Fellow Christians, I have questions
kxmode
Supporting Member
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,613
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)
07 Oct 2010, 3:04 am
AngelRho wrote:
kxmode: I suspect you may be misled on the subject of hell.
Hell, as you described, is correctly rendered "Gehenna," or in the Aramaic as the Valley of Hinnom. It is believed to be the former location of human sacrifice in ancient times and was certainly recognized by those living during the ministry of Jesus as a burning trash heap. Jesus made many references to it as a picture of what would happen to those who chose an eternity apart from Yahweh. Incidentally, "Jehovah" does not appear in any ancient Bible manuscript. This is an incorrect rendering of YHWH that has simply come into common usage and was never a part of either the Old Testament or the New Testament when they were written.
Hell, as you described, is correctly rendered "Gehenna," or in the Aramaic as the Valley of Hinnom. It is believed to be the former location of human sacrifice in ancient times and was certainly recognized by those living during the ministry of Jesus as a burning trash heap. Jesus made many references to it as a picture of what would happen to those who chose an eternity apart from Yahweh. Incidentally, "Jehovah" does not appear in any ancient Bible manuscript. This is an incorrect rendering of YHWH that has simply come into common usage and was never a part of either the Old Testament or the New Testament when they were written.
Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyah′, Isaiah would become Yesha‛·ya′hu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shu′a‛ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sous′ (as in Greek). No one has any problems with Jeremiah, Isaiah and Jesus. The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes. People could go with Yahwah but the name Jehovah has been around for thousand of years and is more common than Yahwah.
AngelRho wrote:
Back to the point: Jesus used Gehenna as a picture of a spiritual sort of trash heap reserved for those who rejected Him. It is very much a real place and has been described, as you aptly put it, as "the Pit," "the Grave," "Hades," "Sheol," and so on. Hades and Sheol are pretty much synonymous, at least as far as I've understood them, but are broad terms for the afterlife or the eternal resting of the soul. Hades and Sheol do not necessarily denote a place of torment or eternal decay. Gehenna, however, is more specific and more descriptive. It does not paint a pretty picture for those who have condemned themselves through their rejection of the Son. Jesus' intent in discussing hell was to emphasize that it was very much a reality, a real place. Saying that there is no such place as hell is misleading. I would advise an examination of properly translated scripture in order to clear up this matter.
The only reason "hell" is improper is because this is a generic label that is used in improperly translated Bibles. Calling Hades, Sheol and Gehenna "hell" "hell" "hell" changes the meaning, especially when you take into account the richness of original Greek and Hebrew words. To put it another way "love" in Greek and Hebrew has many different meanings. Agape love, for example, means to be deeply affectionate towards one another and is not the same as romantic love. You can reason that by changing strong meaning words like Hades, Sheol and Gehenna into generic "hell" this would not only dilute the meaning but it can alter the message. And no, this is not the same as comparing God's personal name between Yahwah and Jehovah.
But we can agree to disagree I think.
_________________
A Proud Witness of Jehovah God (JW.org)
Revelation 21:4 "And [God] will wipe out every tear from their eyes,
and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.
The former things have passed away."
kxmode
Supporting Member
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,613
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)
07 Oct 2010, 3:23 am
AngelRho wrote:
If something is contradictory, then it is untrue. And if something you have learned is untrue, then you have learned it in error. Why don't you like discussing this information? People naturally tend to feel uncomfortable when they are shown that something is false. It's normal to feel that way. However, it is also normal to feel a sense of relief when the truth is revealed and you are finally able to accept it. Several things you have mentioned are questionable. QUESTION THEM.
....
What evidence do we have of this apostasy? Why are writings that became what we call the Bible consistent with ancient manuscripts? See, if there was an apostasy, the Bible would have read much differently today than it does. But as it is, MOST Bible translations are consistent with ancient manuscripts--even the same manuscripts from whence you get the NWT.
I'm not saying that there has never been ANY kind of apostasy. No doubt heretical viewpoints have prevailed in one place or another, and no doubt those heresies continue to rear their ugly heads today. But the only possible vestige of a lasting apostasy or heretical understanding of Christ and Christ's teaching would be strictly the text of the Bible itself. But it appears the Bible has been untouched by any apostasy. If not, then the apostasy began with the life and teaching of Jesus, which we know because the New Testament was compiled quickly very soon after the events happened. But since JWs Bible is translated from those very same manuscripts, it would appear that Watchtower is very accepting of the same apostasy. And if the Bible is cherry-picked and "edited" to be consistent with theology, then perhaps it is not most Bible translations that err, but rather only one in particular used for a specific purpose.
....
There is no evidence to support this. Where is Jesus' throne? I'd love nothing more than to meet Him face to face and worship Him. Why would the Savior I love deny me this?
Quite simply, there IS no invisible Christ on earth! Jesus Himself taught that just as the lightening can be seen from the east to the west, so it will be when He returns. There is no secret. There is no invisible Savior. Jesus wants to be seen and known. When Jesus returns, it will be impossible for anyone, even unbelievers, to deny.
Likewise, as good neighbors and out of love for Christ, we seek to show those among us who are in error how to live in harmony with faith in Jesus. I will be more than happy to discuss these things with you further!
....
What evidence do we have of this apostasy? Why are writings that became what we call the Bible consistent with ancient manuscripts? See, if there was an apostasy, the Bible would have read much differently today than it does. But as it is, MOST Bible translations are consistent with ancient manuscripts--even the same manuscripts from whence you get the NWT.
I'm not saying that there has never been ANY kind of apostasy. No doubt heretical viewpoints have prevailed in one place or another, and no doubt those heresies continue to rear their ugly heads today. But the only possible vestige of a lasting apostasy or heretical understanding of Christ and Christ's teaching would be strictly the text of the Bible itself. But it appears the Bible has been untouched by any apostasy. If not, then the apostasy began with the life and teaching of Jesus, which we know because the New Testament was compiled quickly very soon after the events happened. But since JWs Bible is translated from those very same manuscripts, it would appear that Watchtower is very accepting of the same apostasy. And if the Bible is cherry-picked and "edited" to be consistent with theology, then perhaps it is not most Bible translations that err, but rather only one in particular used for a specific purpose.
....
There is no evidence to support this. Where is Jesus' throne? I'd love nothing more than to meet Him face to face and worship Him. Why would the Savior I love deny me this?
Quite simply, there IS no invisible Christ on earth! Jesus Himself taught that just as the lightening can be seen from the east to the west, so it will be when He returns. There is no secret. There is no invisible Savior. Jesus wants to be seen and known. When Jesus returns, it will be impossible for anyone, even unbelievers, to deny.
Likewise, as good neighbors and out of love for Christ, we seek to show those among us who are in error how to live in harmony with faith in Jesus. I will be more than happy to discuss these things with you further!
Instead of starting off on the easier 25 pound weights, we jumped into the 350 pound weights and exactly what I thought would happen has happened. This is why I'm going to stop because you're all over the map. This happens every time I talk to some one about this. It's not your fault. It's clearly my fault. I made a mistake and I apologize. It's clear to me what you seek is head knowledge or wish to endless debate. Neither of which I wish to engage in. 2 Timothy 2:23-26 urges "Further, turn down foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing they produce fights. But a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all, qualified to teach, keeping himself restrained under evil, instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed; as perhaps God may give them repentance leading to an accurate knowledge of truth, and they may come back to their proper senses out from the snare of the Devil, seeing that they have been caught alive by him for the will of that one."
_________________
A Proud Witness of Jehovah God (JW.org)
Revelation 21:4 "And [God] will wipe out every tear from their eyes,
and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.
The former things have passed away."
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
07 Oct 2010, 8:45 am
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
If something is contradictory, then it is untrue. And if something you have learned is untrue, then you have learned it in error. Why don't you like discussing this information? People naturally tend to feel uncomfortable when they are shown that something is false. It's normal to feel that way. However, it is also normal to feel a sense of relief when the truth is revealed and you are finally able to accept it. Several things you have mentioned are questionable. QUESTION THEM.
....
What evidence do we have of this apostasy? Why are writings that became what we call the Bible consistent with ancient manuscripts? See, if there was an apostasy, the Bible would have read much differently today than it does. But as it is, MOST Bible translations are consistent with ancient manuscripts--even the same manuscripts from whence you get the NWT.
I'm not saying that there has never been ANY kind of apostasy. No doubt heretical viewpoints have prevailed in one place or another, and no doubt those heresies continue to rear their ugly heads today. But the only possible vestige of a lasting apostasy or heretical understanding of Christ and Christ's teaching would be strictly the text of the Bible itself. But it appears the Bible has been untouched by any apostasy. If not, then the apostasy began with the life and teaching of Jesus, which we know because the New Testament was compiled quickly very soon after the events happened. But since JWs Bible is translated from those very same manuscripts, it would appear that Watchtower is very accepting of the same apostasy. And if the Bible is cherry-picked and "edited" to be consistent with theology, then perhaps it is not most Bible translations that err, but rather only one in particular used for a specific purpose.
....
There is no evidence to support this. Where is Jesus' throne? I'd love nothing more than to meet Him face to face and worship Him. Why would the Savior I love deny me this?
Quite simply, there IS no invisible Christ on earth! Jesus Himself taught that just as the lightening can be seen from the east to the west, so it will be when He returns. There is no secret. There is no invisible Savior. Jesus wants to be seen and known. When Jesus returns, it will be impossible for anyone, even unbelievers, to deny.
Likewise, as good neighbors and out of love for Christ, we seek to show those among us who are in error how to live in harmony with faith in Jesus. I will be more than happy to discuss these things with you further!
....
What evidence do we have of this apostasy? Why are writings that became what we call the Bible consistent with ancient manuscripts? See, if there was an apostasy, the Bible would have read much differently today than it does. But as it is, MOST Bible translations are consistent with ancient manuscripts--even the same manuscripts from whence you get the NWT.
I'm not saying that there has never been ANY kind of apostasy. No doubt heretical viewpoints have prevailed in one place or another, and no doubt those heresies continue to rear their ugly heads today. But the only possible vestige of a lasting apostasy or heretical understanding of Christ and Christ's teaching would be strictly the text of the Bible itself. But it appears the Bible has been untouched by any apostasy. If not, then the apostasy began with the life and teaching of Jesus, which we know because the New Testament was compiled quickly very soon after the events happened. But since JWs Bible is translated from those very same manuscripts, it would appear that Watchtower is very accepting of the same apostasy. And if the Bible is cherry-picked and "edited" to be consistent with theology, then perhaps it is not most Bible translations that err, but rather only one in particular used for a specific purpose.
....
There is no evidence to support this. Where is Jesus' throne? I'd love nothing more than to meet Him face to face and worship Him. Why would the Savior I love deny me this?
Quite simply, there IS no invisible Christ on earth! Jesus Himself taught that just as the lightening can be seen from the east to the west, so it will be when He returns. There is no secret. There is no invisible Savior. Jesus wants to be seen and known. When Jesus returns, it will be impossible for anyone, even unbelievers, to deny.
Likewise, as good neighbors and out of love for Christ, we seek to show those among us who are in error how to live in harmony with faith in Jesus. I will be more than happy to discuss these things with you further!
Instead of starting off on the easier 25 pound weights, we jumped into the 350 pound weights and exactly what I thought would happen has happened. This is why I'm going to stop because you're all over the map. This happens every time I talk to some one about this. It's not your fault. It's clearly my fault. I made a mistake and I apologize. It's clear to me what you seek is head knowledge or wish to endless debate. Neither of which I wish to engage in. 2 Timothy 2:23-26 urges "Further, turn down foolish and ignorant questionings, knowing they produce fights. But a slave of the Lord does not need to fight, but needs to be gentle toward all, qualified to teach, keeping himself restrained under evil, instructing with mildness those not favorably disposed; as perhaps God may give them repentance leading to an accurate knowledge of truth, and they may come back to their proper senses out from the snare of the Devil, seeing that they have been caught alive by him for the will of that one."
This is not about starting any kind of fight. I'm perfectly comfortable with 350 pound weights and feel the need to add another 25 or 50.
Why am *I* the one all over the map? Are you really not prepared to defend what you believe? Or rather is it you are uncomfortable facing challenges because deep in your soul, something is telling you that something you believe is fundamentally flawed?
You say "turn down foolish and ignorant questionings" according to the Bible. You and I both get "foolish and ignorant questionings" from unbelievers. But suppose a fellow believer points out your own "foolish and ignorant questionings"? Are you really going to be that quick to withdraw when someone points our errors in your thinking? What do you have to fear from questioning your beliefs? Are you afraid that one or more alternatives might actually be true?
Consider the Beroeans. When Paul sent a message to them or preached to them, they immediately went to holy scripture and carefully examined it to determine whether what they were taught was the truth. Tell me, why would anyone discourage you from doing the same thing? Seriously, I think we are both constantly seeking the truth, and I have no problems weighing the truth of what someone says about my faith against what is written in scripture. You should do the same. Remember, Proverbs 27:17--Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. Is that not what we do here in the PPR forum? If God and I can put atheists and agnostics to work to sharpen me, why can't you allow the same from one of your Christian brothers?
kxmode
Supporting Member
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,613
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)
07 Oct 2010, 9:33 am
AngelRho wrote:
This is not about starting any kind of fight. I'm perfectly comfortable with 350 pound weights and feel the need to add another 25 or 50.
Why am *I* the one all over the map? Are you really not prepared to defend what you believe? Or rather is it you are uncomfortable facing challenges because deep in your soul, something is telling you that something you believe is fundamentally flawed?
You say "turn down foolish and ignorant questionings" according to the Bible. You and I both get "foolish and ignorant questionings" from unbelievers. But suppose a fellow believer points out your own "foolish and ignorant questionings"? Are you really going to be that quick to withdraw when someone points our errors in your thinking? What do you have to fear from questioning your beliefs? Are you afraid that one or more alternatives might actually be true?
Consider the Beroeans. When Paul sent a message to them or preached to them, they immediately went to holy scripture and carefully examined it to determine whether what they were taught was the truth. Tell me, why would anyone discourage you from doing the same thing? Seriously, I think we are both constantly seeking the truth, and I have no problems weighing the truth of what someone says about my faith against what is written in scripture. You should do the same. Remember, Proverbs 27:17--Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. Is that not what we do here in the PPR forum? If God and I can put atheists and agnostics to work to sharpen me, why can't you allow the same from one of your Christian brothers?
Why am *I* the one all over the map? Are you really not prepared to defend what you believe? Or rather is it you are uncomfortable facing challenges because deep in your soul, something is telling you that something you believe is fundamentally flawed?
You say "turn down foolish and ignorant questionings" according to the Bible. You and I both get "foolish and ignorant questionings" from unbelievers. But suppose a fellow believer points out your own "foolish and ignorant questionings"? Are you really going to be that quick to withdraw when someone points our errors in your thinking? What do you have to fear from questioning your beliefs? Are you afraid that one or more alternatives might actually be true?
Consider the Beroeans. When Paul sent a message to them or preached to them, they immediately went to holy scripture and carefully examined it to determine whether what they were taught was the truth. Tell me, why would anyone discourage you from doing the same thing? Seriously, I think we are both constantly seeking the truth, and I have no problems weighing the truth of what someone says about my faith against what is written in scripture. You should do the same. Remember, Proverbs 27:17--Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. Is that not what we do here in the PPR forum? If God and I can put atheists and agnostics to work to sharpen me, why can't you allow the same from one of your Christian brothers?
If one is to believe the Bible is God's personal word than one needs to believe that what the Bible says on various subjects is, in fact, truth. To date you have not offered or quoted a single scripture to back up anything you say. I, on the other hand, have filled up my comments with many scriptures likely to the point of overwhelming anyone interested in looking them all up. In fact all you've done is bombarded me with questions and comments that border on illogical thinking. Like I said I don't think you're sincere in your search for truth. What you desire is for your mind to be tickled with endless debating. This is a course that leads to no where and produces nothing of value. I respectfully decline your invitation to continue. I will respect whatever beliefs you hold true for yourself; please do so likewise.
_________________
A Proud Witness of Jehovah God (JW.org)
Revelation 21:4 "And [God] will wipe out every tear from their eyes,
and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.
The former things have passed away."
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
07 Oct 2010, 9:39 am
kxmode wrote:
Since certainty of pronunciation is not now attainable, there seems to be no reason for abandoning in English the well-known form “Jehovah” in favor of some other suggested pronunciation. If such a change were made, then, to be consistent, changes should be made in the spelling and pronunciation of a host of other names found in the Scriptures: Jeremiah would be changed to Yir·meyah′, Isaiah would become Yesha‛·ya′hu, and Jesus would be either Yehoh·shu′a‛ (as in Hebrew) or I·e·sous′ (as in Greek). No one has any problems with Jeremiah, Isaiah and Jesus. The purpose of words is to transmit thoughts; in English the name Jehovah identifies the true God, transmitting this thought more satisfactorily today than any of the suggested substitutes. People could go with Yahwah but the name Jehovah has been around for thousand of years and is more common than Yahwah.
Well, the problem is that there IS a certain amount of certainty of pronunciation. The Jews certainly (and rightfully so) would never have risked divine punishment from incorrectly invoking the Name. However, there is understandable confusion about what constitutes misuse of the Name, and hence God is called by many other names that appropriately describe God, usually in terms of royal titles such as King or Lord. The more general "El" or "Elohim" are also used, but only in reference to THE God. Other words for God are used such as Baal, also used as a title of royalty borrowed from a different language, but the problem is that Baal worship engaged in specific practices that were strictly prohibited and thus references to Baal became strictly references of the worship of a false god rather than the true God of the Israelites.
So while Jews and some other groups of Israelites may have feared God's wrath from improperly invoking the Name, the "unclean" remnant of the Israelites in Samaria do not have such a fear and have continued to call upon Yah since early times. If there is to be any "best guess," it is to come from this tradition.
The Bible translation I use does NOT mention Jehovah, but the more proper Yahweh. While other names are more easily rendered as English names, the mystery of the Name is such that it cannot be. Troublesome names of the Bible transliterated into English retain pronunciations which closely resemble the original language. The Name should be no exception.
And just because something has been done for thousands of years does not mean that it is correct. If so, then that contradicts some of the fundamentals of JW belief. Watchtower is a relatively young movement against the backdrop of greater Christianity; if you believed that beliefs ought to be maintained that have been so for thousands of years, then more of JW tenets of faith should reflect Catholic church teachings. Yet as it is, JWs teaching nothing resembling the Catholic church. If the church from whence we came is apostate, it stands to reason we'd be more open to change, not closed to it.
Read Mark 16:9-20. Does your Bible include this passage? Most, I think, if not all translations include this passage. The problem with this passage is that it survived only in oral tradition. The events described here are confirmed in other texts, so it's quite possible that it really happened. But it was transmitted orally, not in writing. The earliest and best manuscripts omit this section. It COULD be that one day, after many more years have passed, that a translator will publish a Bible that omits this text based on the truth that the earliest manuscript evidence leaves it out in order to present the truth of the Bible in a more complete and accurate light. But on the other hand, if we take the Bible as the inspired word of God, by what reasoning should we say that a well-meaning scribe WASN'T inspired of God to add those words? We must be wary of tradition for tradition's sake, question what we read, and confirm for ourselves what the truth really is. We must not simply take faith on the authority of another human being, but rather examine for ourselves whether what an "authority" has indoctrinated into our thinking is based on truth and reality or if the doctrine of authority is merely convenient.
kxmode wrote:
But we can agree to disagree I think.
Of course. All I'm saying is never be content with what MEN say. Concern yourself more with what God says. Do not be afraid to question ANYTHING. Any time one person claims to have THE truth, as opposed to the Truth, be immediately alarmed and examine such "truth" against the Bible. As I said, if something is contradictory, then it is untrue and should be discarded. By questioning matters of faith, we come closer to God.
What remains is that in searching for Truth, we run the risk of actually finding it. The problem for seekers of Truth is that actually finding it may lead us away from where we are comfortable and put us at risk of loss of those things we come to love. Imagine, for example, a schizophrenic who has lived an entire life with no reason to believe his reality is anything more than what his hallucinations tell him. If the hallucinations become a problem, he has to confront the fact that everything he has ever believed or experienced never even happened. The loss of a non-existent reality would be extremely painful.
Consider Matthew 10:34-39--Don't assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to turn a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's enemies will be the members of his household. The person who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; the person who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And whoever doesn't take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me. Anyone finding his life will lose it, and anyone losing his life because of Me will find it.
Knowing the truth has consequences, and you run the risk even losing a church family if you find the Truth and follow it. But finding the Truth and living in the Truth far outweighs any earthly loss you may encounter. We Christians are about the business of welcoming our brothers and sisters with open arms. Ultimately, you have nothing to fear.
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
07 Oct 2010, 9:52 am
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
This is not about starting any kind of fight. I'm perfectly comfortable with 350 pound weights and feel the need to add another 25 or 50.
Why am *I* the one all over the map? Are you really not prepared to defend what you believe? Or rather is it you are uncomfortable facing challenges because deep in your soul, something is telling you that something you believe is fundamentally flawed?
You say "turn down foolish and ignorant questionings" according to the Bible. You and I both get "foolish and ignorant questionings" from unbelievers. But suppose a fellow believer points out your own "foolish and ignorant questionings"? Are you really going to be that quick to withdraw when someone points our errors in your thinking? What do you have to fear from questioning your beliefs? Are you afraid that one or more alternatives might actually be true?
Consider the Beroeans. When Paul sent a message to them or preached to them, they immediately went to holy scripture and carefully examined it to determine whether what they were taught was the truth. Tell me, why would anyone discourage you from doing the same thing? Seriously, I think we are both constantly seeking the truth, and I have no problems weighing the truth of what someone says about my faith against what is written in scripture. You should do the same. Remember, Proverbs 27:17--Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. Is that not what we do here in the PPR forum? If God and I can put atheists and agnostics to work to sharpen me, why can't you allow the same from one of your Christian brothers?
Why am *I* the one all over the map? Are you really not prepared to defend what you believe? Or rather is it you are uncomfortable facing challenges because deep in your soul, something is telling you that something you believe is fundamentally flawed?
You say "turn down foolish and ignorant questionings" according to the Bible. You and I both get "foolish and ignorant questionings" from unbelievers. But suppose a fellow believer points out your own "foolish and ignorant questionings"? Are you really going to be that quick to withdraw when someone points our errors in your thinking? What do you have to fear from questioning your beliefs? Are you afraid that one or more alternatives might actually be true?
Consider the Beroeans. When Paul sent a message to them or preached to them, they immediately went to holy scripture and carefully examined it to determine whether what they were taught was the truth. Tell me, why would anyone discourage you from doing the same thing? Seriously, I think we are both constantly seeking the truth, and I have no problems weighing the truth of what someone says about my faith against what is written in scripture. You should do the same. Remember, Proverbs 27:17--Iron sharpens iron, and one man sharpens another. Is that not what we do here in the PPR forum? If God and I can put atheists and agnostics to work to sharpen me, why can't you allow the same from one of your Christian brothers?
If one is to believe the Bible is God's personal word than one needs to believe that what the Bible says on various subjects is, in fact, truth. To date you have not offered or quoted a single scripture to back up anything you say. I, on the other hand, have filled up my comments with many scriptures likely to the point of overwhelming anyone interested in looking them all up. In fact all you've done is bombarded me with questions and comments that border on illogical thinking. Like I said I don't think you're sincere in your search for truth. What you desire is for your mind to be tickled with endless debating. This is a course that leads to no where and produces nothing of value. I respectfully decline your invitation to continue. I will respect whatever beliefs you hold true for yourself; please do so likewise.
You haven't shown why someone shouldn't ask questions! Further, you haven't adequately answered many of the questions I've asked. Why be afraid of questions? Further, I DID quote scripture, in particular Proverbs 27:17. As to the Beroeans and their tenacity for demanding that the claims of Paul be confirmed by carefully and thoroughly consulting ancient scripture, that's in the book of Acts.
Acts 17:10-12--As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas off to Beroea. On arrival, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. The people here were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, since they welcomed the message with eagerness and examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so. Consequently, many of them believed, including a number of the prominent Greek women as well as men.
Now, if my thinking is in error, then you should consider it your duty to correct me. But if YOUR thinking is in error, I have the same obligation, just as much as I have the obligation and duty to examine the errors point out in my own thinking. I'm sorry if you feel I've bombarded you with questions, but my questions are those that have been raised by what you have written. I don't care about debating because, honestly, I'm not that good at it--ask any atheist in here.
Now, I'll respect you as a person and I won't make any hateful personal attacks in any forum. But you have questioned my sincerity in my search for truth. That tells me that you, for whatever reason, are insincere (in truth) about actually respecting any beliefs that I have. Now, that IS a logical conclusion. To suggest that "you have your truth and I have mine" in mutually respecting diverse beliefs walks the line of the relativism fallacy--an error in logic. My goal is not to mock or insult, but merely correct errors. If you wish to end this line of discussion, then I can respect that. Nevertheless, the invitation remains open.
kxmode
Supporting Member
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,613
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)
07 Oct 2010, 10:03 am
AngelRho wrote:
To suggest that "you have your truth and I have mine" in mutually respecting diverse beliefs walks the line of the relativism fallacy--an error in logic.
It is my way of politely saying I do not wish to continue. And for the record I said "I will respect whatever beliefs you hold true for yourself." This is not the same as saying "you have your truth."
_________________
A Proud Witness of Jehovah God (JW.org)
Revelation 21:4 "And [God] will wipe out every tear from their eyes,
and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.
The former things have passed away."
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
07 Oct 2010, 10:13 am
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
To suggest that "you have your truth and I have mine" in mutually respecting diverse beliefs walks the line of the relativism fallacy--an error in logic.
It is my way of politely saying I do not wish to continue.
As you wish. But understand that any time you present any kind of ideas in these forums, as you well know, you open those ideas up to debate. I, for one, would prefer to avoid some of the same kind of silliness and outright mockery of any religious sentiment as with the atheists, and you can be assured that I will take anything questionable about Christian faith just as seriously as my own beliefs. We Christians are obligated to help each other in our lifelong quest to find God's truth, to deepen our relationship with Yahweh, and spread the love of Jesus among ourselves and unbelievers until He returns to gather us to Himself. It amazes me that God can use even unbelievers to sharpen my mind, exposing the errors of my logic, and forcing me to confront the Bible when it's time to give an answer for what I believe. If anything, putting myself in front of hostile witnesses has only strengthened my resolve, not weakened my faith. If I thought I had any reason, any reason at all to abandon my faith, I wouldn't be writing this to you right now. You will be continually in my prayers.
kxmode
Supporting Member
Joined: 14 Oct 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,613
Location: In your neighborhood, knocking on your door. :)
07 Oct 2010, 10:22 am
AngelRho wrote:
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
To suggest that "you have your truth and I have mine" in mutually respecting diverse beliefs walks the line of the relativism fallacy--an error in logic.
It is my way of politely saying I do not wish to continue.
As you wish. But understand that any time you present any kind of ideas in these forums, as you well know, you open those ideas up to debate.
See. The truth comes out and what I suspected all along. Truth seeking takes a back seat to obtaining head knowledge for the goal of endless debating. Believe me when I say I have enough knowledge to keep going but I don't travel that road because the scriptures warns us against such a course.
_________________
A Proud Witness of Jehovah God (JW.org)
Revelation 21:4 "And [God] will wipe out every tear from their eyes,
and death will be no more, neither will mourning nor outcry nor pain be anymore.
The former things have passed away."
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
07 Oct 2010, 11:15 am
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
kxmode wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
To suggest that "you have your truth and I have mine" in mutually respecting diverse beliefs walks the line of the relativism fallacy--an error in logic.
It is my way of politely saying I do not wish to continue.
As you wish. But understand that any time you present any kind of ideas in these forums, as you well know, you open those ideas up to debate.
See. The truth comes out and what I suspected all along. Truth seeking takes a back seat to obtaining head knowledge for the goal of endless debating. Believe me when I say I have enough knowledge to keep going but I don't travel that road because the scriptures warns us against such a course.
But that's what you are doing by posting those ideas. It need not be me who engages you on them. If you don't wish to discuss those things, then perhaps this is not the forum for those ideas. But if this IS the proper forum for such ideas, you have to accept that someone else might have something to say about it. Are you really that unprepared to defend what you have to say? Or do you, deep down in your conscience, understand that those views are problematic and you do not wish to confront those problems?
I've already said plainly that I lack any decent competence with debating. I'll leave a "real" debate to those who are. All I'm doing is simply asking a few questions and pointing out contradictions. Unbelievers do this to me all the time, and I have no problems pointing out where THEIR reasoning is lacking. I MIGHT win them over, I MIGHT NOT. I think you wish to withdraw from discussion because you inwardly acknowledge that some of the things you post here might be in conflict with holy Scripture. Any time a believer experiences this kind of conflict, it MUST BE ADDRESSED.
John 8:31-32--So Jesus said to the Jews who believed Him, "If you continue in My word, you really are My disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free."
If you have enough knowledge to keep going, why not keep going? Where does Scripture warn against witnessing the truth to others?
07 Oct 2010, 12:43 pm
Guitar_Girl wrote:
Why can God only take you to Heaven if your saved?
Because "saved" means that God's punishment for your sins has been put on Jesus and God sees you as "not guilty" when the Day of Judgement comes. If you're "gulity" you go to Hell. If you're "not guilty" you go to Heaven.
07 Oct 2010, 3:10 pm
jc6chan wrote:
Guitar_Girl wrote:
Why can God only take you to Heaven if your saved?
Because "saved" means that God's punishment for your sins has been put on Jesus and God sees you as "not guilty" when the Day of Judgement comes. If you're "gulity" you go to Hell. If you're "not guilty" you go to Heaven.
What is the Day of Judgement?
07 Oct 2010, 4:29 pm
Guitar_Girl wrote:
jc6chan wrote:
Guitar_Girl wrote:
Why can God only take you to Heaven if your saved?
Because "saved" means that God's punishment for your sins has been put on Jesus and God sees you as "not guilty" when the Day of Judgement comes. If you're "gulity" you go to Hell. If you're "not guilty" you go to Heaven.
What is the Day of Judgement?
not sure when it happens (either when you die or Jesus' second coming) but whenever God decides whether you're going to Heaven or Hell. True Christians will be seen as "innocent" since they have trusted in Jesus to pay for the punishment of their sins. Non christians will have to pay the punishment for their sins. There is huge debate as to what happens to those who have never had the chance to hear about the faith.
07 Oct 2010, 4:53 pm
jc6chan wrote:
Guitar_Girl wrote:
jc6chan wrote:
Guitar_Girl wrote:
Why can God only take you to Heaven if your saved?
Because "saved" means that God's punishment for your sins has been put on Jesus and God sees you as "not guilty" when the Day of Judgement comes. If you're "gulity" you go to Hell. If you're "not guilty" you go to Heaven.
What is the Day of Judgement?
not sure when it happens (either when you die or Jesus' second coming) but whenever God decides whether you're going to Heaven or Hell. True Christians will be seen as "innocent" since they have trusted in Jesus to pay for the punishment of their sins. Non christians will have to pay the punishment for their sins. There is huge debate as to what happens to those who have never had the chance to hear about the faith.
Reincarnation, along with fate and karma, is my initial belief. I still believe it goes both ways. Those who never got to know christianity reincarnate, I believe I got some second chances (of life),and It will soon be my turn to make it to Heaven.
Is this my last chance? (Last life?)
(Im not asking you to answer, just pondering it!) In my past lives, I was a good person, but never was religious. According to MY OWN beliefs, God will give you a few chances of life, as long as your not a "horrible" person. My beliefs are very complicated.
