch Tower lingo. In its "speak" Jesus Christi
ndicates not a man; but an angel.
The problem is: the Watch Tower Society uses all the Christian terminology
in common use; but it has redefined the meanings of those terminologies.
Walter Martin, author of Kingdom Of The Cults, was asked on numerous
occasions "Why is it that when I am talking with a cultist he seems to be in
full agreement with what I am saying; but when we are finished talking, I
am aware of a definite lack of communication, almost as though we were not
talking the same language?"
Well the answer to that is: they were both speaking in English; but their
respective definitions of the words were not always the same; ergo: they
were saying the same things; but their minds were not hearing the same
things.
=====================================
Last edited:
great post!
yes, God and Lord are titles... that's one of the beefs the jw's have with using them... they say God has a personal name... but, the nt writers used 'Lord', so most people follow that example.
wondering what the name of God is? join the crowd... ancient hebrew was written without vowels, so we have 'yhwh'... 'yahweh' is the usual guess, but it's only a guess...
'jehovah' is a mix-up between the yhwh and the vowels of 'adonai', the hebrew for 'lord'...
if God doesn't tell us what his name is, my guess is he doesn't want us to know... the nt writers use 'lord'... I think that's the way to go...
yes, God and Lord are titles... that's one of the beefs the jw's have with using them... they say God has a personal name... but, the nt writers used 'Lord', so most people follow that example.
wondering what the name of God is? join the crowd... ancient hebrew was written without vowels, so we have 'yhwh'... 'yahweh' is the usual guess, but it's only a guess...
'jehovah' is a mix-up between the yhwh and the vowels of 'adonai', the hebrew for 'lord'...
if God doesn't tell us what his name is, my guess is he doesn't want us to know... the nt writers use 'lord'... I think that's the way to go...
good question, and the lord's prayer is one of the favorite examples used by the jw's.
but it doesn't solve the issue, that we don't know what God's name is...
the best explanation I've heard is that 'name' in hebrew thinking is often what we would call 'reputation' or 'cred'...
check out what people say at the tower of babel... 'let’s make a name for ourselves'... doesn't mean they're going to call themselves 'fred'... what they want is to become legendary...
but it doesn't solve the issue, that we don't know what God's name is...
the best explanation I've heard is that 'name' in hebrew thinking is often what we would call 'reputation' or 'cred'...
check out what people say at the tower of babel... 'let’s make a name for ourselves'... doesn't mean they're going to call themselves 'fred'... what they want is to become legendary...
There is no issue God's personal name appears almost 7000 times in hebrew scriptures. The issue is ignorance from false religious teachers and all who follow false religion. Remember God , Lord are not personal names, so how can anyone learn to have a personal relationship with God if they don't even know His name?, He, God, made His name known, there is no excuse.
Farewell all.
Farewell all.
well, we disagree there... I think it's a very big issue...
yes, God's name appears almost 7000 times in hebrew scriptures. but that's not the whole story... it occurs 0 times in the christian greek scriptures.
think about that for a minute... what should we make of it?
yes, God and Lord are titles... if God wants us to pronounce his personal name, he has to tell us how to do it...
has he made his name known (the pronunciation)?
yes, God's name appears almost 7000 times in hebrew scriptures. but that's not the whole story... it occurs 0 times in the christian greek scriptures.
think about that for a minute... what should we make of it?
yes, God and Lord are titles... if God wants us to pronounce his personal name, he has to tell us how to do it...
has he made his name known (the pronunciation)?
Actually, there is an excuse. YHWH has no known pronunciation. You calling YHWH "Jehovah" could be like me calling Jesus "Ron".
It would be much better to call God my King and Master (LORD), then call Him what could be a completely false name.
Also, I'd just like to point out that the Holy Name of YHWH is differentiated in any Christian Bible from the title "Lord".
Anytime you read "LORD" (all capitals), it is where YHWH was written in the original scriptures. Anytime you read "Lord", it is referring to a title.
And how can you have a personal relationship with Him? EASY. You don't need to address someone by their name every 5 seconds to have a conversation with them.
If I never knew my wife's name I believe our relationship would still be pretty fantastic. Do you disagree?
It would be much better to call God my King and Master (LORD), then call Him what could be a completely false name.
Also, I'd just like to point out that the Holy Name of YHWH is differentiated in any Christian Bible from the title "Lord".
Anytime you read "LORD" (all capitals), it is where YHWH was written in the original scriptures. Anytime you read "Lord", it is referring to a title.
And how can you have a personal relationship with Him? EASY. You don't need to address someone by their name every 5 seconds to have a conversation with them.
If I never knew my wife's name I believe our relationship would still be pretty fantastic. Do you disagree?
Last edited: