@trogun

While you have to be commended for your enthusiasm and time spent on this issue, you have largely failed to listen to what has been said or counter using the scriptures.

Sorry no my enthusiasm but what you believe is the scriptures

1 Thess 5:17-23
17 Pray without ceasing.
18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.
19 Quench not the Spirit.

20 Despise not prophesyings.
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.


23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

KJV

A clear distinction has been made between "prophesying/prediction" and "expectation". The "prophecy/prediction" is already in the Bible, the "expectation" is when those prophecies are believed to have been fulfilled.

I don’t buy your redefining expectation as having been fulfilled
Expectation is anticipation of something happening: a confident belief or strong hope that a particular event will happen
Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Thus showing that it has not happened yet but will happen in order words, its still futuristic in nature. So russel expected in his day that 1914 will be the end of the world and when 1914 came and passed, instead of accepting that his expectation was wrong, his followers decided to remodify the wordings as something yet to happen, thus been deceitful and disingenuous and also using dates to justify 1914. 1914 is failed and wrong accept it period.

"Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatened anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain.
We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours.

But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226

also Yahshua never claim we should expect YEAR NOR DAY NOR TIME as in 1914 but Him as our salvation but russsel and all jw have harped on the 1914 as if its our savior and when the 1914 came and past, the needful by russel’s followers to do was to remodify the wordings to mean completely different from what russel had categorically said as

“We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours. “

And about the Him , am referring to, is the yet to be visible coming Yahshua to be seen by all not the arch angel who has been invincibly present since 1878. Take note.

The bible chronology used to arrive at 1914 as the year of Christ's assumption of Kingdom power is similar to that recorded in the Bible predicting when the Messiah was to appear:

Daniel 9:25,26 - "Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed".

Vigilant, studious Jews who expended themselves to studying the Scriptures and this Daniel's prophecy (written hundreds of years before Christ came to earth) would have correctly calculated from year 455 B.C.E when the "word to rebuild Jerusalem went out", to "expect" the appearing of the Messiah in 29CE when Christ was baptized (thus anointed as Messiah).

This is pretty much what JWs did. The early Bible students had expectations based on studying Bible prophecies deeply and it was largely true, though there were elements they had wrong expectations of. Nothing is wrong is trying to understand the Bible fully. It's not impossible for serious Christians to misunderstand things ( as the Apostles did, because they are not infallible) - what is more important is willingness to continue to peer into the scriptures for better understanding, like JWs continue to do up to this day.

Feel free to look again at the explanations for 1914 on this thread from the links below, and if you have a biblical basis for a different opinion, please bring it up for discussion:

Am not to comfortable with dates of the past events, all am ok is the events occurred. But do you still agree that uptil now jews still do not believe that the daniel’s prophecy was fulfilled visibly when Christ walked on the earth? Unlike russel’s failed expectation which he claimed to use the bible even using the pyramid of Egypt (which is used in the da vinci code book) to come to the conclusion of 1914 is quite questionable to say the least.

Let me quote I quotes I will like to share with you on dates

This scripture clearly implies that all attempts to set dates for the next World War and the second coming of Jesus are wasted effort. The ages past are also difficult for us to unravel and must remain full of mystery. The tapestry of the past has many folds, and we easily lose track of most of them in our feeble attempts to trace history backwards. http://www.ldolphin.org/time.html

So I would rather have my expectation built on the word of Christ not dates which men can have their expectation in turn out to be erroneous.

You really need to dial down your obsession with Charles Russell. As much as JWs appreciate and respect the early work he and other students of the Bible did, they were just men who willingly expended their time and resources to understand the bible and surely had some wrong expectations (as did the early apostles) but were willing to course-correct and continue learning from the Scriptures.

I don’t know him but what am highlighting is his word which is a failed expectation of assumption which is my right according to this verse

1 Thess 5:17-23
17 Pray without ceasing.
18 In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.
19 Quench not the Spirit.

20 Despise not prophesyings.
21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.


23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

KJV

So if am testing/proving and finding his “prophecy/prediction/expectation” as not good, should I just not speak out against it? SMH. If I were them/he, I wont spend my time and resources to find out the “hour nor the day” of His Coming rather I would spend my time to receive the abundance of His grace and the gift of righteousness to be able to reign in this life in Yahshua, why waste your time speculating on the unknown “hour or day” which makes up a year?

@berny

you decide! from the very day you put up this thread, see the bolded .....Re: JMAN05, BERNIMOORE ON JONAH'S WARNING VS JW RUSSELL 1914 PREDICTION

you have limited the thread to jonah and russel! with the heading of the thread! it would have been another case if you if you had put jonah vs jehovahs witnesses

Yes, I started it because in no way will jonah’s prophecy be equaled to russel’s expectation… note trogun has clarified for us and has put a clog in your wheel by agreeing that russel’s was expectation not prophecy/prediction as you have tried to show and of which that “expectation” was a failed expectation. EOD! here, so berny sorry

A clear distinction has been made between "prophesying/prediction" and "expectation". The "prophecy/prediction" is already in the Bible, the "expectation" is when those prophecies are believed to have been fulfilled.

i was reacting to what you said below
i only try to also remind you that since jonah did not change his words when the destruction of ninevah never occured before he died, russel too never change anything he said about 1914 before he died, maybe you have dig and search for any changes russel might have made but you cant lay your hand on any, you seem to be hard pressed, hence you decide to put russel vs yahshua ...or major/minor prophets,

and it would be unfair if after failing to show if russel had changed what he said about 1914 to another date to now force what he did not say or changes he did not make on him, you easily try to separate jonah and nahum prediction of doom on nineveh which both never witnessed. but tried to force what russel did not change before he died on him...are you fair? brother, i want fairness to these jehovahs witnesses, no matter how you tried to mix these facts up, it would be separated!

You make me laugh. What do you make of the image I uploaded up there, who are the followers of russel? Jw. And when their “expectation” was dashed, they quickly remodified the wordings to mean something other than what russel meant. If only they had allowed it the way it was and come outrightly to condemn it continually unlike what jw on this thread have tried to, uphold the 1914 as still viable which is wrong as any even the assemblies of God church which you are comparing.

I repeat any “expectation” that harps on the coming of Yahshua on a certain [date hour or day], no matter who, I will reject it, even you if you are a sincere student of the bible.

@rabzy

A lot of things Russell said were misconstrued while he was alive and took great pains to explain himself, still he people still spread a lot of mis-information. First and foremost, Russell was not a prophet nor did he claim to be one, he was a student of the Bible and took time to study on his own and consulted with others also on several scriptural points. One of his famous books is studies of the scriptures.

Russell from his studies believed that Christ would appear invisibly an his manifestation would not be apparent to all immediately until much later, he met Barbour who believed and taught that Christ appeared invisibly in 1874 based on their calculation that, that year marked 6000 years from adam so therefore would usher in a 'thousand year sabbath rest'. Now he met Barbour in 1876, two years after the event was supposed to have taken place invisibly. His studies with barbour made him believe so, it could not have been a prediction if you believed something after the event was said to have occurred.

His studies of the scriptures also pointed to the year 1914 as a significant year, he has been talking about 1914 since the late 1870s. It was said that 1914 would mark the end of the gentile times and the commencement of a time of trouble or tribulation. This was how he explained the 'end of the gentile times

'
Now, dear friends, our expectation has been that these Gentile times would finish with the present year, 1914, and that with the finishing of the Gentile times, forthwith, immediately, God's kingdom would begin to manifest itself. I do not know yet that this is not true. It will have to be shown. Perhaps somebody can prove that it is not true, but I do not think anyone yet can prove that it is not true. If we come to the full end of 1914 and nothing transpires following that time to indicate the establishment of Christ's Kingdom amongst mankind, then perhaps we will have to reconsider matters; but not until then will it be necessary for us to reconsider.

Because these Gentile governments, represented by the image Babylon, Medo-Persia, etc., were given their places to occupy for a certain specific time, between the time Zedekiah's crown was taken away and the time when Messiah's Kingdom would be established. All of that time they must have. It is like a lease given to you. If you received a lease expiring October, 1914, why then, just as soon as the lease would expire it would be time for you to get out of the premises. Suppose you did not know that your lease had expired; it was long and you had forgotten it was for October 1st, 1914. You were building, planting and fixing up the house as though you were expecting to stay there forever. Now your lease has run out; what would you then expect? You would receive some notice to get out. Suppose you did not go? You would be put out.


It was an 'expectation' and never a prediction and he never said said it was 'cast in stone' that was what his critics said when he mentioned witnesses in stone i.e alluding to one of the pyramids.

Russell and his friends were ardent Bible students, they sought for knowledge, they consulted amongst themselves, they came out with what they understood from their studies, they were wrong on some things but they never said, they never said they never said they were prophets nor infallible.

@rabzy as much as you try to make us see that russel’s “expectation” was out of studious study of scripture… then you must also agree that he was studiously wrong in his “expectation”. Trying to twist scriptures to support russel’s failed expectation will not help us… lets accept it was a failed expectation and move on to simply expecting His coming. By the way, if Yahshua “claimed” that His Father has set the hour and day best known to Him alone, why would you now turn to accept russel’s studious expectation of coming to the conclusion of 1914?
Another thing is you seem to suggest that his expectation was not “cast in stone”…. Please what do you make of this

"Now, in view of recent labor troubles and threatened anarchy, our readers are writing to know if there may not be a mistake in the 1914 date. They do not see how present conditions can hold out so long under the strain.
We see no reason for changing the figures - nor could we change them if we would. They are, we believe, God's dates, not ours.

But bear in mind that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble." Zion's Watch Tower 1894 Jul 15 p.226

@jman05

And so hilarious that you cant disprove this confirmation when you also confrim yours so that it suit your church's. I hope Berny is also doing this confirmation? Some have eyes but they cannot see...

Which confirmation if I may ask? Is it to confirm the invisible presence of arch angel michael or the failed 1914 expectation that was amended to reflect a new view or expectation?

@house… sorry am I wrong here
Trogunn = jman05

While you have to be commended for your enthusiasm and time spent on this issue, you have largely failed to listen to what has been said or counter using the scriptures.

A clear distinction has been made between "prophesying/prediction" and "expectation". The "prophecy/prediction" is already in the Bible, the "expectation" is when those prophecies are believed to have been fulfilled.

The bible chronology used to arrive at 1914 as the year of Christ's assumption of Kingdom power is similar to that recorded in the Bible predicting when the Messiah was to appear:

Daniel 9:25,26 - "Know and understand this: From the time the word goes out to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until the Anointed One, the ruler, comes, there will be seven 'sevens,' and sixty-two 'sevens.' It will be rebuilt with streets and a trench, but in times of trouble. After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. The end will come like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed".

Vigilant, studious Jews who expended themselves to studying the Scriptures and this Daniel's prophecy (written hundreds of years before Christ came to earth) would have correctly calculated from year 455 B.C.E when the "word to rebuild Jerusalem went out", to "expect" the appearing of the Messiah in 29CE when Christ was baptized (thus anointed as Messiah).

This is pretty much what JWs did. The early Bible students had expectations based on studying Bible prophecies deeply and it was largely true, though there were elements they had wrong expectations of. Nothing is wrong is trying to understand the Bible fully. It's not impossible for serious Christians to misunderstand things ( as the Apostles did, because they are not infallible) - what is more important is willingness to continue to peer into the scriptures for better understanding, like JWs continue to do up to this day.

Feel free to look again at the explanations for 1914 on this thread from the links below, and if you have a biblical basis for a different opinion, please bring it up for discussion:

https://www.nairaland.com/1525969/jman05-bernimoore-jonahs-warning-vs#19747459

https://www.nairaland.com/1525969/jman05-bernimoore-jonahs-warning-vs/1#19773623

https://www.nairaland.com/1525969/jman05-bernimoore-jonahs-warning-vs/2#19780247

You really need to dial down your obsession with Charles Russell. As much as JWs appreciate and respect the early work he and other students of the Bible did, they were just men who willingly expended their time and resources to understand the bible and surely had some wrong expectations (as did the early apostles) but were willing to course-correct and continue learning from the Scriptures.

Both moniker used the above quote…..

BERNIMOORE: @Hisblud

[size=15pt]The alleged 1915 edition of "studies in the scriptures" that you posted above of "thy kingdom come" was a fake![/size] unlike the first one in 1908 by the left which has a particular page(pg 228) the al
[quote author=BERNIMOORE]

@Hisblud

[size=15pt]The alleged 1915 edition of "studies in the scriptures" that you posted above of "thy kingdom come" was a fake![/size] unlike the first one in 1908 by the left which has a particular page(pg 228) the alleged 1915 edition where the quote[i] "deliverance of saints must take place very soon after 1914"[/i] was lifted has no page ! and suspicious! can you provide the particular page that it says "must take place very soon after 1914"

im waiting for that!

meanwhile the 1908 issue that has a date, there was a disclaimer regarding the "direct imformation" and there was no mention of day and hour! then it could be regarded as "stiring up minds by way of reminder! like peter did below


2 Peter 3,15-17

3 Beloved, I now write to you this second epistle (in both of which I stir up your pure minds by way of reminder), 2 that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us,[a] the apostles of the Lord and Savior, 3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.”

and instead of getting the message, some untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures

15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;

like i said, no matter how you try to mix them up, it will be laid bare where people distorts what was not said, which page do you lift your 1915 quote above, so that we can start from there!

do you mean that the quoted 1915 edition NEVER existed or THAT the jw cannot change it?

Haha are you trying to equate the holy scripture with the false expectation of jw with this



15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles,[b] speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

17 You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;
[/b]

hisblud: oya all jw lets port to that thread yooguz opened and lets trash the other false doctrine of arch angel michael.

You can see how Jman05 ran away from that thread.
Imaging for good 50years JWs can't recognize who Angel Micheal is and for over 70years they never know maybe Jesus should be worshipped or not? confuse set of people.

BERNIMOORE:

keeping to the topic
if you say that there is no biblical basis for 1914, a year that the 1st world war started, of which one third of people living on earth died and peace was taken out of the earth according to report, its not the normal war but a unique type
then
is there anywhere you can point to where God directly told jonah to mention a figure pointing to a day of doom, ....in forty days...nineveh shallbe overthrown in Gods message to jonah? if you cant point to any then does it mean that there is no basis for mentioning a figure in the first place,.....and does that stir up the minds of the people of nineveh to repentance?
I like you loyalty, but there is danger in blind loyalty
you dont know what loyalty means
1, in case of jonah he lost out, and looks to be ashamed that he told God that he wants to die because what he said did not come to pass in 40days
2, in case of Noah's children shem Ham and japhet who were married,their obedience streched to not even giving birth at all for decades because of the seeming deluge, and had it been that the people then repented, do you still see the case of loyalty of Noahs children as dangerous as you put it? because it will be twisted as if they were been deprived by blind loyalty to their father, and NOT tp God
you can see now that projecting ones personal benefit ahead of Gods can distort your sense of reasoning!
religion itself can be faulted in all ramification, but those living by a devoted doctrine to please God do not deserve jest from those doing Nothing to please God!

Since I was the one that open this thread and to which you acknowledged here

you decide! from the very day you put up this thread, see the bolded .....Re: JMAN05, BERNIMOORE ON JONAH'S WARNING VS JW RUSSELL 1914 PREDICTION

you have limited the thread to jonah and russel! with the heading of the thread! it would have been another case if you if you had put jonah vs jehovahs witnesses

I therefore conclude that jonah’s prophecy is not similar to russell’s expectation which rabzy and trogun have agreed too here

@trogunn ‘s statement

A clear distinction has been made between "prophesying/prediction" and "expectation". The "prophecy/prediction" is already in the Bible, the "expectation" is when those prophecies are believed to have been fulfilled.
https://www.nairaland.com/1525969/jman05-bernimoore-jonahs-warning-vs/4#20033554

@rabzy’s statement

It was an 'expectation' and never a prediction and he never said said it was 'cast in stone' that was what his critics said when he mentioned witnesses in stone i.e alluding to one of the pyramids.
https://www.nairaland.com/1525969/jman05-bernimoore-jonahs-warning-vs/4#19982718

Thus if two able jw have brought forth by their statement confirmed that there is a distinction between prophecy and expectation, who are we to judge …

arsenalwenger: You are cunny and not sincere. Ok JW is now putting her shoe in the place of Jonah for their failed prediction.

Jonah warned the people of Ninehveh of God's coming judgement, the people trembled, repented and asked God not to bring his wrath to pass. God listend to them and forgave them.

Now my question is this, did JW pray that their predictions should not come to pass as the peaple on nineveh did? Will the coming of christ be negotiable, through prayer, as the peaple of Nineveh did concerning the warning and prediction of Jonah? Will God change his mind postponed the date of armagedon after a prediction had been made by JW?

So if you try compare prophet Jonah with failed watchtower prophets you are wrong. You will agree with me that 1914, 1925, 1935, 1975 and 1914 where all prophesied as the time for the end of gentile and when God will take over the rulership of the earth from satan. Did that happen? You and i knw that it is false dates. So if all the dates prophesied are all false, what makes you think 1914 is not also false.

Did JW pray that God's rulership on earth should be postponed just as the peaple of Nineveh prayed that his judgemment should not come to pass? They do not pray that his kingdom should not come, but they were eagerly expecting it to fulfil and turned out to be false dates.

100000000 likes

rabzy:

Dont even talk about the trinity doctrine....that is a doctrine that is as false as any doctrine can be...That doctrine has been debated and in dispute and disrepute as soon as it came up up after the death of the faithful apostles...it only became widely accepted because of political pressure.
If you stubbornly refuse to accept the fact that JW never predicted but only expected, then what is the purpose of having any further discussion on this.

is God Spirit that has Spirit?

Emusan:

You can see how Jman05 ran away from that thread.
Imaging for good 50years JWs can't recognize who Angel Micheal is and for over 70years they never know maybe Jesus should be worshipped or not? confuse set of people.

ran? you are so interested in victory that you keep sleeping in delusion.

When you keep tallking about what I no longer believe, you are no longer talking about me anymore. You cant disprove what I believe, so you keep fighting the past.

1914 as the date of Christ being king has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

God is a spirit person, while His spirit is not a person but an active force. So He can have a spirit.

Poor brain is really too bad.

JMAN05:

Poor brain is really too bad.

A wired brain is not only worse but dangerous.

JMAN05: God is a spirit person, while His spirit is not a person but an active force. So He can have a spirit.

Poor brain is really too bad.

where is it written "spirit person"?

hisblud: where is it written "spirit person"?

That is their newly added word, only God knows what they will be teaching in Ten years to come if Jesus taries.

This is their definition of God now "God is an invisible spirit person"--watchtower Jan 2014, back page.

According to them if Spirit means; Air, wind or force. Something is seriously wrong with this definition.

Though JMAN05 and his like will never see it.

JMAN05: God is a spirit person, while His spirit is not a person but an active force. So He can have a spirit.

Poor brain is really too bad.

Fya, the bible never teach God to be a spirit person (the watchtower did). The Bible said God is a Spirit (John 4:24). Plain and simple! Do you read your bible at all?

The difficulty JW have here is this, they interprete spirit as wind, so if they say that God is a spirit, they are telling us that God is a wind. So to make more sense, they have to put person after spirit. Can't u see deceit here? As a good english and bible student, i expected you to understand what you watchtower is trying to pass accross.

Is God a Spirit or not? You can do the house good by given us a plain answer devoid of long and irrelevant post.

arsenalwenger: Fya, the bible never teach God to be a spirit person (the watchtower did). The Bible said God is a Spirit (John 4:24). Plain and simple! Do you read your bible at all?

The difficulty JW have here is this, they interprete spirit as wind, so if they say that God is a spirit, they are telling us that God is a wind. So to make more sense, they have to put person after spirit. Can't u see deceit here? As a good english and bible student, i expected you to understand what you watchtower is trying to pass accross.

Is God a Spirit or not? You can do the house good by given us a plain answer devoid of long and irrelevant post.

Do you want them to run again?

Yooguyz:

Do you want them to run again?

I wont like to derail this thread. I think there is need to open another thread for JMAN05, BERNIMORRE, truthislight etc to explain this new concept where the JW now called God a spirit person.

arsenalwenger: I wont like to derail this thread. I think there is need to open another thread for JMAN05, BERNIMORRE, truthislight etc to explain this new concept where the JW now called God a spirit person.

Me and you ^ ? Hehehehe, smh.

You lot should go and play in the sand, when the force behind trinity that made trinitarians kill their oponents on the ground where the doctrin was enacted free you lot, i will know.

Yet, with all the evil you and your mother(RCC) have done in the name of "christianity", i just wonder if that is what christ will have done, how christ like ?

Trinity indeed!

Meanwhile, i dont play in the sand like kids, cause that is what this has became.

@hisblud thread and yougurz are of this sort, anyone that feel he has bible truth to discuss with me, meet me up on any thread you see me posting and lets roll, the bible will always speak for itself.

Peace all.

arsenalwenger: Fya, the bible never teach God to be a spirit person (the watchtower did). The Bible said God is a Spirit (John 4:24). Plain and simple! Do you read your bible at all?

The difficulty JW have here is this, they interprete spirit as wind, so if they say that God is a spirit, they are telling us that God is a wind. So to make more sense, they have to put person after spirit. Can't u see deceit here? As a good english and bible student, i expected you to understand what you watchtower is trying to pass accross.

Is God a Spirit or not? You can do the house good by given us a plain answer devoid of long and irrelevant post.

God is a spirit ( Greek - pneuma). Fact. - John 4:24

An angel is a spirit ( Greek - pneuma); angels are spirits (Hebrews 1:7)

Meaning of the word "spirit" can vary, not only wind/air - http://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/4151.htm

God is obviously a person ( meaning a being with personality- with likes, dislikes, character).

Na woo. Do you even know why you are arguing with yourself? What is wrong in saying God is a spirit person? Is God human? Or is God not a person (being)?

truthislight:

Me and you ^ ? Hehehehe, smh.

You lot should go and play in the sand, when the force behind trinity that made trinitarians kill their oponents on the ground where the doctrin was enacted free you lot, i will know.

Yet, with all the evil you and your mother(RCC) have done in the name of "christianity", i just wonder if that is what christ will have done, how christ like ?

Trinity indeed!

Meanwhile, i dont play in the sand like kids, cause that is what this has became.

@hisblud thread and yougurz are of this sort, anyone that feel he has bible truth to discuss with me, meet me up on any thread you see me posting and lets roll, the bible will always speak for itself.

Peace all.

You have not answered the question whether God is a Spirit or a Spirit-person. Choose one cos they have two different concepts.

Emusan:

That is their newly added word, only God knows what they will be teaching in Ten years to come if Jesus taries.

This is their definition of God now "God is an invisible spirit person"--watchtower Jan 2014, back page.

According to them if Spirit means; Air, wind or force. Something is seriously wrong with this definition.

Though JMAN05 and his like will never see it.

go and research Isaiah 1:14, and read job 2:7. after, you tell me the result. make I check your own brain.

arsenalwenger: Fya, the bible never teach God to be a spirit person (the watchtower did). The Bible said God is a Spirit (John 4:24). Plain and simple! Do you read your bible at all?

The difficulty JW have here is this, they interprete spirit as wind, so if they say that God is a spirit, they are telling us that God is a wind. So to make more sense, they have to put person after spirit. Can't u see deceit here? As a good english and bible student, i expected you to understand what you watchtower is trying to pass accross.

Is God a Spirit or not? You can do the house good by given us a plain answer devoid of long and irrelevant post.

Assignment:

reaearch Isaiah 1:14, and job 2:7. (45 marks)

let me see if you go fit get the 45 marks. read hard dear...

TroGunn:

God is a spirit ( Greek - pneuma). Fact. - John 4:24

An angel is a spirit ( Greek - pneuma); angels are spirits (Hebrews 1:7)

Meaning of the word "spirit" can vary, not only wind/air - http://biblehub.com/strongs/greek/4151.htm

God is obviously a person ( meaning a being with personality- with likes, dislikes, character).

Na woo. Do you even know why you are arguing with yourself? What is wrong in saying God is a spirit person? Is God human? Or is God not a person (being)?

My bros, its good to give them the assignment at times cos they will never doubt the result of their research but they will doubt it if you tell them.

JMAN05:

Assignment:

reaearch Isaiah 1:14, and job 2:7. (45 marks)

let me see if you go fit get the 45 marks. read hard dear...

Hope you had a good nite rest. Your latest edition of watchtower now described God as a spirit person and not simply as a Spirit as Jesus put it, how do you reconcile this changes and the reason for it?

arsenalwenger: Hope you had a good nite rest. Your latest edition of watchtower now described God as a spirit person and not simply as a Spirit as Jesus put it, how do you reconcile this changes and the reason for it?

ya, hope urs was great. research doz verses i gave, it b clear. preaching things on my mind. we ll c in d evenimg.

arsenalwenger: You have not answered the question whether God is a Spirit or a Spirit-person. Choose one cos they have two different concepts.

As a matter of fact they don't? How you ask?

Well, the Religious hymm some Christian group use says," God in three PERSONS,Blessed......", so there is no doubt that God is infact a person or being (NB: both words may be used interchangeably). Unless you want to Fault the lyrics of that hymm and the dictionary meaning of Person/Being.

So if God is a Person (with individuality/personal traits) and Jesus said he also his a Spirit, calling him a Spirit person is the combination of the two words and their meaning, both of them being true all the time except you are saying God is only a spirit and does not have his own individuality which faults logic since Twins have theirs not to mention Dogs have their individuality.

[quote author=BERNIMOORE post=20144940][/quote]

As a the society's agent on nairaland, who opens topics more often on politics section, (understandably to hide your identity), what is the watchtowers official statement on the points raised by the OP.