paxonel:

i quoted John 4:21 and John 2:19-21 that what Jesus meant by the term "there will not be left one stone upon another " in Matthew 24:2 is something totally different from what the disciples had in mind when they asked him this question, but you are still looking at what the disciples asked to buttress your point not knowing that even the disciples were confused themselves.

Scriptures are contextual, no scripture in the bible can be understood in isolation. Every scriptures are linked to some other scriptures in correlation, AND IF WHAT YOU ARE READING DOES NOT LINK YOU TOWARDS THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF CHRIST THEN YOU HAVE LOST IT
If it linked you to one irrelevant 70 AD you have lost it
in contrary to Matthew 24 that the generation of the disciples did not pass?

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

what you are saying contradicts the bible.
It does not have any scritural bearing!
No where in the bible that 70AD events were mentioned.
But i quoted John 4:21 and John 2:19-21 to buttress my points and they correlate, any reasonable person who follows this thread will see that.

And come to think of it, do you know how many times the israelites temple was destroyed and rebuild since Jesus died and resurrected up till this modern day? There is no significance of all that to salvation, but rather it was Christ's death and resurrection recorded in the bible that matters.

Like I said before, you’re entitled to your opinion. Truth will remain truth irrespective of how you try to color it or bend it to suit you.
Shalom

paxonel:
I'm saying that whether it was the scripture Jesus said he will rebuild the temple in 3 days or Matthew 24:2, he wasn't referring to the temple at Jerusalem in both cases.

Matthew 24:1-2
Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”

-This happened in 70AD when the Roman army besieged Jerusalem and destroyed the temple like Jesus said

He was simply saying he was going to be crucified and resurrect after 3 days, the process that will destroy the temple to set up a new covenant.

John 2:19-21
Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body.

Jesus was speaking to his fellow Jews here that when they kill him he will resurrect, and they actually killed him because they took responsibility for the killing.

Matthew 27:24-25
So when Pilate saw that he was gaining nothing, but rather that a riot was beginning, he took water and washed his hands before the crowd, saying,”I am innocent of this man's blood; see to it yourselves.”And all the people answered, “His blood be on us and on our children!”


As for the temple (building) in Jerusalem, the Jews didn’t destroy nor take responsibility for it like they did for the temple(body of Christ) and Christ didn’t say it will be rebuilt in 3 days like he said about his own body. So they are two different scenarios and both had been fulfilled.

But since you have a fixed opinion, you’re entitled to it. But the scriptures remain the standard and no opinion of man can change the truth in the scriptures.

Shalom

paxonel:
in Matthew 24?
Go and read it again and see if two temples were mentioned,I don't know where you get that from.

You were the one that made mention of Jesus saying that the temple would be rebuilt after 3 days when destroyed and I responded to you accordingly.

Why are you now asking if that part was mentioned in Matthew 24? So you didn’t know that it wasn’t mentioned before you brought it up in the first place?

paxonel:
no doubt
that does not dispute the fact that the whole bible was written chronologically.ie,the time of the old testament events were much older than that of the new testament, right?
I'm very sure that the disciples didn't understand anything Jesus was saying to them in Matthew 24 until Jesus died and resurrected. It was after his resurrection that Jesus began to fully expanciate on some of those things written about him that he was trying to explain to his disciples in Matthew 24

Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
but you have read a scripture when Jesus told the Pharisees "destroy this temple and i will build it within 3 days", what will you say to that?
Did it take 40 years to destroy and rebuild the temple by Jesus Christ or 3 days, choose one?
I just mention Jesus told the Pharisees he will rebuild the temple in 3 days, is that what the article confirmed?
If not, then don't you think what is valid is what is written in the bible,that it took 3 days for Jesus to rebuild the temple?

Why are we still waiting for rapture that must have taken Jesus 3 days to complete 2000 years ago?
Certainly, he said that generation did not pass until everything he said in Matthew 24 was fulfilled, he was very truthful.
it was because nobody knew who he was now in that hour of his death and resurrection.
The Pharisees didn't know he was the Christ so they didn't believe.
The disciples who believe didn't know that he was about to be crucified talkless of believing he will resurrect.
So, the signs were actually the signs of his death and resurrection, not rapture.

Jesus spoke about two temples: his body and Jerusalem temple.

He talked about how the temple (his body) would be destroyed/killed and how it will be rebuilt in 3 days and it happened:
John 2:19-22

Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”
“But he was speaking about the temple of his body. When therefore he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the Scripture and the word that Jesus had spoken.”


The second temple he talked about was also destroyed as he prophesied and it happened in the generation of the people he was talking to

Do you see the extent to which you people are confused in Christianity today?

Earthquake was one that of the signs he mentioned, there was earthquake the day he was crucified.
Rumors of wars was one the signs, the Roman empire conquered and ruled Israel about the time he was crucified.
So,

You people cannot think at all
firstly,he did not mention second, please correct yourself.

Secondly, the gospel of kingdom was preached starting by John the Baptist.
It was preached by Jesus and his disciples until Jesus was crucified, that crucifixion and resurrection was the end of the world.

The world in this context does not necessarily mean the whole world.
The end of the world therefore could possibly mean the end of the old covenant and the beginning of a new covenant
oh, see you!

Keep waiting my dear, the world will simply move on and leave you behind

Thank you

worlexy:

Op Jesus’ word is the truth and nothing but the truth.
In order for you to understand Matthew 24:34, you need to understand the questions Jesus was asked at the beginning of that chapter in Matthew 24:1-3


“Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”


“ As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

The asked two questions
First was when the Jerusalem temple will be destroyed

Second was the sign of Jesus’ second coming


Prophets of old often grouped events together by their topic rather than their chronology, and in this discourse Jesus did the same. He addressed what in Matthew are grammatically two separate questions as highlighted above.

The disciples might have viewed these questions as integrally related but Jesus distinguished them:

When will the temple be destroyed: within a generation. As Jesus proclaimed, the temple was destroyed roughly 40 years after Jesus spoke those words. Go and read the event that happened in Jerusalem in the year AD 70 then you’ll understand better.

You can read this link as well:
https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Jerusalem-70

What will be the sign of his coming: he gave the signs and said it will happen at an hour no one knows.

Matthew 24:14 made us know that Jesus said his second coming won’t take place until all the nations of the world have heard the gospel. There was no way that could have taken place in that generation but it’s possible in our generation because of advancement in mass communication and transportation.
Shalom

OLORIPAPA
Kandeed
Dtruthspeaker
Image123
MrOnPoint
Pschalade
Kingxsamz
Cannies

paxonel:
A lot of Christians also quote this scripture in defense of rapture.

Matthew 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.

But they ignore what Jesus said in verse 34

Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

He was referring to the generation at the time he was not yet crucified which is about 2000 years ago

2000 years have pass now, what is rapture still waiting for?

Does it mean Jesus lied when he told his disciples it will happen before their generation pass away i don't get it ?

Op Jesus’ word is the truth and nothing but the truth.
In order for you to understand Matthew 24:34, you need to understand the questions Jesus was asked at the beginning of that chapter in Matthew 24:1-3


“Jesus left the temple and was going away, when his disciples came to point out to him the buildings of the temple. But he answered them, “You see all these, do you not? Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”


“ As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the end of the age?”

The asked two questions
First was when the Jerusalem temple will be destroyed

Second was the sign of Jesus’ second coming


Prophets of old often grouped events together by their topic rather than their chronology, and in this discourse Jesus did the same. He addressed what in Matthew are grammatically two separate questions as highlighted above.

The disciples might have viewed these questions as integrally related but Jesus distinguished them:

When will the temple be destroyed: within a generation. As Jesus proclaimed, the temple was destroyed roughly 40 years after Jesus spoke those words. Go and read the event that happened in Jerusalem in the year AD 70 then you’ll understand better.

You can read this link as well:
https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Jerusalem-70

What will be the sign of his coming: he gave the signs and said it will happen at an hour no one knows.

Matthew 24:14 made us know that Jesus said his second coming won’t take place until all the nations of the world have heard the gospel. There was no way that could have taken place in that generation but it’s possible in our generation because of advancement in mass communication and transportation.
Shalom

Sunday2021:
you statement read: I will attend to my health first! They didn't go for strike because they are sick or attending to their health. They went to strike because they want an increase on their allowances, not even salaries.

Stop Misinforming people, show us where they asked for increase allowance

References:

https://www.thecable.ng/breaking-court-orders-resident-doctors-to-suspend-strike/amp

Wrong headings, maintaining status quo is not the same as calling off the strike. The current status quo is strike



Premium times reported it better

https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/top-news/480799-court-refuses-another-request-to-stop-resident-doctors-strike.html

Jolomenas:

The level at which residents and consultant doctors are leaving this country is alarming
When they all leave we have no one to teach us the junior doctors.
It will be devastating to our health system.

The thought of that is scary

Jolomenas:

No mind manna, For Abia na even 19months salary

imagine! That’s someone who has worked for 1 and a half years without getting paid

post=105039748:
This dem strike no dey finish

It is only in this our darling nation that we still Doctors going on strike like bakers making bread!

And this has been going on for almost 20 years!

God save Nigeria.

You expected a doctor that was owed 6 months salary to continue working?

stunnert:
These doctors are fvcked up greedy bastardz, always feeling like they should be paid the highest salaries and as if we should worship the ground they walk on and when you're rushed to an hospital for an emergency medical attention these motherfvckers will not attend to you immediately, someone will even have the balls to tell you to go and bring a police report before giving you medical attention.

Your anger can cook beans

Nigeria!

Why did the government play ludo with the lives of innocent Nigerians that have died during the strike by not honoring the agreement they signed in the first place? Now, the government will end up doing what they refused to do that led to the strike: the striking doctors will get paid; but the lives lost can’t be gotten back.

Who loses? All the parties

The government loses money and the lives of the citizens

The citizens, including the striking doctors would have lost loved ones in one way or the other!

No victor!

Morale of the story:

Make hay while the sun shines

A stitch in time saves nine


Nigeria government should try to always avoid its workforce from going on strike by obeying agreements signed!

MaxInDHouse:


That's what all of us need to bear in mind and easily walk away when we see people whose faith is not in agreement with ours.
It's just as simple as that!

Revelation 22:12
Look, I am coming soon! My reward is with me, and I will give to each person according to what they have done.

MaxInDHouse:
From our chat so far any reasonable follower can sense who is really crying inwardly like Cain. So calm down and relax!

Continue misleading people in your cult. You’ll give account of your deeds and misdeeds

MaxInDHouse:


Please help yourself because at this point nobody can help you!

We are talking about FAITH and each person will decide no one has the right to force another.

The highlighted reveals how bitter you've become against a religious group whose only offense is difference in beliefs.

Cain attacked Abel!
Jewish religious leaders attacked Jesus and his disciples!
Orthodox Churches killed millions of innocent people!
Radical Islamists are still killing innocent people till today!


All these occurred simply because of difference in beliefs!

Now imagine what Cain, Jewish religious leaders, Orthodox Churches during the dark ages and Radical Islamists had in mind towards the people they wanted to silence:

It's all about being "Idolatry and religious fraud"

The reason why i've been responding to your question is to prove that we have a reason why our FAITH differs from yours. But if you're now becoming this bitter think of what Jesus said:

“Stop judging that you may not be judged; 2 for with the judgment you are judging, you will be judged, and with the measure that you are measuring out, they will measure out to you. 3 Why, then, do you look at the straw in your brother’s eye but do not notice the rafter in your own eye? Matthew 7:1-3

Only God can judge who is right and who is wrong. For your information to the Jews, Islamists and Traditionalists once you claim to believe in Jesus you're a fraudster who deserves to be deleted (killed)
So if you're now having the same kind of feelings towards your fellowman for the same reason that their faith is wrong, then remind yourself always what Jesus said in the Bible book of Matthew 7:1-3.

Jesus never asked us to take laws into our hands against those who choose to pitch their tent elsewhere {Luke 9:51-56} he was a strong advocate of freedom of worship!

To Jesus only God's Kingdom can resolve the issue of contradictions in faith not you or anybody else for that matter!

If you like cry from now till tomorrow, your sect is fraudulent and Antichrist you’ve misled a lot of people.

MaxInDHouse:


True Christians don't keep the laws of Moses we only make references to it when needed.

But you’re keeping the one that you fraudulently misinterpreted to deny people from blood transfusion.

You guys are Antichrist and fraudulent.

Our law not to take blood is from the Bible book of Act 15:28-29 which reads:

Paul was making reference to the same law of Moses that you deny above.

MaxInDHouse:


If he has come to FULFILL something how come you think his followers need to continue with what Jesus said it has finished? John 19:30

So you mean the law has finished? So why are you still misinterpreting the law of not to drink animal blood and using it to send people to their early graves?

MaxInDHouse:


Guy you're more confused than i thought!

Please quote the verse for everyone to read and understand!

Matthew 26:27-28
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”

Paul re affirmed what Jesus said:
1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”


If you follow the teaching of Christ, you will follow his order of taking drinking his blood in Holy communion, if you don’t that means you’ve disobeyed him. If you do, that means you’re an hypocrite cos you preach against drinking of blood under any guise and yet you drink that of Christ.

MaxInDHouse:

But later sent His only begotten Son who now brought the final word on killing. Do you think people who rejected Jesus' teaching had no brains? Well these are the reasons why the rejected and even condemned him!
But we believe he is the most wonderful counselor the world ever had {Isaiah 9:6} God sent Moses who taught the Israelites to kill their enemies and through Moses foretold this same people that another Prophet will arise who will teach them something better {Deuteronomy 18:15-18} so when God told those faithful Jews in the first century saying:

“This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved. Listen to him” Matthew 17:5

It's clear that something New is about to be revealed through this person because God has never said so even if the messenger is an angel {Hebrews 1:6} so if you don't believe in God's Son well we do! John 3:16



Jerusalem Temple was destroyed due to the wicked way the Jews treated God's prophets sent to them most especially what they did to God's only begotten Son! Matthew 23:37-38

Jesus said he came to fulfill the laws and not to abolish them.
Matthew 5:17
Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

MaxInDHouse:
Guy you're totally confused!

Malicious Criticism is kicking you off balance so take your time to meditate thoroughly on what you want to say before accusing people simply because their faith is not in agreement with your thinking!

Jesus never drank blood neither did any of his followers back then so it's clear that God's son is using a metaphorical expression to pass across an important message. Please first get yourself together, know the import of Jesus' metaphorical expression before coming to a public forum like this to argue blindly!

Can you mention the name of your church now? Of course you won't because right thinking people will see such a church as the gathering of vampires!

Twisting and derailing again.

Jesus said” drink my blood in remembrance of me”

If you’re not doing so you’re not a Christ follower, if you are doing so then you’re an hypocrite cos u claim you don’t take blood under any guise

Janosky:

@ Matthew 5:40, Bros did Jesus Christ tell you his followers should join the Roman army ,nay any army?

Acts 5:29, JWs obey God rather than men.
John 18:36, Bros, digest & roger that.

Titus 3:1
Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed,

1 Peter 2:13-14
Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

MaxInDHouse:
Guy please go and relax, it's not by force that we agree on beliefs that's the essence of freedom of worship!

Respond to what I asked you, stop the game of blackmail

MaxInDHouse:


This case is simple!
You believe eating blood is sin but you can take it through your veins during treatment while JWs beleive we must totally abstain from blood.
The difference here is the understanding Sir just as most religious leaders are telling their Church members not to take Covid19 vaccine whereas JWs are encouraged to take it.
So if members of your church die through Covid19 does that makes your religious leaders wicked for discouraging you from taking it?

Respond to this first:


I won’t allow you to derail this discussion further, the point is clear that JW is an extremist group that twisted the law of God that dead animals blood should not be drank like the idolaters do, but you twisted it to mean that those that need blood transfusion should die rather than take blood.

Even Jesus that you claim you follow said we should drink his blood because he was alive, he’s alive and will forever be alive.

Matthew 26:27-28
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”

Paul re affirmed what Jesus said:
1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”


If you follow the teaching of Christ, you will follow his order of taking drinking his blood in Holy communion, if you don’t that means you’ve disobeyed him. If you do, that means you’re an hypocrite cos you preach against drinking of blood under any guise and yet you drink that of Christ.

Janosky:

Bros, why do you pass off your FALSE claims as fact?
Whether, Blood screening or not, why do most patients get blood transfusion and die?

Stop talking about what you know nothing about.

You lied that people get infected from blood transfusion and I told you that it’s only when the blood is not properly screened.

Now you’re saying people die from blood transfusion reaction. That is not restricted only to blood transfusion. People die from food allergies, allergies to environmental dust, medications. So you don’t have a point. Many are saved by transfusion than those that have reactions from it and most reactions don’t lead to death.

Did their transfusion save them?
(I'm speaking from experience, wetin my eyes see, no be hearsay.)

Blood transfusion saves millions, negligible numbers of people have reactions that don’t kill.

Stop lying that you are speaking from experience. You can’t have experience in blood transfusion than I am and I know that your claim is falsehoods.

Blood transfusions suppresses immunity, it's a proven medical research finding of John Hopkins University's Medical hospital/School.
Bros, read more,abeg you.

Send the full article/journal and I’ll expose your deception.

Repeated blood transfusion like done for those with sickle cell may suppress immunity but not transfusion done to save the life of someone bleeding from accidents or childbirth

Janosky:


Acts 5:29, Obey God first, ("thou shalt not kill)"

The same God that said “thou shall not kill” allowed Israel to kill their enemies. You can’t be smarter than God

Matthew 24:15-20, when the Roman army invaded Jerusalem and destroyed the temple, did Jesus tell the disciples to arm themselves and defend their temple/country?

Because Jesus had already said God doesn’t live in the Temple.

Destruction of temple in Jerusalem was prophesied by Jesus before it occurred.

Janosky:


**1.
Bros, did you see the expression "Abstain from animal blood" at Acts 15:29?
Is blood exclusive to animals alone?
Is blood exclusive to man alone?

"Abstain from blood" refers to blood without exclusivity to animals alone.
If you claim it's animal blood,@ Acts 15:29, did God command animals to abstain from fornication?
Therefore, your claim @**1 is NOT true.
Because you twisted Acts 15:29 to claim it reference animal blood.

**2
Bros, according to your **2, you have proven that the life force of a beast is in the blood.

2 Questions for you:
is the life force of man in the blood?

Does the blood in man perform the same function as the blood in the beast?

Bros, be frank & straight forward oooo

First and foremost, we know that Paul was referring to the blood of animal because he was making reference the laws against drinking animal blood as commanded by God in Leviticus.

To understand the concept of animal blood, read this again:

Leviticus 3:17
This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood.’”

The ordinance was to avoid eating fat or blood. You chose to obey one law and to reject the other.

You refuse blood transfusion but eat animal fat yet you claim you’re obeying God’s law.


The blood of animal commanded not to be eaten is the animal that has been killed and “the idea is that by ingesting it, the individual has destroyed the life force by dissipation. Instead, the life is to be offered back to God where it came.”

That was why the blood of Abel’s blood cried from the ground because he was dead already like you quoted in genesis 4:10.

The LORD said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.


Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Deuteronomy 12:16-25.
16. ye shall not eat the blood; ye shall pour it upon the earth as water
—The prohibition against eating or drinking blood as an unnatural custom accompanied the announcement of the divine grant of animal flesh for food (Ge 9:4), and the prohibition was repeatedly renewed by Moses with reference to the great objects of the law (Le 17:12), the prevention of idolatry, and the consecration of the sacrificial blood to God. In regard, however, to the blood of animals slain for food, it might be shed without ceremony and poured on the ground as a common thing like water—only for the sake of decency, as well as for preventing all risk of idolatry, it was to be covered over with earth (Le 17:13), in opposition to the practice of heathen sportsmen, who left it exposed as an offering to the god of the chase.


So, your sect deliberately twisted the law of God and in so doing you have sent many into their early graves. So yes, you guys are extremist. God never said humans should not be transfused with the blood of fellow humans. God can see into the future so He could have known that a time would come when blood transfusion would be a form of treatment yet He never spoke against it.




The blood of those who got injured in battles and had their blood spilled on the ground, don’t cry as long as the person is still alive

In blood transfusion, the person whose blood you’re refusing is not killed or dead so the analogy is to the same.

MaxInDHouse:

We are the people that comes from different races throughout the earth to form one big and happy family of peace loving worshipers! Isaiah 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-3

Diversion tactic.

Answer my question:
Jehovah or Jesus never spoke against joining the army, so which law are you obeying to be rebellious against the authorities?


The Jesus you claim you’re obeying NEVER commanded you to be rebellious.
Matthew 5:40
“And if any man will sue thee at the law and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also”


JW’s teaching is clearly Antichrist

MaxInDHouse:

You're very funny Walahi Talahi!

So Jesus never married so those adherents to his teachings shouldn't marry. Please clap for yourself!

Well you asked a question so you deserve an answer. The New Covenant comes with laws that's written in our hearts not in tablets or scrolls {Jeremiah 31:31-34} therefore we look onto Jesus to read out the laws of the New Covenant through his thoughts, words and actions!

Note again: the laws of the New Covenant are written in Jesus'
Thoughts
Words and
Actions Romans 10:1-4

About marriage Jesus never married but in his WORDS it's written that he said we can decide to marry or not! Matthew 19:10-12

So that's what it means to keep looking at the AUTHOR and finisher of our faith! Hebrews 12:2

Because our faith is not determined by the Old Covenant with the laws given to the nation of Israel, rather it's written in Jesus' THOUGHTS WORDS AND ACTIONS!

May you have PEACE!

I won’t allow you to derail this discussion further, thr point is clear that JW is an extremist group that twisted the law of God that dead animals blood should not be drank like the idolaters do, but you twisted it to mean that those that need blood transfusion should die rather than take blood.

Even Jesus that you claim you follow said we should drink his blood because he was alive, he’s alive and will forever be alive.

Matthew 26:27-28
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;
“For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.”

Paul re affirmed what Jesus said:
1 Corinthians 11:25
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”


If you follow the teaching of Christ, you will follow his order of taking drinking his blood in Holy communion, if you don’t that means you’ve disobeyed him. If you do, that means you’re an hypocrite cos you preach against drinking of blood under any guise and yet you drink that of Christ.

MaxInDHouse:
[size=8pt][/size]

Wow It's like you've gotten so much to say on this!
But i pick out the points so i'll stick to the main points. There are 613 laws given to the nation of Israel, the first ten were inscribed on stone tablets as a proof that the remaining are from the God who brought the people out of Egypt so when they see the laws written not by human they will know that truly Jehovah meant business with the laws Moses brought to them. But after Jesus has sealed the New Covenant with his blood all those who come under the New Covenant have nothing to do with whatever comes with the Old (including it's laws/Commandments! Jeremiah 31:31-34

So if someone should ask you any question about stealing, covet or what have you tell them that JWs only look onto Jesus. If Jesus do steal or covet then we can but if he doesn't then it means we shouldn't! Romans 10:1-4

May you have PEACE!

Did Jesus marry? No

So why are JW getting married since Jesus didn’t get married and you claim to do only what Jesus did.

MaxInDHouse:
[size=8pt][/size]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm i can see that you're getting to know Maximus on this thread so i welcome you Sir.

When reading the Bible please try to meditate on what prompted the Author (God) to order His servants to pen down such injunctions!

So let's consider Paul's letter to our brothers in Rome together but this time around meditate thoroughly on what could have been the cause of such injunction.

The Christians do deliberate on so many issues and since they're Roman citizens they wonder if it's appropriate for them to obey the government that's not practicing God's law.
Unlike the ancient nation of Israel the laws the government in place advocates is God's own Commandments but in this case it's laws that stem from pagan customs and traditions. So the Christians are puzzled "should we keep their laws?"
That's why Apostle Paul under the inspiration of God's Holy Spirit rephrased Jesus' order for his followers to pay Caesar's things to Caesar and God's things to God! Mark 10:13-17
Caesar (worldly authorities) demands that their subjects fear them, honour them, pay them tributes and taxes {Romans 13:7} but whenever their orders comes in conflict against God's orders then we must obey God as ruler rather than man! Act 4:19
God's only begotten son reminded us that we must love our neighbours as ourselves {Mark 12:30} but most importantly we must love our fellow believers the same way he loved us! John 13:34-35
You may not understand the clear difference between this two injunctions so i'll expatiate: when you love someone like yourself it means you're putting such a person in your shoes before dealing with him therefore whatever you know you won't like you shouldn't try it with your neighbout. But the second one is very hard: loving someone the same way Jesus love you means you have to prepare to sacrifice your own life if the need arises to save your fellow believers! John 15:13

Now let's come back home!
My fellow believers are in Ghana and i remember that Jesus COMMADED me to love them the same way he loved me! {John 13:34-35} but here is the man in authority ordering me to pick up weapons and go against my fellow believers in Christ!

Please judge for yourself who you will obey at that time whether the worldly authority or that guy from Nazareth you often refer to as "Lord" Act 5:29

God bless you and may you have PEACE!

Jehovah or Jesus never spoke against joining the army, so which law are you obeying to be rebellious against the authorities?

FengChui:


Na you give me fat to chop?

Nope but since your sect doesn’t talk against eating fat as commanded in the law you’re quoting, it doesn’t need any rocket science to know that u eat fat