Christianity in 30 Seconds

jpz17

Starter
If your not going to bother to debate anything meaningful to this debate...why even bother to drop by here??

This is the problem with society. no one discusses shit anymore. This apathetic live and let live..either you believe or don't mantra. People don't gain knowledge, or discover things by simply just taking them as the truth or not. If this were the case..we'd still be believing the earth is flat, demons cause psychotic episodes, and that exorcism is necessary in every case of strange behavior.

But if you truly thought this was a waste of time, you wouldn't have posted anything.


your smart, did you think of that all by yourself!!!!
 

Paul1355

All Star
That's still NOT MENTIONING ISRAEL BECOMING A STATE IN 1948...DOES IT SAY SPECIFICALLY ISRAEL WILL AGAIN BECOME A STATE IN 1948?

IF NOT THEN IT'S NOT SPECIFIC, NOT PROPHETIC. END OF STORY.


Are you serious? Look at every prophecy ever recorded, does it give you an exact date and time and what the weather is that day, and what they are wearing etc. How detailed do you want a historical find to be???? Do you think everything we know about powers like Rome and Alexander the great are in 100% detail containing everything that happened? NO. That was the dumbest excuse I have heard yet from a guy who boasts about prophecy being false. A prophecy likr this one takes two things and has one representing the other with Dry Bones and Israel. I feel like im talking to a 5 year old. And saying that Israel is dry bones re-forming again is a clear prophecy. Yes, this is end of story because you are too hard-headed on something that was clearly presented to you and you still see it as not true. You have an attitude that makes it impossible for you to accept anything besides your own belief.
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
Below is your post, lyfe. I'm glad you quoted that entire chapter of revelation. My question is, how can you say that Alpha and Omega is different from first and last, when they both mean the same thing? In fact Alpha and Omega is simply a metaphor, created by using the alphabet, of being first and last, creator and destroyer, etc. In that chapter of revelations, Jesus says that he is the first and last, the almighty, who was to come. There are other scriptures, in Isiah, for example, where God's entire being are explained, "the holy ghost" and the "word." You just make the scripture fit the JW theology, at all cost.

As for my posts about your organization's false prophecies and occult origins, you haven't answered, and these are verifiable facts, not imperfect philosophies. You know what the bible says about false prophecy and witchery, yet you continue to challenge Jehovah's will by following this wicked organization???

Knicks4Lyfe's Post:

"(5) At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be "the first and the last," which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression "apostle" is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1) So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title "Alpha and Omega" applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son."

Entire text of revelation 1:17,18

1:17 And when I saw him, I fell at his feet as dead. And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:

1:18 I [am] he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

 
Below is your post, lyfe. I'm glad you quoted that entire chapter of revelation. My question is, how can you say that Alpha and Omega is different from first and last, when they both mean the same thing? In fact Alpha and Omega is simply a metaphor, created by using the alphabet, of being first and last, creator and destroyer, etc. In that chapter of revelations, Jesus says that he is the first and last, the almighty, who was to come. There are other scriptures, in Isiah, for example, where God's entire being are explained, "the holy ghost" and the "word." You just make the scripture fit the JW theology, at all cost.
It's quite simple my friend.
Collosians 1:15 says this about Jesus:[15] Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:
Answers.com says
creature:

Something created.

Please tell me how Jesus can be a creature, which means someone created him, but he is somehow that someone who created him. If you can do that, you win the prize.


As for my posts about your organization's false prophecies and occult origins, you haven't answered, and these are verifiable facts, not imperfect philosophies. You know what the bible says about false prophecy and witchery, yet you continue to challenge Jehovah's will by following this wicked organization???

What true prophets foretell comes to pass, but they may not understand just when or how it will be

Dan. 12:9: "Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of the end."

1 Pet. 1:10, 11: "The prophets . . . kept on investigating what particular season or what sort of season the spirit in them was indicating concerning Christ when it was bearing witness beforehand about the sufferings for Christ and about the glories to follow these."

1 Cor. 13:9, 10: "We have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially; but when that which is complete arrives, that which is partial will be done away with."

Prov. 4:18: "The path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established."

The apostles and other early Christian disciples had certain wrong expectations, but the Bible does not classify them with the "false prophets."?See Luke 19:11; John 21:22, 23; Acts 1:6, 7.

Nathan the prophet encouraged King David to go ahead with what was in his heart regarding the building of a house for Jehovah?s worship. But later Jehovah told Nathan to inform David that he was not the one who would build it. Jehovah did not reject Nathan for what he had said earlier but continued to use him because he humbly corrected the matter when Jehovah made it plain to him.?1 Chron. 17:1-4, 15.

The pronouncements of a true prophet promote true worship and are in harmony with God?s revealed will

Deut. 13:1-4: "In case a prophet or a dreamer of a dream arises in your midst and does give you a sign or a portent, and the sign or the portent does come true of which he spoke to you, saying, ?Let us walk after other gods, whom you have not known, and let us serve them,? you must not listen to the words of that prophet or to the dreamer of that dream, because Jehovah your God is testing you to know whether you are loving Jehovah your God with all your heart and all your soul. After Jehovah your God you should walk, and him you should fear, and his commandments you should keep, and to his voice you should listen, and him you should serve, and to him you should cling."

Since the Bible says that "a friend of the world" is an enemy of God, are clergymen who urge their parishioners to get involved in the affairs of the world promoting true worship? (Jas. 4:4; 1 John 2:15-17) The true God said that the nations "will have to know that I am Jehovah," and the Bible states that God would take out of the nations "a people for his name," but are religious organizations that minimize the importance of using God?s personal name acting in harmony with this revealed will of God? (Ezek. 38:23; Acts 15:14) Jesus taught his followers to pray for God?s Kingdom, and the Bible cautions against putting one?s trust in earthling men, so are clergymen or political organizations that urge people to place their confidence in human rulership true prophets??Matt. 6:9, 10; Ps. 146:3-6; compare Revelation 16:13, 14.

True prophets and the false can be recognized by the fruitage manifest in their lives and the lives of those who follow them

Matt. 7:15-20: "Be on the watch for the false prophets that come to you in sheep?s covering, but inside they are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will recognize them. . . . Every good tree produces fine fruit, but every rotten tree produces worthless fruit . . . Really, then, by their fruits you will recognize those men."

What characterizes their way of life? "The works of the flesh are . . . fornication, uncleanness, loose conduct, idolatry, practice of spiritism, enmities, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, contentions, divisions, sects, envies, drunken bouts, revelries, and things like these. . . . Those who practice such things will not inherit God?s kingdom. On the other hand, the fruitage of [God?s] spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, kindness, goodness, faith, mildness, self-control."?Gal. 5:19-23; see also 2 Peter 2:1-3.

Have not Jehovah?s Witnesses made errors in their teachings?

Jehovah?s Witnesses do not claim to be inspired prophets. They have made mistakes. Like the apostles of Jesus Christ, they have at times had some wrong expectations.?Luke 19:11; Acts 1:6.

The Scriptures provide time elements related to Christ?s presence, and Jehovah?s Witnesses have studied these with keen interest. (Luke 21:24; Dan. 4:10-17) Jesus also described a many-featured sign that would tie in with the fulfillment of time prophecies to identify the generation that would live to see the end of Satan?s wicked system of things. (Luke 21:7-36) Jehovah?s Witnesses have pointed to evidence in fulfillment of this sign. It is true that the Witnesses have made mistakes in their understanding of what would occur at the end of certain time periods, but they have not made the mistake of losing faith or ceasing to be watchful as to fulfillment of Jehovah?s purposes. They have continued to keep to the fore in their thinking the counsel given by Jesus: "Keep on the watch, therefore, because you do not know on what day your Lord is coming."?Matt. 24:42.

Matters on which corrections of viewpoint have been needed have been relatively minor when compared with the vital Bible truths that they have discerned and publicized. Among these are the following: Jehovah is the only true God. Jesus Christ is not part of a Trinitarian godhead but is the only-begotten Son of God. Redemption from sin is possible only through faith in Christ?s ransom sacrifice. The holy spirit is not a person but is Jehovah?s active force, and its fruitage must be evident in the lives of true worshipers. The human soul is not immortal, as the ancient pagans claimed; it dies, and the hope for future life is in the resurrection. God?s permission of wickedness has been because of the issue of universal sovereignty. God?s Kingdom is the only hope for mankind. Since 1914 we have been living in the last days of the global wicked system of things. Only 144,000 faithful Christians will be kings and priests with Christ in heaven, whereas the rest of obedient mankind will receive eternal life on a paradise earth.

Another factor to consider regarding the teachings of Jehovah?s Witnesses is this: Have these truly uplifted people morally? Are those who adhere to these teachings outstanding in their communities because of their honesty? Is their family life beneficially influenced by applying these teachings? Jesus said that his disciples would be readily identified because of having love among themselves. (John 13:35) Is this quality outstanding among Jehovah?s Witnesses? We let the facts speak for themselves.​
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
It's funny how you selectively respond to things.

First, you did not respond to my request that you explain the difference between alpha and omega and first and last, when I stated that alpha and omega is simply a metaphor for first and last.

Secondly, as I've cited before, Deuteronomy states 18:20-18:22 states that someone who falsely speaks in God's name will be put to death and should not be feared. So... being as there are plenty of Christian groups who don't make false predictions, how do you continue as a JW?

Thirdly, it's pretty meaningless that you use the word Jehovah more so than other denominations. As to the fruits of Jehovah's witnesses, I've only seen superficial acts of goodness, which are, as a result, not good. For them to actually be good, they'd have to be performed with full awareness, and sensitivity, towards other human beings, their needs and the action(s) that compassion would dictate one take. However, JW sensitivity is for their theology, nothing else, which is why the truth that has been spoken here has not even budged you. In fact, you've even omitted that which is inconvenient, when answering us.

I hope you wake up, before you end up trapped by these pack of lies. A friend of mine, former JW, only recently, after years of not educating himself, since he was told the end was near, finally got his degree, began to work for a decent wage and has disassociated himself with the JWs. Unless you want to end up in a similar dynamic of circumstances: beginning life at 38, you should walk away, while you're young. Life is more than God, a lot more.
 
Last edited:

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
Lyfe, how can you call these errors, and not false prophecy? How can an organization be considered changed, when they still claim that Jesus has been ruling invisibly since 1914? If you completely dissolve this organization, and start afresh, maybe you can be considered a new, and respectable, organization. Otherwise, this is your legacy:

*A 1961 Watchtower magazine article, "How can girls guard against temptation in this sex-crazy world?" compared the way young girls and young men interact sexually to the way cattle do. This demeaning article invokes belly laughs from non-JWs.

*In the early 1950s, the long-standing teaching that God lives on the star Alcyone in the Pleiades constellation was formally jettisoned: A belief related to the theosophical society, formed in 1875, around the same time as the precursor to the JWs was formed by Charles Taze Russell. The Theosophists named a boy chosen as their "world teacher" Alcyone. This boy was supposed to herald the return of Christ. Later, he rejected the title and claimed it was falsely attached to him.

*In the early 1950s, the long-standing claim that vaccinations are a work of the devil was abandoned. This was to facilitate travel by Watchtower officials, who had to have certificates of vaccination for international travel.

*In 1945, the notion that vaccinations violate "the everlasting covenant between God and Noah" was applied to blood transfusions, and over the next decade this was gradually built into a complete ban on transfusions.

*In 1929, the teaching that the Great Pyramid of Gizeh was built at God's direction and was an important marker in "Bible chronology" was changed to be that the Great Pyramid was the work of the devil.

*Beginning in the 1920s, in the magazine "The Golden Age", the Society hawked all sorts of quack medical ideas, claiming that the medical establishment was a complete fraud.

*In the 1920s, the Society recommended a bizzare, quack machine called "The Electronic Radio Biola" as a cure for all sorts of chronic diseases.

*In 1876, the founder and first president of the Watchtower Society, Charles Taze Russell, began claiming that Christ had returned invisibly to the earth in 1874. In 1943, the Society changed this date to 1914. Russell's teaching was based on the failed prediction of his mentor, an Adventist named Nelson Barbour, that Christ would return visibly in 1874.

*In 1877, Russell claimed that Armageddon would begin in 1878. When that failed to happen, he claimed it did, but invisibly.

*In 1877, Russell predicted the complete end of all nations by 1914. This became a staple of Bible Student teaching. When that failed to occur, Russell's followers gradually decided that the end had occurred, but invisibly.

*In 1877, Russell predicted that the long-awaited "resurrection of the saints" would occur in 1878.

*In 1878, when "the saints" failed to appear, Russell predicted that they'd appear in 1881. When that failed, he claimed that they were indeed resurrected, but invisibly.

When "the end" failed to appear in 1914 but WWI began, Russell claimed that Armageddon had begun, and predicted it would end in 1918.

*In 1918, Joseph Rutherford, second president of the Watchtower Society, began an advertising campaign called "Millions Now Living Will Never Die". He predicted that Armageddon would occur in 1925.

*Between 1918 and 1925, many Bible Students prepared for "the end" by selling their property and engaging in preaching for the "Millions" campaign. When 1925 rolled past uneventfully, nearly 3/4 of the Bible Students quit.

*After 1925, Rutherford emphasized that very soon, the "ancient worthies" such as Abraham, Samuel and David would soon be resurrected and take over the governing of the earth.

*In 1929, the Society began work on a mansion for Rutherford to live in, in San Diego. This came to be called Beth Sarim.

*About 1930, Rutherford formally deeded Beth Sarim to "the ancient worthies" and described how his followers should recognize them.

Beth Sarim was initially described in Watchtower publications as a home for "the ancient worthies".

Today the Society describes Beth Sarim as a home for Rutherford. According to some sources, that's probably closer to the truth, because Rutherford, as a drunk and adulterer, was a thorn in the side of his underlings.

*In the early 1940s, the Society built a bomb shelter for Rutherford on a property near Beth Sarim and called it Beth Shan. They later claimed that they never built such a thing.

*In 1967 the Society banned organ transplants, calling the practice cannibalism. The policy was reversed in 1979.

*In 1971 the Society began teaching that the physical heart is the seat of human emotion, and carries on "conversations" with the physical brain, which determines what a person does. This teaching was illustrated at the 1971 district conventions with a giant green brain and a giant red heart on the speaker's platform, where during the introductory speech, a dialog was played with the heart and brain "talking" to one another. During the speech, the heart would light up when it "talked" and the brain would light up when it "conversed".

*In 1971, the Society began a program of instructing the JW community what to do and not do sexually, in embarrassing detail. Oral and anal sex were described in public talks, and condemned. Over the next few years this resulted in the opposite of what they intended in some cases, and in others to the disintegration of marriages. After a number of lawsuits by injured non-JW marriage partners, the Society largely abandoned these teachings in the early 1980s.

*In 1966, the Society began predicting that "big things" would come not later than 1975. By the next year, this had grown into a nearly definite prediction that the battle of Armageddon would come by 1975. When that failed to happen, the rapid growth of the JWs in the years between 1967 and 1975 reversed.

*In 1993 to 1995, upon realizing that its teachings about "the generation of 1914" were about to go down the tubes, the Society drastically revised its ideas, and made the idea virtually meaningless. Most JWs barely noticed.

By Alan Feurbacher

http://www.pressbox.co.uk/detailed/S...cts_33760.html
__________________
 
Last edited:

Paul1355

All Star
For OG

OG, what is your main reason for not having a strong Christian faith that you have moved away from which you explained to me?
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
Well, Paul, as I've gotten older, and have learned more and more about the world, its history, people, and religion, the reasons have grown exponentially.

Initially, however, my reason for leaving Christianity was that I never really believed in the bible and its claims. I remember praying, as a little child, when in very difficult circumstances, and not having my prayers answered. Ever since, doubt lingered in me, as to whether the bible was the truth of our origins. As I entered my teenage years, doubt was coupled with my feeling that the bible was cruel, racist: preferring the Jewish race over others, sexist and intolerant. Christians that I encountered felt threatened by what I was pointing out and felt it was heresy.

Around age 22, I began to try to take a serious look at Christianity, tried a few different churches, and it just felt wrong, I felt imprisoned, threatened (with either hell or being banned from heaven), controlled and as if I was being asked to forsake truth for something that I just couldn't bring myself to believe in.

I also felt that not one Christian that I encountered actually knew anything about truth, compassion, sacrifice: they spoke of it, gave examples but could not unite the act with the mind and heart, thus making it moot. I began my way on a spiritual journey, first with Buddhist and Hindu texts, such as the Bhagavad Gita and the Lotus Sutra, and moved on to the writings of Jiddu and U.G. Krishnamurti, as well as other spiritual thinkers. I've also helped to arrange meetings on spiritual matters, in addition to attending meetings put together by other like-minded people.

I still look at the bible as a text with spiritual value, especially when you use it as a piece of a much larger puzzle, but I don't believe in it, when it comes to talking bushes, invisible men, demons, saviors, heaven, hell, spirits, etc. Ultimately, I feel religion: JWs, Catholics, other Christians, Hindus, Muslims, etc., strip their humanity for the religious title, just as we do with ethnic and racial labels. We do the same with others. This is why labels, and the ideologies that come along with them, have proved to be so destructive.
 
Last edited:
It's funny how you selectively respond to things.

First, you did not respond to my request that you explain the difference between alpha and omega and first and last, when I stated that alpha and omega is simply a metaphor for first and last.

Secondly, as I've cited before, Deuteronomy states 18:20-18:22 states that someone who falsely speaks in God's name will be put to death and should not be feared. So... being as there are plenty of Christian groups who don't make false predictions, how do you continue as a JW?

Thirdly, it's pretty meaningless that you use the word Jehovah more so than other denominations. As to the fruits of Jehovah's witnesses, I've only seen superficial acts of goodness, which are, as a result, not good. For them to actually be good, they'd have to be performed with full awareness, and sensitivity, towards other human beings, their needs and the action(s) that compassion would dictate one take. However, JW sensitivity is for their theology, nothing else, which is why the truth that has been spoken here has not even budged you. In fact, you've even omitted that which is inconvenient, when answering us.

I hope you wake up, before you end up trapped by these pack of lies. A friend of mine, former JW, only recently, after years of not educating himself, since he was told the end was near, finally got his degree, began to work for a decent wage and has disassociated himself with the JWs. Unless you want to end up in a similar dynamic of circumstances: beginning life at 38, you should walk away, while you're young. Life is more than God, a lot more.
If you really paid attention to the alpha post, you would understand our viewpoint fully.

So basically, just like everyone else who thinks Jesus is God, you have no clue of why Jesus is said to be a creation? You have not answered this, ABCD, Paul, no one. Yet, I'm part of the stupid group who twist the bible here? Everyone else here has all the answers, yet not one of you more intelligent beings can tell me how Jesus is said to be a creature, but is somehow also the creator? Let everyone tell it in the thread, I'm the dumbest guy in the room. Yet the slow guy is waiting on all the fast talkers to provide logical answers for me. There is not one reply to how Jesus is said to be a creature. NOT 1! WHEN IS IT COMING?

This is exactly why I am proud, VERY PROUD JEHOVAH'S WITNESS! Because at least for once, someone has answers that just make sense.

And until I see something better, I'll stick around for awhile.
 

Paul1355

All Star
Well, Paul, as I've gotten older, and have learned more and more about the world, its history, people, and religion, the reasons have grown exponentially.

Initially, however, my reason for leaving Christianity was that I never really believed in the bible and its claims. I remember praying, as a little child, when in very difficult circumstances, and not having my prayers answered. Ever since, doubt lingered in me, as to whether the bible was the truth of our origins. As I entered my teenage years, doubt was coupled with my feeling that the bible was cruel, racist: preferring the Jewish race over others, sexist and intolerant. Christians that I encountered felt threatened by what I was pointing out and felt it was heresy.

Around age 22, I began to try to take a serious look at Christianity, tried a few different churches, and it just felt wrong, I felt imprisoned, threatened (with either hell or being banned from heaven), controlled and as if I was being asked to forsake truth for something that I just couldn't bring myself to believe in.

I also felt that not one Christian that I encountered actually knew anything about truth, compassion, sacrifice: they spoke of it, gave examples but could not unite the act with the mind and heart, thus making it moot. I began my way on a spiritual journey, first with Buddhist and Hindu texts, such as the Bhagavad Gita and the Lotus Sutra, and moved on to the writings of Jiddu and U.G. Krishnamurti, as well as other spiritual thinkers. I've also helped to arrange meetings on spiritual matters, in addition to attending meetings put together by other like-minded people.

I still look at the bible as a text with spiritual value, especially when you use it as a piece of a much larger puzzle, but I don't believe in it, when it comes to talking bushes, invisible men, demons, saviors, heaven, hell, spirits, etc. Ultimately, I feel religion: JWs, Catholics, other Christians, Hindus, Muslims, etc., strip their humanity for the religious title, just as we do with ethnic and racial labels. We do the same with others. This is why labels, and the ideologies that come along with them, have proved to be so destructive.

Hey OG, i like how you basically outlined your life in that post. I know many people like you that have searched and searched for something that you felt was right spiritually. You always feel an emptiness because you have people telling you that there is no God but yet in your heart and mind you always have the thought of a possiblility of a GOD. The problem is which God is the right one. Now by reading your story it seems like you were never guided by a true follower of Biblical Chrsitianity that stressed the RELATIONSHIP with God and not the religion because it is a personal relationship, not a religion. James 4:8 says that if you draw near to God that he will draw near to you, but if you go away from God then he won't draw near to you.
I recommend you reading a story in John 1:35-39 were it talks about two men who confront Jesus. And Jesus said to them "What do you seek?" or in other words "What are you looking for?' And then Jesus said "come and you will see." My faith being an Evangelical Christian is one were I don't add or take out the words of the Bible. The Bible says that if followers of Christ do that, that they would be cursed. I believe Jesus is my best friend because he died for my sins. He is my personal savior and by believing in him, I have eternal life. You see, it's the ONLY belief were you don't have to work to get into a heaven or paradise. You see every religion: JW's, Catholics, Muslims they all work for salvation. Read Acts 4:12. Religion is man trying to find God. My belief which is of an Evangelical Chrsitian is not a religion but a personal relationship with Jesus, my God, my Savior, and my best friend. And that's what I feel seperates my belief from every other. I don't have to work for His love and salvation. I can just say what's in Romans 10:9-10 and right there, I am saved. That's all it takes.
Also read Titus 3:5 which is very important and the basic reason why I talk about grace and salvation.

I'm glad you haven't given up hope and I pray that one day, Jesus may give to you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of who Jesus is. And that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened, so that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance and what is the surpassing greatness of His power towards you when you believe on Him.
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
Colossians 1:15-20, New international version

15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.



#1. You still haven't addressed the difference between the Alpha and Omega and the title "beginning and the end," when it comes to Jesus.

#2. You still haven't answered for the JWs false prophecies and God's instruction that false prophets will be put to death, but, in regards to the passage that you cited, the above section clearly describes Jesus as part of God's manifestation of himself/itself. Here, he says that Jesus is his image, that Jesus is the creator of all things and that he is before all things. It also says the he is the head of the Church. The writer also references, once again, to the alpha and omega, by saying that Jesus is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead (in other words that he is the first when it comes to a new beginning, that which is one with the end). It also states that things were created by him and for him, implying that the bible's God has more than one manifestation of his being, one that can create something for Jesus, the other manifestation of God's being. The problem you're having is that you think of God as a man, as you would yourself.




I don't believe in any of this stuff, either way, except as valuable spiritual symbolism and ancient thought that, unfortunately, has lost its meaning to most of us, but you can't argue for the JW dogma, anymore so than you can for the trinity dogma. In fact, even though I'm not a believer, I think the trinity actually makes the most sense, unless one believes in more than one creator, since Jesus is named the creator, as well as he who had everything created for him.




As for what you follow, it's your business. I'm just trying to help you to free and wake yourself up, as I've explained in the past. I've made my points. If you want to avoid answering them, to yourself, more than anyone else, fine.
 
Last edited:

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
Are you serious? Look at every prophecy ever recorded, does it give you an exact date and time and what the weather is that day, and what they are wearing etc. How detailed do you want a historical find to be???? Do you think everything we know about powers like Rome and Alexander the great are in 100% detail containing everything that happened? NO. That was the dumbest excuse I have heard yet from a guy who boasts about prophecy being false. A prophecy likr this one takes two things and has one representing the other with Dry Bones and Israel. I feel like im talking to a 5 year old. And saying that Israel is dry bones re-forming again is a clear prophecy. Yes, this is end of story because you are too hard-headed on something that was clearly presented to you and you still see it as not true. You have an attitude that makes it impossible for you to accept anything besides your own belief.

I don't know how much more of answer on this you want me to give. Your metaphoric ass prophecies are not prophecies, not from a divine source either. I've already explained WHILE USING MY USUAL FLAWLESS LOGIC as to what would have to be contained in them in order for them to qualify.

And somehow you want me to come to the understanding that these primitive people whom the only way they would've got advanced knowledge from a GOD....but are not exact on the details..were prophetic.

It's nothing more than folks making observations, and requires loose interpretations by the reader of today. The only way your prophecy holds up is that like a piece of bubble gum you've got to stretch it all the way out...damn near before it breaks in order to encompass the passage.

If you cannot understand this concept, then what's the point?

A prophecy has to be specific in order to be true. It cannot be a loose metaphor, or ad hominem. PERIOD.


Your are not realizing without the exactness, the prophecy cannot be a prophecy at all...it becomes nothing more than poetic notions of a possibility that people were coming to at the time.

I see a nation get defeated I gotta conclude one day they'll come back to re-conquer...not that difficult to understand that.

You are a 5 year old you still believe in this bullshit as a supposedly grown ass adult. How many more ways you want to keep shooting yourself in the foot??
 

OGKnickfan

Enlightened
Paul, thanks; but I've studied Christianity, at length, and I can't bind myself to it, because I see no evidence. I'm the type of person that needs evidence, or I can't believe. I also feel that Christianity was forced on my people, in Latin America, and I'm not willing to follow, just because 400 years have passed. I don't think truth is static, that it can be contained in a book or in a person. I'm going to continue trying to live morally and ethically, I'll live and die by my values. However, I cannot do something that's against my conscience. Even if the bible's God is real, I don't know that I want to live forever, especially if it means living with most of humanity, which has turned out to be a very depraved species.

All right, over and out.

Just wanted to add that I respect what you have to say about not needing an organization, especially in light of what some of these organizations, like the JW, do to people. Look at lyfe, they've taken this young man and told him that, without the JW organization, there is no way, all when Jesus said "I am the truth (another of God's titles) and the way." I think if you're going to be a real Christian, you have to have that personal understanding, like what you said, Paul. If you don't, you're just sitting on a bench, passively, as opposed to actively, listening.
 
Last edited:

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
On the subject of failed prophecies

Why do you people continue to challenge me as if you are actually going to win? Just like I said to be in a relationship with god, coincides greatly with battered spouse syndrome. Just think about that for a while folks.Getting back to my point about FAILED..that is WRONG/FALSE/INCORRECT biblical prophecy!!!

In short there is no Old Testament prophecy which point to Yeshua ha Notzri (JESUS) who lived around the first three decades of the first century as a messiah or as a divine person.Let's go through them one by one...(WARNING THIS IS GOING TO TAKE MORE THAN ONE POSTING).Many of the prophecies presented "AS Evidence" could be easily dismissed as mere wishful thinking.

Let us look at a few:

Jesus' Pre-Existence

The prophecy given here is from Micah 5:2. This is the verse as given in his book:[6]

Micah 5:2
From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His going forths are from long ago, From the days of eternity.

The "fulfillment" of this prophecy is supposedly the passage below:

Colossians 1:7
And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

Amazing! AN anonymous author in the New Testament makes for fulfilled prophecy! Even if the author is Paul, the passage is nothing more than an empty assertion. It takes someone really gullible and seeped in the belief of biblical inerrancy to even to begin to consider this to be a case of prophecy fulfillment.

That is not the only problem with the passage. Modern translations such as the New Revised Standard Version (NRSV) showed no such allusion of the messiah's pre-existence:

Micah 5:2 NRSV
from you shall come forth for me, one who is to rule in Israel, whose origin is from of old, from ancient days.

The passage, as read in the NRSV, simply shows that the messiah's ancestors are ancient. The Good News Bible (GNB) translates this even more clearly:

Micah 5:2 GNB
but out of one of you I will bring a ruler for Israel, whose family line goes back to ancient times.

Jesus Called Immanuel

Isaiah 7:14
"Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin is with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel".

SUPPOSED FULFILLMENT...

Matthew 1:22-23
And this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: "The virgin is with child and will give birth to a son, and they will call him Immanuel-which means 'God is with us'".

Another startling and puzzling assertion. With this passage he claimed that Jesus was called Immanuel. But Matthew's passage was simply a repeat of the passage from Isaiah and nowhere else in the gospels was Jesus ever referred to by that name. Clearly the claim is meaningless and nonsensical.

Jesus as Priest

The Old Testament passage is this:

Psalms 110:4
"The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind, 'Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek."

The supposed fulfillment, get this(!), is:

Hebrews 5:5-6
"So also Christ did not glorify Himself so as to become a high Priest, but He who said to Him, 'Thou art My Son, today I have begotten Thee'; just as He says also in another passage, 'Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchidezek.'"

Seated at the Right Hand of God

Here the "prophecy" is also in Psalms:

Psalm 110:1
"The Lord says to my Lord: 'Sit at my right hand, Until I make Thine enemies a footstool for Thy feet."

The supposed fulfillment:

Hebrews 1:3
"...When He had made purification of sins, He sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high

Again an unfounded assertion by an anonymous author about Jesus sitting at the right hand of God is taken as a "fulfillment". Pure nonsense.

This is just a handful of the false and stupid New Testament one's..next posting will address some of the one's from the OLD TESTAMENT that many evangelicals used, and still use to fit Jesus's life.
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
A Few Old Testament Failed Prophecies

A few failed prophecies from the Old Testament

The Return of Joseph and Mary from Egypt

Matthew 2:14-15
And he [Joseph] rose and took the child and his mother by night and departed to Egypt and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfil what the Lord has spoken by the prophet, "Out of Egypt will I call my son."

The Old Testament passage Matthew was quoting came from the book of Hosea. Let us look at that passage in its context:

Hosea 11:1-2
When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son. The more I called them, the more they went from me; they kept sacrificing to the Baals and burning incense to idols.

It takes either a very gullible person, or someone who is bent on believing no matter what, to actually believe that the passage in Hosea above relates to Jesus.

* In the first place the passage was in past tense ( "I called" as opposed to Matthew's "will I call"). Thus Matthew had tweak the Old Testament passage ever so slightly.

* And in the second place it is not even a prophecy at all.

The whole passage talks about the calling out of the Israelites from Egypt as narrated in the Pentateuch. Thus my son in this passage meant the whole Israelite nation.

The portions clearly could not be applied to Jesus (who was sacrificing to Baal and burning incense to idols on the way back from Egypt? Joseph? Mary? Jesus?) yet the passage is obviously an organic whole. This is also another example of a prophecy taken out of it's context in order to fit something that CAN'T POSSIBLY BE TRUE.

Herod's Slaughter of the Children

Matthew 2:16-18
Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in that region who were two years old or under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men. Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:

A voice was heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted because they were no more .

Let us look at the relevant passage in Jeremiah:

Jeremiah 31:15-17

Thus says the Lord:
A voice is heard in Ramah,
lamentations and bitter weeping.
Rachel is weeping for her children:
She refuses to be comforted for her children,
because they are not.
Thus says the Lord:
Keep your voice from weeping,
and your eyes from tears;
for your work shall be rewarded,
says the Lord:
and they shall come back from the land of the enemy.
There is hope for the future,
says the Lord, and your children will come back to their own country.

***Note that here we have another case of taking a quote out of context. This time the whole sense of the passage has been changed. As Jeremiah 31:17 showed Rachel's children, far from being slaughtered, will come back home. Seen in this context it is obvious what is meant by the phrase "they are not" in Jeremiah 31:15. It means that her children are at the moment not physically present in their homeland, they are in the land of the enemy where they shall return. Thus Matthew had given a meaning to Jeremiah 31:15 that it did not have.***

***Jesus' Birth in Bethlehem(THE HUGE CONTRADICTION)**

The passage supposedly prophesying Jesus birth is found in the book of Micah.

Micah 5:2
But you O Bethlehem Ephranath, who are little among the clans of Judah, from you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler of Israel

Of course both Matthew (2:1) and Luke (2:4-7) mentioned that Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Thus, while we do not doubt that both Matthew and Luke claimed that Jesus was born there, how certain are we that this is actually historical and ACCURATE??

The accounts of how Bethlehem became the birthplace of Jesus in Luke and Matthew contradict one another. This is a crucial first step; for if the two stories contradict one another, then at least one of these must be false.

Other passages imply Nazareth as the birthplace of Jesus

The tradition of Jesus' birth in Bethlehem surfaced late (close to 100 CE) and is not found in the earliest gospel Mark (circa 70 CE) nor in the epistles of Paul (circa 50 CE). It is important to appreciate this time frame. It is as though a story about something that happened before the first world war (i.e. before 1914) only surfaced today (2001 CE).

THE ACTUAL QUOTES AND EXPLANATION!!!

Both Matthew and Luke stated that Jesus was born in Bethlehem in Judea. But the ways both gospels connect Jesus' birth to that Judean town are contradictory and immediately arouses suspicion.

* Matthew made Bethlehem the home town of Mary and Joseph from the beginning.

* Luke made Nazareth their home town and they had to move to Bethlehem because of the census.
* Other earlier traditions speaks against Bethlehem as the birthplace of Jesus.

* The reason why Bethlehem was the place chosen by later tradition (and used by Matthew and Luke) was that it was prophesied in the Old Testament.


n Matthew, the impression we get is that both Mary and Joseph were already living in Bethlehem during the time of the annunciation and the conception:

Matthew 1:24-2:1
When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus. In the time of King Herod, after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea...

Note that no mention is given of any travelling between Joseph taking Mary home as his wife and the birth of Jesus. In fact anyone reading the nativity story in Matthew alone will conclude that Joseph and Mary were natives of Bethlehem as is confirmed by the passage below (after the flight of Joseph and his family to Egypt):

Matthew 2:19-23
When Herod died, an angel of the Lord suddenly appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt and said, "Get up, take the child and his mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who were seeking the child's life are dead." Then Joseph got up, took the child and his mother, and went to the land of Israel. But when he heard that Archelaus was ruling over Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. And after being warned in a dream, he went away to the district of Galilee. There he made his home in a town called Nazareth

Especially in the view of the earlier passage, the one above gives definite proof that Joseph wanted to return to his home town of Bethlehem but was prevented from doing so by the fact that Archelaus was the new tetrarch. His making Nazareth a home came after this.

In Luke, however, we are told that both Mary and Joseph were living in the Galilean town of Nazareth before the annunciation:

Luke 1:26-27
In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, to a virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The virgin's name was Mary.

So Luke makes Mary and Joseph natives of Galilee. The event that made them travel to Bethlehem was the Roman census under Quirinius. According to the evangelist, the Roman census require everyone to register in the town of their ancestor. Since David was from Bethlehem, Joseph had to travel Judea to register himself.

Luke 2:1-7
In those days a decree went out from Emperor Augustus that all the world should be registered.This was the first registration and was taken while Quirinius was governor of Syria. All went to their own towns to be registered. Joseph also went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to the city of David called Bethlehem, because he was descended from the house and family of David. He went to be registered with Mary, to whom he was engaged and who was expecting a child. While they were there, the time came for her to deliver her child. And she gave birth to her firstborn son and wrapped him in bands of cloth, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.

Luke's version is historically suspect for many reasons. While there was nothing unusual per se about a Roman census (in fact Josephus corroborates the fact that there was a census in Judea when Quirinius was governor of Syria), the method of taking the census, by herding everyone to register in the towns of their ancestors, is unheard of in the history of the Roman Empire.

The Roman censuses were always taken for economic purposes, to determine the amount of taxable income of the residents of their provinces. The Romans had always taken the census at the place of residence and not in their ancestral hometown.

Furthermore, the census, if conducted in the manner described by Luke, was extremely impracticable: each and every Israelite will have to recall the residence of their ancestors who lived when Joshua partitioned the land of Palestine among the twelve tribes, i.e. an event that occurred more than one thousand years before the census!

And finally why would Joseph haul Mary along with him to Bethlehem, when she was already in an advances stage of pregnancy. The distance from Nazareth to Bethlehem is about one hundred kilometers and would have taken an exhausting ten days or so on donkey-back. The fact that Mary was not even required for the census further compounds this problem.

In short, Luke's whole scenario is unconvincing and , especially his description of the method of the Roman census, without any historical support.

Our suspicion as to the basic unhistorical of the account of the birth in Bethlehem is further aroused by the fact that apart from the nativity stories in Matthew and Luke, there is no evidence elsewhere in the New Testament to support it. We find in Mark, the oldest of all the gospels, passages that seem to imply the birthplace of Jesus as Nazareth in Galilee:

Mark 6:1
He [Jesus] left that place and came to his hometown...

The original Greek of the words in Mark 6:1 is patrida autou which means one's homeland, native country or hometown. Thus there is no reason to quibble with the translation provided by the NRSV. The whole section covered in the early chapters of Mark show Jesus preaching in the towns and villages of Galilee. So Mark 6:1 is telling us that Jesus' hometown, or native place, must be a town in Galilee. In the first verse referring to Jesus in Mark, this is how he was introduced:

Mark 1:9
In those days Jesus came from Nazareth of Galilee and was baptized by John in the Jordan.

Anyone reading these passages in Mark, without any references to Matthew or Luke will doubtless conclude that Jesus was born in Nazareth in Galilee. Furthermore we find that in all the three synoptics, Jesus was henceforth referred to as "the Galilean" or "the Nazarene" with no further reference being made to his birth in Bethlehem.

There is even one passage in John where, had the evangelist been aware of the tradition that Jesus was born in Bethlehem would certainly have inserted it here:

John 7:41-43

Others said, "This is the Messiah." But some asked, "Surely the Messiah does not come from Galilee, does he? Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?" So there was a division in the crowd because of him.

Surely John would have shown that the Jews' doubts were based on their own ignorance about Jesus ancestry and place of birth had he believed that Jesus was of the house of David and born in Bethlehem. The above passage strongly suggests that John was relying on a tradition about Jesus that included neither the descendents from David nor the birth in Bethlehem!!!!

Assuming, of course, that Luke does not have the audacity to invent his whole account of the Nativity, it is probable that both Matthew and Luke received different and, perhaps still amorphous, traditions regarding the birth of Jesus. For instance, it is possible that the tradition stated only that Jesus was born in Bethlehem not how his parents got there. Thus both Matthew and Luke simply added details to the story as they see fit. Could this tradition of the birth in Bethlehem be based on historical fact? It is not impossible, of course, that the tradition could have been grounded on historical fact. But I think it unlikely. For one thing it obviously reached both evangelist in different or indefinite forms, had it been historical one would expect more "meat" in the story. Secondly the birth in Bethlehem supposedly fulfilled an Old Testament passage. This is explicitly stated in Matthew:

Matthew 2:4-5

When King Herod heard this, he was frightened, and all Jerusalem with him; and calling together all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born. They told him, "In Bethlehem of Judea; for so it has been written by the prophet...

Matthew was quoting from Micah 5:2. What is wrong with this? Let us listen to what theologians Don Cuppitt and Peter Armstrong said in their book, Who Was Jesus?:

So our first principle of historical criticism must be: be wary of any details in the gospels which have close parallels in the Old Testament.

The reasoning is simple. The early Christians, not having access to information about the early life of Jesus and not knowing where he was born, searched, or rather ransacked, the Old Testament to look for references to Jesus. And having found the verse in Micah concluded that Jesus must have been born in Bethlehem. The fact that the birth in Bethlehem fulfilled an Old Testament prophecy, therefore makes the whole tradition of doubtful historicity.

I REST MY CASE...IT'S ALL BULLSHIT FOLKS. PERIOD.
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
look whos talking

I don't recall dragging you into this thread and making you post anything. You don't like what is being said here...LEAVE.You find it a waste of time...LEAVE. You find it pointless...LEAVE. U are here of your own free will. If you didn't find this thread interesting in the least bit...you wouldn't have bothered to post anything in the first place. Especially, not multiple posts.
 

KnicksFan4Realz

Benchwarmer
One Last Thing About Biblical Prophecy

Paul and Lyfe's BASIC ARGUMENT;

The Bible contains many prophecies that have accurately been fulfilled, proving it is a divine source.

WHY THEY ARE WRONG;
1. There are several mundane ways in which a prediction of the future can be fulfilled:

1. Retrodiction. The "prophecy" can be written or modified after the events fulfilling it have already occurred.

2. Vagueness. The prophecy can be worded in such a way that people can interpret any outcome as a fulfillment. Nostradomus's prophecies are all of this type. Vagueness works particularly well when people are religiously motivated to believe the prophecies.

3. Inevitability. The prophecy can predict something that is almost sure to happen, such as the collapse of a city. Since nothing lasts forever, the city is sure to fall someday. If it has not, it can be said that according to prophecy, it will.

4. Denial. One can claim that the fulfilling events occurred even if they have not. Or, more commonly, one can forget that the prophecy was ever made.

5. Self-fulfillment. A person can act deliberately to satisfy a known prophecy.

There are no prophecies in the Bible that cannot easily fit into one or more of those categories.

2. In biblical times, prophecies were not simply predictions. They were warnings of what could or would happen if things did not change. They were meant to influence people's behavior. If the people heeded the prophecy, the events would not come to pass; Jonah 3 gives an example. A fulfilled prophecy was a failed prophecy, because it meant people did not heed the warning.

3. The Bible also contains failed prophecies, in the sense that things God said would happen did not. For example:

* Joshua said that God would, without fail, drive out the Jebusites and Canaanites, among others (Josh. 3:9-10). But those tribes were not driven out (Josh. 15:63, 17:12-13).
* Ezekiel said Egypt would be made an uninhabited wasteland for forty years (29:10-14), and Nebuchadrezzar would plunder it (29:19-20). Neither happened.

4. Other religions claim many fulfilled prophecies, too (Prophecy Fulfilled n.d.).

5. Divinity is not shown by miracles. The Bible itself says true prophecies may come elsewhere than from God (Deut. 13:1-3), as may other miracles (Exod. 7:22, Matt. 4:8). Some people say that to focus on proofs is to miss the whole point of faith (John 20:29).

To touch on Archaeology as well...

1. Archaeology supports at most the general background of the Bible and some relatively recent details. It does not support every biblical claim. In particular, archaeology does not support anything about creation, the Flood, or the conquest of the Holy Land.

If a few instances of historical accuracy are so significant, then an equal claim for accuracy can be made for the Iliad and Gone with the Wind.

2. Archaeology contradicts significant parts of the Bible:

* The Bible contains anachronisms. Details attributed to one era actually apply to a much later era. For example, camels, mentioned in Genesis 24:10, were not widely used until after 1000 B.C.E. (Finkelstein and Silberman 2001).

* The Exodus, which should have been a major event, does not appear in Egyptian records. There are no traces in the Sinai that one would expect from forty years of wandering of more than half a million people. And other archaeological evidence contradicts it, showing instead that the Hebrews were a native people (Finkelstein and Silberman 2001; Lazare 2002).

* There is no evidence that the kingdoms of David and Solomon were nearly as powerful as the Bible indicates; they may not have existed at all (Finkelstein and Silberman 2001; Lazare 2002).

Many claims that archaeology supports the Bible, especially earlier ones, were based on the scientists trying to force the evidence to fit their own preconceptions.

Bimson, J. J. and D. Livingstone, 1987. Redating the Exodus. BAR 13(5): 40-53.

Finkelstein, Israel and Neil A. Silberman, 2001. The Bible Unearthed, New York: Free Press.

Miller, Laura, 2001 (7 Feb.). King David was a nebbish. Salon.com, http://dir.salon.com/books/feature/2001/02/07/solomon/index.html

Moorey, P. R. S., 1991. A Century of Biblical Archaeology. Westminster/John Knox Press.
 
Colossians 1:15-20, New international version

15He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16For by him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by him and for him. 17He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Does Colossians 1:16, 17 (RS) exclude Jesus from having been created, when it says "in him all things were created . . . all things were created through him and for him"? The Greek word here rendered "all things" is pan?ta, an inflected form of pas. At Luke 13:2, RS renders this "all . . . other"; JB reads "any other"; NE says "anyone else." (See also Luke 21:29 in NE and Philippians 2:21 in JB.) In harmony with everything else that the Bible says regarding the Son, NW assigns the same meaning to pan?ta at Colossians 1:16, 17 so that it reads, in part, "by means of him all other things were created . . . All other things have been created through him and for him." Thus he is shown to be a created being, part of the creation produced by God.

Dictionary:
image


  1. A reproduction of the form of a person or object, especially a sculptured likeness.
  2. Physics. An optically formed duplicate, counterpart, or other representative reproduction of an object, especially an optical reproduction formed by a lens or mirror.
  3. One that closely or exactly resembles another; a double: He is the image of his uncle.
  4. To make or produce a likeness of: imaged the poet in bronze.
  5. To mirror or reflect: a statue imaged in the water
So Jesus being said to be the Image of God does not mean he is actually God. He is one that closely,or exactly RESEMBLES God. Still, not God. And the first definition would explain how Jesus can be a creation of God and be his exact image or likeness.

You have yet to even try to explain how Jesus is said to be as your Bible puts it "the firstborn over all creation". This implies Jesus had a begining. I think it's noteworthy to mention that only Jesus is here being stated as the firstborn of all creation, and not the Father and Holy Spirit also.

In fact, the evidence would weigh against your understanding of these scriptures, in favor of JW's standpoint that Jesus is not God, but his only begotton Son, who is the closest to his Father's likeness or image. Also, the FIRSTBORN over all creation, meaning he was created by someone. Just like the Bible says. Also, the fact that God can't die (Habbakuk 1:12) and Jesus did, should ring the alarm.


#1. You still haven't addressed the difference between the Alpha and Omega and the title "beginning and the end," when it comes to Jesus.
Sure I have. here goes again.

Alpha and Omega: To whom does this title properly belong? (1) At Revelation 1:8, its owner is said to be God, the Almighty. In verse 11 according to KJ, that title is applied to one whose description thereafter shows him to be Jesus Christ. But scholars recognize the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 11 to be spurious, and so it does not appear in RS, NE, JB, NAB, Dy.

Dictionary:
spurious:

  1. Lacking authenticity or validity in essence or origin; not genuine; false.
  2. Of illegitimate birth.
(2) Many translations of Revelation into Hebrew recognize that the one described in verse 8 is Jehovah, and so they restore the personal name of God there.

(3) Revelation 21:6, 7 indicates that Christians who are spiritual conquerors are to be ?sons? of the one known as the Alpha and the Omega. That is never said of the relationship of spirit-anointed Christians to Jesus Christ. Jesus spoke of them as his ?brothers.? (Heb. 2:11; Matt. 12:50; 25:40) But those ?brothers? of Jesus are referred to as "sons of God." (Gal. 3:26; 4:6)

If Jesus is God, then how could spirit-anointed Christians be said to be his brothers, and his Sons?

(4) At Revelation 22:12, TEV inserts the name Jesus, so the reference to Alpha and Omega in verse 13 is made to appear to apply to him. But the name Jesus does not appear there in Greek, and other translations do not include it.
5) At Revelation 22:13, the Alpha and Omega is also said to be "the first and the last," which expression is applied to Jesus at Revelation 1:17, 18. Similarly, the expression "apostle" is applied both to Jesus Christ and to certain ones of his followers. But that does not prove that they are the same person or are of equal rank, does it? (Heb. 3:1) So the evidence points to the conclusion that the title "Alpha and Omega" applies to Almighty God, the Father, not to the Son.

#2. You still haven't answered for the JWs false prophecies and God's instruction that false prophets will be put to death.
Ok. First ask yourself do you even know the meaning of prophet? I don't think you do.

prophet:

  1. A person who speaks by divine inspiration or as the interpreter through whom the will of a god is expressed.
  2. A person gifted with profound moral insight and exceptional powers of expression.
  3. A predictor; a soothsayer.
I think you tend think that the 3rd definition is the only definition of a prophet. All prophets of Jehovah exibited definition #1. This is how come JW's are not false prophets, because we speak purely of the will of God, and not of ourselves. Also, your argument of our predictions being wrong, so we're wrong is a bit dogmatic. Why? Well because even the early Christians had wrong expections and had to be corrected. Examples.

1 Cor. 13:9, 10: "We have partial knowledge and we prophesy partially; but when that which is complete arrives, that which is partial will be done away with."

Prov. 4:18: "The path of the righteous ones is like the bright light that is getting lighter and lighter until the day is firmly established."

The apostles and other early Christian disciples had certain wrong expectations, but the Bible does not classify them with the "false prophets."?See Luke 19:11; John 21:22, 23; Acts 1:6, 7.

Nathan the prophet encouraged King David to go ahead with what was in his heart regarding the building of a house for Jehovah?s worship. But later Jehovah told Nathan to inform David that he was not the one who would build it. Jehovah did not reject Nathan for what he had said earlier but continued to use him because he humbly corrected the matter when Jehovah made it plain to him.?1 Chron. 17:1-4, 15.







As for what you follow, it's your business. I'm just trying to help you to free and wake yourself up, as I've explained in the past. I've made my points. If you want to avoid answering them, to yourself, more than anyone else, fine.
No disrespect, but you have no basis for your freedom, other than freedom from God. There is nothing but philosophical viewpoints that you have stated thus far. And man's philosophy is always limited in truth and understanding. That would include yours.

But more power to you. Good talk, and good day!
 
Top