The contents ofJesus's parables were a reflection of both earthly and eternal realities. His parable of a rich man who celebrated his son's wedding in his own house was a reflection of the earthly reality that Jews of that era celebrated weddings in the groom's father's houses and not in the their places of worship unlike today. So also the cry of the rich man for just a drop of water to relieve him of dehydration and extreme heat in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man is a reflection of the reality of hell fire. Don't be deceived!
As per resurrection; it will happen before the final judgement. Neither Jesus nor Elijah would have been able to raise the dead had they already gone to heaven or hell.
The whole of Ecclesiastes is a documentation of the random thoughts about the incomprehensibility of nature by a man who had fallen deep into sin thus was spiritually distanced from God. That such book found its way into the Bible does not confer any reliability on it as an authority on spiritual truths. Rather it is just an indication that the Christian faith is broad enough to accommodate every shade of opinion with the ultimate objective of redirecting all towards the truth.
In chapter 9 vs 1 to 3, King Solomon also concluded that both the righteous and wicked share the same fate. If we are to take that as valid, then neither you nor me would have been striving to live a life pleasing to God. Did Jesus the author and finisher of the faith teach that the same destiny awaits the righteous and wicked alike?
The contents of the verse you referenced above were a question and not an authoritative assertion. Like I have been saying, if you had not taken that verse in isolation but read it in the context of the entire theme of the book and the Bible you would have avoided the contradiction which Chapter 9 vs 1-3 presents to kill off your argument.

---

The account of Ecclesiastes is not random thoughts. Though he focused on the general activities of humans, he expressed divine wisdom, it was a blessing from God. God used men to pen the bible who were under inspiration of his holy spirit. If it were random thought then the whole bible is futile. It's useless its just a mere book. No value.


[size=8pt][/size]

Solomon stated events that befall beast and man. We all died. Good people die, the wicked die He also urge us to serve God when we are young. (Eccles 12:1) & (eccl 12:13-14) our purpose is to fear God and keep his commandments. Thanks to ourLord jesus perfecter of faith and saviour. When we fear God and keep his commandment in the bible it gives us the privilege to exercise faith in jesus ransom. So when we die unlike the wicked whose death is meaningless. They die judged n destroy. The good die not into corruption but resurrected into everlasting life through our redeemer, christ jesus. Amen

Tolax17:



Bro, I never for ones toldyou i am a witness. If I were one what is the big deal anyway.
Ur comment shows you are not ready to reason logically, but here to attack. Maybe you're pastor sef.
It's doesn't matter. Live your life, Work for your salvation and leave the rest to God.

Like I said, I am halting here. No more comments from me. You can't stop me from associating with who I like. Not a single word from your write up as moved me. If 1+1=2 not everyone will see it as 2. Some will justify themselves and say its 1.
Different things for different folks.

We are different, we see it different. It's
But I haven't gain anything from your write up though. Not a single word as moved me.

Neither did I too get anything from you. You may really not be a JW but then it is wrong of you to have all listened to and swallowed all their attacks on other Christians and rushing into conclusion that these other Christians are evil without ever having heard their own response. Now you are hearing it today amidst the glaring fact that the JWs themselves have melted away for lack of superior logical response woven around the very scriptures they made you believe formed the basis for their initial attacks on other Christians.
They made you believe that other Christians, including your very self, are bad, evil, support violence, support adultery, support conflicts, etc, yet they turn around to ask you to contribute to the growth of their ministry through donations towards their magazines from the moneys they supposedly made from these alleged vices; yet you got convinced they actually are better than others whereas the Jesus they claim to preach never accepted financial assistance from unbelievers and those He condemned as wicked and hypocritic followers of the word of God.
They call other Christians hypocrites but keep asking them for financial support. How come it never occurred to you that such is s higher degree of hypocrisy?

Deadlytruth:



Neither did I too get anything from you. You may really not be a JW but then it is wrong of you to have all listened to and swallowed all their attacks on other Christians and rushing into conclusion that these other Christians are evil without ever having heard their own response. Now you are hearing it today amidst the glaring fact that the JWs themselves have melted away for lack of superior logical response woven around the very scriptures they made you believe formed the basis for their initial attacks on other Christians.
They made you believe that other Christians, including your very self, are bad, evil, support violence, support adultery, support conflicts, etc, yet they turn around to ask you to contribute to the growth of their ministry through donations towards their magazines from the moneys they supposedly made from these alleged vices; yet you got convinced they actually are better than others whereas the Jesus they claim to preach never accepted financial assistance from unbelievers and those He condemned as wicked and hypocritic followers of the word of God.
They call other Christians hypocrites but keep asking them for financial support. How come it never occurred to you that such is s higher degree of hypocrisy?

It's not hypocrisy. It's voluntary donation. If you come to me that you need money to fire your zealous evangelical activities n I have I will give it to you not because of what you wished to do only but it could be thevdesire to help my fellow man. Whatever assertion made could be wrong or right but remember we all sin in words a d deeds

If you look at all my comment you will get offended. If I duel on yours, I will get offended, see lapses. We should be tolerant. If you don't share a believe with some one, no need to attain anybody. Let them go, if you feel you its beneficial then listen. We shouldn't use their believe against ours to witch hunt them. We gain nothing fro m it but wasting time, energy n resources

Beside I see no attack from them

Deadlytruth:


First of all let me appreciate you for trying to counter me with the scriptures than with utterances inspired by sentiments, and attacks with name calling and other mundane insinuations founded on persecution complex. You have just shown example of how Christians should disagree over principles. And for that I regard you as a true follower of Christ irrespective of you being a JW.
You see, my argument here is that house to house visits recorded in the Bible happened only between fellow believers and not for fresh evangelism which involved a believer and yet to be converted unbelievers. If, you had not, like other JWs, treated Acts 20:20 in isolation but have read the entire Acts chapter 20, you would have realized that Paul was speaking to only the Elders of the Church in Ephesus when he declared in that verse that he visited them from house to house. And if you have actually followed this thread from page 0 you should have seen where one JW brought up the visit of Peter to Cornelius and I explained to him that Cornelius was already a believer hence Peter's visit to him in his house was not for fresh evangelism for which Jesus forbade house to house visit in Like 10:7. So also Paul's reference to visiting the Ephesus Church elders in their houses as contained in Acts 20:20 was not for fresh proselytization but to church elders who were already believers. Could church elders have been in need of being evangelized afresh?

Don't forget those Elders have a past , a time when they are just Newly converted to Christianity ...

Paul was reminding them of their past by saying " You well know how I conducted myself among you from THE FIRST DAY I stepped into the province of Asia " - Act 20:18

When Paul stepped into Asia , his ministry there was recorded in Act 19:10 . He was simply reminding them of how he spoke to them then , which is through public teaching and from house to house - Act 20:20

Which resulted in their repentance - Act 20:21

Deadlytruth:



Please what do you have to say about Hebrews 1:8 King James Version (KJV)
"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom."

Or was this verse not in the original text as usual?

The construction of this verse allows for two renderings . RSV footnote says " or God is thy throne " .

I just don't understand the point you are driving at, But I can assure you it doesn't prove the trinity since verse 9 says Jesus has a God .

Proving Jesus isn't Supreme .

Tolax17:


I laugh in swahilli. I backing out here. I only wish to express my quota, the the fact remains, jehovah witnesses a far better in many ways. I have made inquiry, studied, research through the bible, I haven't seen anything wrong in all you say. I have travelled across the continents
Nothing wrong with their pattern of medical care such as blood transfusion. It's the best. Go to Britain, UK, Sweden, bloodless surgeries is the best. Many people are even adopting bloodless surgeries. Nigeria is backward in everything, nothing works here. The medical care and facilities are archaic. I have come across several doctors here in nigeria not jehovah witnesses who practices bloodless surgeries. They will even tell you right on time.

Continue laughing in Swahili. You are not even sure if Jehovah witness is the only good one. You even have to say they are better in so many ways to feel good about it. you just made me laugh so hard. At least you have acknowledged there are still good ones.
You have made inquiry, studied and researched only watchtower approved materials which is not even research.
bloodless surgery is aka autologous blood transfusion. Where in the Bible did your Jehovah say you should accept autologous blood transfusion and reject allogenous blood transfusion? you also know that your bloodless surgery allows blood fractions from blood donated by wordly wicked non jws. Or did your Jehovah also tell you the type of fraction to accept or reject? Well, i know it's only men in new York that will tell you all these. In the same Britain, UK and USA, children of jw parents undergo blood transfusion when it is required. In the same Britain, USA and Sweden, blood transfusion is indicated when bloodless surgery fails. In the same Britain, UK and USA when blood transfusion is the only thing that will save a patient they use it or allow you to die. Maybe watchtower didn't tell you that bloodless surgery or medicine is not indicated in these countries when hemoglobin concentration is less than 6gram per dl. I think you haven't researched enough. Well, i expect it from someone who is repeatedly told not to view anything that her organization doesn't approve saying it's pornography and that thinking without their help is apostasy.

Nothing wrong with Armageddon, it's in the bible. It's the war of a God almighty. Armageddon is synonymous to mountain of meggido (Hebrew). Where literal wars were fought. Since War of Almighty God is not only against wicked humans but also demons even Satan, Armageddon is fitting- meaning total destruction of all opposers.

There is something wrong thinking that anyone who doesn't belong to your organization will be slaughtered by your God in Armageddon. This is a psychopathic thought. Looking forward to a day where your God will slaughter people who have different religious views signifies you are really worse than hitler.

Whereas, is different from the malicious lies of hellfire and heaven. Even king Solomon who was blessed with wisdom, knowledge, fame, power, material possession etc. even compared animals life cycle to that of humans, eventually concluding what befall animals happen to human (Eccles 3:18,19) no superiority over animals. All dies, all comes from the dust n return to the dust. In contracts to false teaching that man dies, the he faces eternal punishment or go to heaven to be singing n enjoyin life, building mansion. Yet the bible speaks of resurrection. If they are being punished or building mansion and partying or enjoying in heaven, what's the purpose of resurrection?

Killing 8.4 billion people so that 8.4 people will inherit earth is a barbaric act. That's going to be the greatest genocide here on earth. Your Jehovah plans to outdo Hitler in the number of casualties and is the devil himself. So your Jehovah's reason for committing the greatest genocide known to man is because 8.4billion people refused to join an earthly man made organization which was founded in 1874 and obey some men in new York's interpretation of the Bible? I think your Jehovah must be a blood thirsty prick then.
In Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, Even king Solomon who was blessed with wisdom, knowledge, fame, power, material possession said this

For the living know that they will die,
5 but the dead know nothing;
they have no further reward,
and even their name is forgotten.
6 Their love, their hate
and their jealousy have long since vanished;
never again will they have a part
in anything that happens under the sun

The dead has no place on earth ever again. Paradise earth is a fiction according to king Solomon who was blessed with wisdom, knowledge, fame, power, material possession

Before you were born, were you the one that chose where to be born or to be born in nigeria?
Certainly not.
God did the selection. Jehovah witnesses practice n follow bible teaching. No dispute about that. Anyone among them that remain faithful to the end God will pick from them (God sees the heart, no human does- the heart is evil and treacherous, who can see it?- God)

My parents in Nigeria had sexual intercourse on the day I was conceived. 9 months later, my mom went into labour and I was brought into this country.


Watchtower organization was not conceived by sexual intercourse nor was it brought into this world via delivery. It was formed by a full grown man who believed the world was going to end in 1914.

How did God do the selection in 1874? Is it through magic or is it some USA citizens told you God specifically chose their organization? The Bible never mentioned any God using any organization. You say God chose your group in USA but you don't know how he did it. BTW a man made earthly religious organization is not thesame thing as a human being before it was born. Is it what your organization can come up with? Well, I think their audience are kindergarten pupils that's why they will give you this stupid explanation for God choosing them. I expect this kind of reasoning from people who are told not to reason by themselves by the men who told them God chose their group.

Among non-JW, anyone that obey God's commandment and keep it faithfully to the end n merit God's approval, he will picks them. Pagans who never had the privilege but there heart is clean God's will pick them.
Even, Lydia the prostitute in the bible was saved because of her faith. She was a sinner in the beginning but her faith saved her in the end.
God's see beyond the physical eye.that's y the bible say there will be a resurrection of both the righteous n unrighteousn. Even resurrection of the wicked for judgment. (Act 5:24,25)

So you are in God's head already. Where did he say he will spare non jws that gets his approval? Continue saying what God did not tell you or your leaders. God sees beyond the physical eye yet the organization some men said he chose cannot even explain how God chose them spiritually or physically. So when did faith in men who rule a man made organization become the yardstick for surviving Armageddon?

When you move with good people there is every probability that they would exact good influence on you. If you move with bad ones they can also influence you negatively. If you move with intelligent friends you might see yourself as intelligent or potential intelligent person.

Not disputed

Same can be applied to jehovah witnesses. They strive hard in this crooked world to please their God jehovah and everyone who associate with them strictly to imitate jehovah, keeps is commandment n live a life well pleasing to him.

The same men in new York told you that the world is crooked and you agreed. The world is a good place full of very good people and few bad people when compared to the number of good people. Your organization that has rapists, women abusers, pedophilles whom watchtower has always protected from the police or law. I guess watchtower is crooked too. Hiding and having pedophilles and rapist in their midst makes them a crooked organization.

Hence
, they always see themselves as servants of God who will inherit/ live in God's Kingdom. In the mist of so many self acclaimed Christians
who claimed (Christendom -a term used for false christians who deviated from God's laws even welcome amoral practices such as: fornication, adultery, idolatry, given head blowjobs, supporting conflict, violence wars corruption extortion, homo n bisexuality etc even common among pastors, most reverend, most holy etcs) but claiming to be God servants etc. But when they are exposed they claiming we shouldn't forgets they're humans too like us .
Ever in the scriptures, the Apostles didn do that . Apostle Peter and Paul had a disagreement in the scriptures, when corrected by Paul, he never justify himself in the bible.

So watchtower even tells married couples in their organization how to have sexual intercourse? Wow, interesting. Let's take the list one by one.
Fornication and adultery: they are both bad
when did any Christian church marry a divorced person? I know watchtower organization has married so many divorced people. And I know the Bible says a divorced person sleeping with another is adultery.
Fornication: I know so many people who fornicate are given privileges.
Stop throwing stones. You support bad things knowingly and unknowingly.
Idolatry: when did worshipping Jesus Christ become idolatry? 1960 according to watchtower.
Head blowjobs: since it is a sin, give us a bible verse. So you people still monitor how husband and wife run bedroom shows. Una cult na highest

Supporting conflict, wars,violence: you await the day your Jehovah will come for the greatest genocide, war and violence known to man. We should be accusing you for this.
Corruption and extortion: your leaders discouraging you from getting higher education and encouraging going to bethel to do menial jobs nko? Is this one not extortion? What about voluntary donations you are constantly reminded to do? Extortion also. They even tell you how to donate and the things you can donate for the worldwide work.
Bisexuality and homosexuality: the bible says its bad. Don't generalize. A church accepts it and you translate it to mean all churches in your head. Deception at its peak. Whether you have become Jehovah the judge I have no idea.

Let me generalize my own Your church supports rape, divorce, pedophillia, domestic violence, murder, stealing because they harbour these criminals and hide their acts from the police.

I also realize you're here to look at flaws of jehovah witnesses, then you capitaliseon it and use it againSt them. If you wanna grow n acquire knowledge n stop looking for mistake where there's non. If you have a friend who's good at maths, you're also good but you need enough information from him but he can't speak in English fluently, would you learn anything by looking at his flaws ?

Just like the way you look for flaws in Christendom.

Why are you answering for me. You wanna play the strawman no way.
The friend is good in maths so it is mathematics we will learn. We didn't come to learn English. Let me give you various scenarios.

1. Do you know you can't teach mathematics in Yoruba language to a Frenchman who understands only French? He wouldn't even know its maths you are teaching. You have find a common language to pass any message.

2. If the person not being fluent in English (assuming you are learning the maths in English) hinders the learning process you change the person to someone who can pass the message clearly without language being a barrier immediately.
3. You can't grow and acquire knowledge from someone who can't pass the message properly.

Is this the explanation your watchtower can give for their doctrines not being supported by the Bible? I think they can do better. They keep saying Christendom is filled with flaws that is why nobody should belong to Christendom yet they expect you to overlook their excessive flaws.
The bottom line is there is already a mistake in the transfer of information and knowledge.

To acquire Info, you overlook is spoken English n focus on what he has for. The info you need, you hold it dear 5o you, those you don't need you simply discard it

To acquire information you don't overlook the spoken English and focus on what the person has. Never do this. If the spoken English hinders you from getting the information, look for another person to give you the information. Stop using kindergarten analogy for me. I am not a daft person. How will a student overlook a teacher's spoken English to get proper knowledge about mathematics written in English language?
So I should force myself to learn mathematics written in English language from a teacher who combines yoruba and English ( when I am an Igbo person ) because I wanna gain knowledge of mathematics?
I know I will never gain any knowledge and fail mathematics woefully.

Pls note
I am not a perfect man, sinner not here to look at flaws or support anybody but to express my Quota.
Good day

But can look at flaws of what you call Christendom and tag them Babylon the great. You just claimed you are not a perfect man or a sinner so what are you?

Tolax17:


It's not hypocrisy. It's voluntary donation. If you come to me that you need money to fire your zealous evangelical activities n I have I will give it to you not because of what you wished to do only but it could be thevdesire to help my fellow man. Whatever assertion made could be wrong or right but remember we all sin in words a d deeds

If you look at all my comment you will get offended. If I duel on yours, I will get offended, see lapses. We should be tolerant. If you don't share a believe with some one, no need to attain anybody. Let them go, if you feel you its beneficial then listen. We shouldn't use their believe against ours to witch hunt them. We gain nothing fro m it but wasting time, energy n resources

Beside I see no attack from them

Voluntary donations that they constantly remind you to donate. They also will describe the process you will donate and the things you can donate eg real estate, jewelry, bonds, stocks, assets, money etc. Mtcheww. Voluntary donation indeed.

Donation o call it whatever you like. Its members of the religion that still give to the organization just like other religions.
I even thought money falls from the sky in your religion. That's how Muslims donate voluntarily for their religion too.

Jozzy4:


Don't forget those Elders have a past , a time when they are just Newly converted to Christianity ...

Paul was reminding them of their past by saying " You well know how I conducted myself among you from THE FIRST DAY I stepped into the province of Asia " - Act 20:18

When Paul stepped into Asia , his ministry there was recorded in Act 19:10 . He was simply reminding them of how he spoke to them then , which is through public teaching and from house to house - Act 20:20

Which resulted in their repentance - Act 20:21

If you go back to Acts 19:1-8, you'll see that the first time ever that Paul entered Ephesus, he immediately met some already existing believers who were 12 in number and he baptized them with the Holy Spirit.
This means there were already believers in Ephesus among whom those future elders were.
After baptizing those 12 Paul proceeded straight not to anyone's house but to the synagogue where he stayed for 3 months delivering his teachings with people coming to listen to him there including the would be church elders whom he would later identify and visit at home for having already becoming believers prior to his arrival in Ephesus.

Jozzy4:


The construction of this verse allows for two renderings . RSV footnote says " or God is thy throne " .

I just don't understand the point you are driving at, But I can assure you it doesn't prove the trinity since verse 9 says Jesus has a God .

Proving Jesus isn't Supreme .

I recall that JWs discredit translators of RSV for allegedly making an addition to a verse in the Bible with the aim of giving false credence to Trinity. That you reference the same RSV to defend your anti-trinity stance is quite curious.
However, only in your NWT is Heb. 1:8 deliberately distorted to suit a preconceived doctrine.
All other translations have it as "...... your kingdom, O God......."

In John 8:58, Jesus declared, "before Abraham was born, I am". Normally Jesus' use of "I am" was grammatically wrong as it should have been "before Abraham was born I was" or "before Abraham was born I had been". However he deliberately chose "I am" to imply that he is the very I AM THAT I AM whom Moses met in Mount Horeb while tending his father in-law's sheep, and the Jews there got the message and therefore saw it as blasphemous of equating himself with God due to their lack of understanding similar to that displayed by JWs today, and then they picked up stones to cast on him.

Deadlytruth:



If you go back to Acts 19:1-8, you'll see that the first time ever that Paul entered Ephesus, he immediately met some already existing believers who were 12 in number and he baptized them with the Holy Spirit.
This means there were already believers in Ephesus among whom those future elders were.
After baptizing those 12 Paul proceeded straight not to anyone's house but to the synagogue where he stayed for 3 months delivering his teachings with people coming to listen to him there including the would be church elders whom he would later identify and visit at home for having already becoming believers prior to his arrival in Ephesus.

Many became believers including those Elders through the ministry of Apostle Paul .

Act 20:25 " now look! I know that none of you among whom I PREACHED the Kingdom will ever see my face again "

Clearly Paul was referring to their past, He said he was the one who preached to them ... How did he do this ? Verse 20 answers .. Teaching you publicly and from house to house .

Jozzy4:


Many became believers including those Elders through the ministry of Apostle Paul .

Act 20:25 " now look! I know that none of you among whom I PREACHED the Kingdom will ever see my face again "

Clearly Paul was referring to their past, He said he was the one who preached to them ... How did he do this ? Verse 20 answers .. Teaching you publicly and from house to house .

But chapter 19 vs 1-8 tell us clearly that it wasn't Paul that converted all of them. Paul was talking about how he preached to them and not how he converted them. An already existing convert could still be preached to for the purpose of strengthening his faith. Paul was lettered enough to know the exact differences between merely preaching to people and converting them. Where he did the conversion he did not hesitate to say it in other books.

Deadlytruth:


I recall that JWs discredit translators of RSV for allegedly making an addition to a verse in the Bible with the aim of giving false credence to Trinity. That you reference the same RSV to defend your anti-trinity stance is quite curious.

Sorry, but you sound uninformed with the above , Even the LXX Septuagint admits two renderings for the above verse, I gave the example of RSV to buttress that fact . Many others also include it in their footnote because its not wrong to render it " God is your throne " .

Like I said earlier, it doesn't prove anything since verse 9 proves Jesus is not supreme .

However, only in your NWT is Heb. 1:8 deliberately distorted to suit a preconceived doctrine.
All other translations have it as "...... your kingdom, O God......."

LIKE I said earlier, you also sound informed here ... Check the below Translations

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”


And The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century Translation - ‘God is thy throne….’


Will you now make a PUBLIC APOLOGY for misleading the public and misrepresenting the witnesses with your bolded words ?

In John 8:58, Jesus declared, "before Abraham was born, I am". Normally Jesus' use of "I am" was grammatically wrong as it should have been "before Abraham was born I was" or "before Abraham was born I had been". However he deliberately chose "I am" to imply that he is the very I AM THAT I AM whom Moses met in Mount Horeb while tending his father in-law's sheep, and the Jews there got the message and therefore saw it as blasphemous of equating himself with God due to their lack of understanding similar to that displayed by JWs today, and then they picked up stones to cast on him.

An angel also identified himself as " I am " to Manoah and wife ... Going by your logic, that angel is Yahweh ?

@ Bold When Yahweh introduced himself to Moses , He made mention that he is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ... Please back up your claim of Jesus is claiming I am , by telling us if Jesus is THE GOD OF ABRAHAM , ISAAC and JACOB as specifically told Moses ?

Deadlytruth:


But chapter 19 vs 1-8 tell us clearly that it wasn't Paul that converted all of them. Paul was talking about how he preached to them and not how he converted them. An already existing convert could still be preached to for the purpose of strengthening his faith. Paul was lettered enough to know the exact differences between merely preaching to people and converting them. Where he did the conversion he did not hesitate to say it in other books.

I hope you remember he said " from the very first day I stepped into the province of Asia ( not just Ephesus ) ... I did not hold from telling you any of the things that were profitable nor from teaching you publicly and from house to house . But I thoroughly bore witness both to Jews and to Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus "

He preached to them as unbelievers using those method's ( house to house and public teaching ) , if they are ; repentance toward God and faith in Lord Jesus won't be mentioned.

A believer already has faith in Lord Jesus , But here they are been preached to , to have faith in Lord Jesus showing they ain't yet believers at the time .

Jozzy4:


Stop the ignorant talk, aren't his disciples also " One " ?

Tell us if it means John is same as Peter .

Christ didn't say I and my Father are " one God " . he said " One" ... Read your Bible!

bible reader i see you!
John 10:30-"I and my Father are one."

Jozzy4:


I hope you remember he said " from the very first day I stepped into the province of Asia ( not just Ephesus ) ... I did not hold from telling you any of the things that were profitable nor from teaching you publicly and from house to house . But I thoroughly bore witness both to Jews and to Greeks about repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus "

He preached to them as unbelievers using those method's ( house to house and public teaching ) , if they are ; repentance toward God and faith in Lord Jesus won't be mentioned.

A believer already has faith in Lord Jesus , But here they are been preached to , to have faith in Lord Jesus showing they ain't yet believers at the time .

So Ephesus alone was equivalent to the whole of Asia province?
Entering Ephesus can't mean exactly the same as entering Asia Minor.
When a generalization is made there are exceptions.
Chapter 19 vs 1-8 show clearly that he did not do house to house preaching immediately on arrival in Ephesus.
It is like a tourist visiting Nigeria for the first time Lands in Lagos as his point of entry and starts visiting museums first, then he proceeds to Benin and visited Museums first again, and same thing with PH, Kano and Kaduna before proceeding to Abuja where he however visited Unibuja first on arrival. Then when telling of his experience he says, "When I first got to Nigeria I visited Museums first". He is correct here because he is apparently referring to Lagos. By this statement he couldn't have been referring to Abuja because in Abuja he didn't visit a museum first. This is simple logic.

Moreover, the first city Paul visited in Asia Minor was not Ephesus.

Jozzy4:


Sorry, but you sound uninformed with the above , Even the LXX Septuagint admits two renderings for the above verse, I gave the example of RSV to buttress that fact . Many others also include it in their footnote because its not wrong to render it " God is your throne " .

Like I said earlier, it doesn't prove anything since verse 9 proves Jesus is not supreme .



LIKE I said earlier, you also sound informed here ... Check the below Translations

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”


And The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century Translation - ‘God is thy throne….’


Will you now make a PUBLIC APOLOGY for misleading the public and misrepresenting the witnesses with your bolded words ?



An angel also identified himself as " I am " to Manoah and wife ... Going by your logic, that angel is Yahweh ?

@ Bold When Yahweh introduced himself to Moses , He made mention that he is the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob ... Please back up your claim of Jesus is claiming I am , by telling us if Jesus is THE GOD OF ABRAHAM , ISAAC and JACOB as specifically told Moses ?

You sound confused about these things.

If some translations have it as "Your throne O God" and others have it as "God is your throne", and both renderings are contained in the LXX Septuagint, then how does one rendering invalidate the other?
Jesus called Himself both the Son of God and the Son of Man under different circumstances. How does His being the Son of Man invalidate His being the Son of God?
Had it been the LXX Septuagint does not at all contain the "Your throne, O God" rendering, then you would have had a point.

Verse 9 says, ".... Therefore God, your God has set you above.......". If the Bible itself calls Jesus God and according to your understanding that doesn't make Jesus supreme, then why do JWs fret and fume when other Christians call him God despite knowing fully well that they actually saw it in the Bible?
Jesus said, "Listen O Israel, the Lord your God is one God......" Now God says, "God, your God has set you above....". Harmonizing these two we can see that Jesus and God are actually one and the same.

If God Himself is someone's throne, then who else could that person be except God?
Jesus and God are one and the same. They share the exalted name "God" which no one else is permitted to share.
According to the logic you apply to explain verse 9; Jesus and God are both Gods but with God being supreme over Jesus - meaning there are two Gods between whom one is supreme and the other is subordinate.
However, you are wrong because if God and Jesus are both Gods and there are NOT two Gods in existence according to the same Bible, then that logically means Jesus and God are one and the same. That explains why it is called a mystery. Put in another way, Jesus and God are integral fractions of a whole but single entity called God. Without Jesus God is incomplete.
The bottom line which other Christians establish is that God Himself calls Jesus God hence they too are free to call Jesus God. Hence when they say Jesus is God, they are just echoing Heb 1:8-9 for whatever it means. Unfortunately this is what JWs miss.

Jesus deliberately used "I am" against a grammatical context for which such usage was contrary. He used present tense instead of past tense or past perfect. He deliberately disobeyed the rule concordance of tenses because he wanted to prove a point.
But in the case of Manor, the angel used "I am" in contextual concordance with the mood of the conversation.
Had the angel to disobeyed the rule of concordance of tenses in his reply, then you would have had a basis for comparison.
Look at it:

Manor: Are you the one who came yesterday?
Angel: Yes I am. (harmony of tenses)

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?
Jesus: Before Abraham was born, I am (instead of I was or I had been) - deliberately chosen disharmony of tenses to prove a point.
The angel was not trying to prove any extraordinary point, so he answered "I am" i.e. "I am the one" or as everyone would ordinarily do if asked "Who are you?" or "Are you the one who I was told came yesterday?" The angel's response simply means "Yes it is me" in the context of the conversation.
But Jesus' use of "I am" in response to inquiry by the Jews doesn't not mean "It is me" in the context of their conversation.
Let's put "it is me" in place of "I am" and see whether it makes sense at all:

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?

Jesus: Before Abraham was born It is me.

Does this make any sense at all and does it answer the question asked?
The issue between Manor and the angel is totally unrelated to the one between Jesus and the Jews here. So there is no basis for comparison.
Jesus could have gone further into telling them he was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but because their hearts were hardened already, he refrained.
Just for the mere use of "I am" they picked up stones. How could he have gone further.
Even if Jesus had made mention of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; you would have, in your doubt, demanded further confirmatory utterances.

Remember Jesus was not particularly out to convince His doubters but to ground the faith of those who accept Him even without having fully understood Him yet.

OnyeOGA:


bible reader i see you!
John 10:30-"I and my Father are one."

Beautiful, He never said I and my Father are one God .

John 17:21 he prayed his disciples be ONE just as he and his father are one .

" Just as " ... Can u see that ?

Now if you take it to mean being one as God , then his disciples are also Gods as well, because they will be one JUST AS.

Deadlytruth:


You sound confused about these things.

If some translations have it as "Your throne O God" and others have it as "God is your throne", and both renderings are contained in the LXX Septuagint, then how does one rendering invalidate the other?

Jesus called Himself both the Son of God and the Son of Man under different circumstances. How does His being the Son of Man invalidate His being the Son of God?
Had it been the LXX Septuagint does not at all contain the "Your throne, O God" rendering, then you would have had a point.

It simply means don't accuse NWT of deception when you don't have the facts .

Another of your FALSE assertion which stem out of your hatred was ONLY NWT contained the God is your throne rendering ., which as stated was found to be an outright LIE .

I Demand an apology for your making such deceptive Assertion to mislead the Public !!!

Until you do, I won't proceed with you because doing so will mean you can continue to slander without remorse .

Verse 9 says, ".... Therefore God, your God has set you above.......". If the Bible itself calls Jesus God and according to your understanding that doesn't make Jesus supreme, then why do JWs fret and fume when other Christians call him God despite knowing fully well that they actually saw it in the Bible?
Jesus said, "Listen O Israel, the Lord your God is one God......" Now God says, "God, your God has set you above....". Harmonizing these two we can see that Jesus and God are actually one and the same.

If God Himself is someone's throne, then who else could that person be except God?
Jesus and God are one and the same. They share the exalted name "God" which no one else is permitted to share.
According to the logic you apply to explain verse 9; Jesus and God are both Gods but with God being supreme over Jesus - meaning there are two Gods between whom one is supreme and the other is subordinate.
However, you are wrong because if God and Jesus are both Gods and there are NOT two Gods in existence according to the same Bible, then that logically means Jesus and God are one and the same. That explains why it is called a mystery. Put in another way, Jesus and God are integral fractions of a whole but single entity called God. Without Jesus God is incomplete.
The bottom line which other Christians establish is that God Himself calls Jesus God hence they too are free to call Jesus God. Hence when they say Jesus is God, they are just echoing Heb 1:8-9 for whatever it means. Unfortunately this is what JWs miss.

Can you be the same with YOUR GOD ?

Where is your reasoning ability given to you by God Sir ., no insult intended just baffling how a clear statement can be misrepresented

Verse 9 says he has a GOD .

Anyone who is Your God has authority over you. No wonder Jesus is said to be under the authority of his God . ( 1 Cor 11:3)

Also, even going by the other rendering, The Father also called human Gods as well ... Yet doesn't mean they are Almighty .

Christ is not the Almighty, he is subjected to the authority of someone Greater than him . HIS GOD!!!

Jesus deliberately used "I am" against a grammatical context for which such usage was contrary. He used present tense instead of past tense or past perfect. He deliberately disobeyed the rule concordance of tenses because he wanted to prove a point.
But in the case of Manor, the angel used "I am" in contextual concordance with the mood of the conversation.
Had the angel to disobeyed the rule of concordance of tenses in his reply, then you would have had a basis for comparison.
Look at it:

Manor: Are you the one who came yesterday?
Angel: Yes I am. (harmony of tenses)

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?
Jesus: Before Abraham was born, I am (instead of I was or I had been) - deliberately chosen disharmony of tenses to prove a point.
The angel was not trying to prove any extraordinary point, so he answered "I am" i.e. "I am the one" or as everyone would ordinarily do if asked "Who are you?" or "Are you the one who I was told came yesterday?" The angel's response simply means "Yes it is me" in the context of the conversation.
But Jesus' use of "I am" in response to inquiry by the Jews doesn't not mean "It is me" in the context of their conversation.
Let's put "it is me" in place of "I am" and see whether it makes sense at all:

Jews: How old are you to have seen Abraham?

Jesus: Before Abraham was born It is me.

Does this make any sense at all and does it answer the question asked?
The issue between Manor and the angel is totally unrelated to the one between Jesus and the Jews here. So there is no basis for comparison.
Jesus could have gone further into telling them he was the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob but because their hearts were hardened already, he refrained.
Just for the mere use of "I am" they picked up stones. How could he have gone further.
Even if Jesus had made mention of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob; you would have, in your doubt, demanded further confirmatory utterances.

Remember Jesus was not particularly out to convince His doubters but to ground the faith of those who accept Him even without having fully understood Him yet.

Scripture said it clearly that Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob . that simply dismiss your write up as lacking credentials .

Act 3:13 Jesus is a servant of God of Abraham , Isaacb and Jacob

Jozzy4:


Beautiful, He never said I and my Father are one God .

John 17:21 he prayed his disciples be ONE just as he and his father are one .

" Just as " ... Can u see that ?

Now if you take it to mean being one as God , then his disciples are also Gods as well, because they will be one JUST AS.

But in the preceding verses Christ made it clear that He and the Father were one before creation of the world. But did not however say that he and the disciples were one before creation. See where the difference lies?

Deadlytruth:


But in the preceding verses Christ made it clear that He and the Father were one before creation of the world. But did not however say that he and the disciples were one before creation. See where the difference lies?

Just AS ,

Meditate on that, be one JUST AS .

Whatever u infer as what oneness means between Jesus and his Father MUST clearly apply to the disciples

Deadlytruth:


So Ephesus alone was equivalent to the whole of Asia province?
Entering Ephesus can't mean exactly the same as entering Asia Minor.
When a generalization is made there are exceptions.
Chapter 19 vs 1-8 show clearly that he did not do house to house preaching immediately on arrival in Ephesus.
It is like a tourist visiting Nigeria for the first time Lands in Lagos as his first point of entry and immediately on arrival starts visiting museums first, then he proceeds to Benin and visited Museums first again, and same thing with PH, Kano and Abuja before proceeding to Kaduna where he however visited Unibuja first on arrival. Then when telling of his experience he says, "When I first got to Nigeria I visited Museums first". He is correct here because he is apparently referring to Lagos. By this statement he couldn't have been referring to Abuja because in Abuja he didn't visit a museum first. This is simple logic.

Moreover, the first city Paul visited in Asia Minor was not Ephesus.

Speaking regarding his ministry in the Asian province . he talked about how he preached repentance to God and Faith in Jesus Christ .

This is not something to be taught a believer, because he already has faith in Jesus Christ . clearly he was referring to the time they were unbelievers and he did the preaching by teaching publicly and from HOUSE to HOUSE .

Jozzy4:


It simply means don't accuse NWT of deception when you don't have the facts .

Another of your FALSE assertion which stem out of your hatred was ONLY NWT contained the God is your throne rendering ., which as stated was found to be an outright LIE .

I Demand an apology for your making such deceptive Assertion to mislead the Public !!!

Until you do, I won't proceed with you because doing so will mean you can continue to slander without remorse .



Can you be the same with YOUR GOD ?

Where is your reasoning ability given to you by God Sir ., no insult intended just baffling how a clear statement can be misrepresented

Verse 9 says he has a GOD .

Anyone who is Your God has authority over you. No wonder Jesus is said to be under the authority of his God . ( 1 Cor 11:3)

Also, even going by the other rendering, The Father also called human Gods as well ... Yet doesn't mean they are Almighty .

Christ is not the Almighty, he is subjected to the authority of someone Greater than him . HIS GOD!!!




Scripture said it clearly that Jesus is NOT the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob . that simply dismiss your write up as lacking credentials .

Act 3:13 Jesus is a servant of God of Abraham , Isaacb and Jacob

You are still treating verses in isolation of the entire Bible. What you referenced above was Peter's speech to Jewish unbelievers who were yet to accept Jesus. When trying to convert an unbeliever you don't start with the deepest and most complex parts of the message but with the simplest and less controversial ones. It is after you have won him over and he his faith is firmly rooted that you go deep.
You go from the known to the unknown.
When Paul arrived Athens and introduced the unknown god inscribed on the wall of the temple as the Almighty God, does it mean that those Athenians actually perceived that unknown god as the God of heaven? Never! To them it meant just another one of their usual gods whose existence they believed they might not be aware of.
Also, Jesus was of dual nature, namely; as an earthly being in the flesh and as a spirit being in heaven. In Hebrews 1:8-9, the scene happened in heaven and He was therefore spoken of as a Spirit/God and not as a fleshy being.
But in the Acts 3:13 you have just cited, Peter was referring to him concerning his activities on earth as a man in the flesh, hence he referred to him as a servant which is an earthly thing.
Also in the 1 Cor 1:13 you cited, Paul was speaking to them in the earthly sense hence his presentation of the hierarchy. The evidence that the reference was earthly is the fact that he was speaking about Church and matrimonial home hierarchies. Remember there will be neither marriage nor Church in heaven.

Yes the NWT alone shifted the position of "is" in their translation of the second rendering. So I have not reversed myself.
Does the NWT indicate in any footnote that the verse has two renderings?
That is the distortion.
Is the NWT the same as the LXX Septuagint which you referenced as evidence of existence of two renderings of the verse?
So what is this apology you are demanding as if you are God?

Jozzy4:


Speaking regarding his ministry in the Asian province . he talked about how he preached repentance to God and Faith in Jesus Christ .

This is not something to be taught a believer, because he already has faith in Jesus Christ . clearly he was referring to the time they were unbelievers and he did the preaching by teaching publicly and from HOUSE to HOUSE .

Yes he spoke of teaching people about repentance when he first entered Asia Minor. But the preceding Bible verses make it clear that Ephesus was not the first city he visited in Asia Minor and that there were already believers in Ephesus before he ever set foot there.

Deadlytruth:



You are still treating verses in isolation of the entire Bible. What you referenced above was Peter's speech to Jewish unbelievers who were yet to accept Jesus. When trying to convert an unbeliever you don't start with the deepest and most complex parts of the message but with the simplest and less controversial ones. It is after you have won him over and he his faith is firmly rooted that you go deep.
You go from the known to the unknown.
When Paul arrived Athens and introduced the unknown god inscribed on the wall of the temple as the Almighty God, does it mean that those Athenians actually perceived that unknown god as the god of heaven? No. To them it meant just another one of their usual gods whose existence they believed they might not be aware of.
Also, Jesus was of dual nature, namely; as an earthly being in the flesh and as a spirit being in heaven. In Hebrews 1:8-9, the scene happened in heaven and He was therefore spoken of as a Spirit/God and not as a fleshy being.
But in the Acts 3:13 you have just cited, Peter was referring to him concerning his activities on earth as a man in the flesh, hence he referred to him as a servant which is an earthly thing.

Firstly Apologize for your earlier FALSE statement.

Deadlytruth:


Yes he spoke of teaching people about repentance when he first entered Asia Minor. But the preceding Bible verses make it clear that Ephesus was not the first city he visited in Asia Minor and that there were already believers in Ephesus before he ever set foot there.

This he said was done by teaching publicly and from house to house .

Jozzy4:


Firstly Apologize for your earlier FALSE statement.

You are not making any sense with this.
What is all this demand for apology about when you are not God? Why do you JWs so much love playing God?
Does the NWT indicate any footnote that there are two possible renderings to that verse?
Are the LXX Septuagint, RSV and NIV you referenced for evidence the same as the NWT you could not reference for same. Why did NWT translators avoid presenting both renderings but chose just the one which favoured their predetermined doctrine? That is the distortion. Distortion could take the form of addition or deliberate ommission which is the case here.

Jozzy4:


This he said was done by teaching publicly and from house to house .

You have refused to address Luke 10:7 in which Jesus clearly forbade house to house preaching for fresh evangelism.
If you keep twisting the other verses to make it appear that JWs are right to go from house to house then where do you place this clear instruction from Jesus himself? Aren't Bible verses supposed to harmoniously agree? Your twisting of the other verses make them look contradictory to Luke 10:7. And you are okay with that just so that JWs ego must be massaged?

Deadlytruth:


You are not making any sense with this.
What is all this demand for apology about when you are not God? Why do you JWs so much love playing God?
Does the NWT indicate any footnote that there are two possible renderings to that verse?
Are the LXX Septuagint, RSV and NIV you referenced for evidence the same as the NWT you could not reference for same. Why did NWT translators avoid presenting both renderings but chose just the one which favoured their predetermined doctrine? That is the distortion. Distortion could take the form of addition or deliberate ommission which is the case here.

Bro, the below statement is FALSE . admit that and present your apology , then we can proceed .

However, only in your NWT is Heb. 1:8 deliberately distorted to suit a preconceived doctrine.
All other translations have it as "...... your kingdom, O God......."

Jozzy4:



Bro, the below statement is FALSE . admit that and present your apology , then we can proceed .

First show the proof that it is wrong.
However, I can't even continue with any of you because for three days now I have taken the pain to address and comment on all the verses you raised in defense of your beliefs in house to house preaching while you people on the other hand have refused to directly or indirectly address the Luke 10:7 I cited for my conviction against house to house preaching.
It has been a one sided game all along and it must stop being so. If you want me to continue then first tell me why the disciples later 'disobeyed' Jesus clear instruction in Luke 10:7 by going from house to house immediately on arrival in previously unevangelized towns as it appears to you.

Any further response short of this will not get my attention. Thanks.

Deadlytruth:


You have refused to address Luke 10:7 in which Jesus clearly forbade house to house preaching for fresh evangelism.
If you keep twisting the other verses to make it appear that JWs are right to go from house to house then where do you place this clear instruction from Jesus himself? Aren't Bible verses supposed to harmoniously agree? Your twisting of the other verses make them look contradictory to Luke 10:7. And you are okay with that just so that JWs ego must be massaged?

Even Jesus instruct his apostles to only go to the house of isreal and should not enter into the nations to preach , didn't he ?

Did they disobey?

This is why I asked earlier on if the apostles are disobeying Jesus Christ, a because clearly as seen in Act 20:20 and Act 5:42 , they presched from house to house .

Infact Jesus also said they must not greet anyone on their way to preach ...


Circumstances of the time make Jesus give this guidelines, after his resurrection he instruct them to.go into the whole world , House to house preaching becomes one of their preaching methods ( Act 5:42, 20:20)

Deadlytruth:


First show the proof that it is wrong.
However, I can't even continue with any of you because for three days now I have taken the pain to address and comment on all the verses you raised in defense of your beliefs in house to house preaching while you people on the other hand have refused to directly or indirectly address the Luke 10:7 I cited for my conviction against house to house preaching.
It has been a one sided game all along and it must stop being so. If you want me to continue then first tell me why the disciples later 'disobeyed' Jesus clear instruction in Luke 10:7 by going from house to house immediately on arrival in previously unevangelized towns as it appears to you.

Any further response short of this will not get my attention. Thanks.

The bolded is extremely funny Bro . I already did . Again, I will so everyone reading the thread can see for themselves.



Check the below Translations ( coded as reference *2A)

An American Translation (Smith-Goodspeed), renders it: “God is your throne....”


And The Bible in Living English (Byington) reads: “God is your throne....”

The Message reads: “Your throne is God’s throne….”

NSB - God is your throne

Mace - "God is thy throne….”

Twentieth Century Translation - ‘God is thy throne….’


Will you now make a PUBLIC APOLOGY for misleading the public and misrepresenting the witnesses with your bolded words below?

"

Deadlytruth

However, only in your NWT is Heb. 1:8 deliberately distorted to suit a preconceived doctrine.
All other translations have it as ..... your kingdom, O God......."

Is it true all other translation have it as you stated ? ( reference 2A)

Is it only the NWT that said God is your throne ? ( reference 2A)

Jozzy4:




Even Jesus instruct his apostles to only go to the house of isreal and should not enter into the nations to preach , didn't he ?

Did they disobey?

This is why I asked earlier on if the apostles are disobeying Jesus Christ, a because clearly as seen in Act 20:20 and Act 5:42 , they presched from house to house .

Infact Jesus also said they must not greet anyone on their way to preach ...


Circumstances of the time make Jesus give this guidelines, after his resurrection he instruct them to.go into the whole world , House to house preaching becomes one of their preaching methods ( Act 5:42, 20:20)

In commissioning the 72 disciples in Luke 10:7 Jesus was silent on the question of whether they could go to gentile lands or not. But let us even assume that He didn't want them to visit gentile lands on that very outing judging from the constraining circumstances you claim were in existence at that moment, then it would mean that he forbade house to house preaching among the Jews. And those 72 actually went out and returned without actually visiting gentile lands. So how come it appears to you that they disobeyed Christ by entering into gentile territories thereby setting a precedent for future disobedience to Jesus' instruction against house to house preaching?

Even when Jesus later expanded the reach of His gospel to gentiles he only asked them to go out into the whole world and spread the good news without making any alterations to the manner he had already spelt out in previous instances. If He had found a change necessary about the manner of approach do you think he would not have made it known when he was expanding the outlook to cover all nations? And do you think it was a coincidence that Paul and Peter always first went to the synagogues in whichever gentile cities they set their feet on for the first time ever?

Now, let me tell you the actual reason behind Jesus disapproval of house to house manner:
Luke 10: 2 he said to the 72 appointees, "The harvest is ripe but labourers are few....". This therefore means the method that must be adopted for maximum harvest is mass approach. And that would normally involve speaking from the synagogues or other public places. On the other hand going from house to house would not yield a bountiful harvest within the timeframe they had to evangelize.
On return, their testimonies actually showed they made a mountainous harvest of souls that same day.
Small as Israel was in population, house to house approach was seen by Jesus as unproductive. Then how could He have ever intended it to be used for the far more populous gentile land where bigger harvests were ripe?
And have labourers outnumbered ripe harvest today to warrant a change of approach as you would have us believe?
Are other world's religions not being reported as growing faster than Christianity today through biological means?