₦airaland Forum

9jaforlife:
Because you'll still refuse to get it! Why would I bother wasting my time going back and forth when you'll end up talking out of context?!

I can see that you have problem with simple English.

You claimed my post FULL OF CONTRADICTIONS and I went ahead to challenge you to highlight ALL THE CONTRADICTIONS in my post so that people can see them.

But you are here giving another dumb excuses.

9jaforlife:
"Dividing the spoil... a girl or two for each warrior" means what Spoil means gains of war. Go and read the whole chapter.

You can deny it. I understand it's embarassing.

Now see the whole chapter analysis

Verse 1 was talking about a SONG sang by Deborah and Barak "On that day Deborah and Barak son of Abinoam sang this song:"

From verse 2-end show the lyrics of the song.
So how can you apply a SONG SANG BY SINGERS to mean RAPE? that's what I couldn't phantom from your post which shows your dumbness.

9jaforlife:
You're too confused. Your post makes no sense, it's full of contradictions!

Why can't you point out the contradictions for people to see?

Typical Muslims excuse.

After I've exposed your ignorance about the verse you quoted that never even talked about RAPE.

9jaforlife:
[size=14pt]DUMB TALKS!![/size]

Can you see your life outside?

How can you quote a verse that is not even talking about RAPE to mean Bible condones RAPE? SMH

9jaforlife:
As for rape of war victims, see what the bible has to say...

Bible Condones Rape of War Victims
"Are they not finding and dividing the spoil-- a girl or two for each warrior, the spoil of colored garments for Sisera, the spoil of an embroidered garment or two for my neck?" Judges 5:30

And if that church was to follow the bible's instructions, the pastor and those women would have been dead....

‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death" Leviticus 20:10

So, keep on rambling!

The astonish part of your post is to quote a verse that is not even talking about rape to mean Bible condones RAPE very pathetic and dumbness.

But what you (Muslims) who always refer to Bible for a post like this fail to understand is that [b]If both Bible and Quran actually condone RAPE then God can't be the inspire Author BUT if the Biblical text never condone RAPE and Islamic source condone RAPE then it means God never inspired it.

9jaforlife:
Infact, ALL of your post fall out any form of sense.

Really So what about the poo you just posted?

You're not in support of the act but you're trying to diminish the gravity of it Saying one form of barbarity is better is pure hypocricy!

Wrong conception about my post, evil cannot be done away in human society until Jesus comes but as we live in evil generation MAN believe that less evil should befall them than TOTAL ELIMINATED FROM life. If someone was hit by a vehicle even to the point of death the Family will continue to spend money to make sure the person survive death.

First I DON'T PREFER any form of savagery. All forms of inhumanity are bad and should be condemned, especially when committed in the name of God.

You DON'T PREFER it but the truth of the matter is YOU CAN'T STOP IT which you must have alternative IN CASE such happened

You talk as if the children kidnapped by Boko Haram were in night clubs when they were abducted.

Please where does my post imply your statement?

Do you think that you've been spared from BH violence because you're smart??

So you know this and you DON'T PREFER one to another. Now that I know I'm not smart but I'LL PREFER MY DAUGHTER TO FALL into the hand of man who will impregnate her THAN BOKO HARAM to kill her.

You all love to sing the tune of how there's so much fights in Muslim countries, is it not your so called loving christian nations that are fueling the fights? Creating and funding terrorist groups and providing them with weapons to distabilize their territories just to be able to gain control of their oil?

Lol Now it is Christians who founded Islamic terrorist because of their oil, please does Borno state have oil?

Your bible is full of 'kill' quotes but you never pay attention to that.

Thank God that you say we never pay ATTENTION TO IT which is better THAN MUSLIMS who PAY attention to their own which is the point you're confusing with each other.

When millions of people die in christian inspired wars you blame the initiators

INSPIRED BY WHO? please provide evidence.

but when a Muslim is involved in any crime you blame Islam.

Because the founder of Islam PRACTICE THEM and at the same time PRESCRIBED for Muslims.

When Hilary Clinton confessed that America created Al Qaeda or when Bush said God (of christians) inspired him to fight Iraq war, did you blame christianity??

Is America Christianity?
Bush made the same claim that this man made as God inspired him (Them) but the question is was it commanded by GOD in the Bible or PRACTICE BY JESUS HIMSELF or they draw their inspiration from the Bible?
I think the only evidence here is to ask God Himself whether He truly inspired them.

Yet, when some lunatics who are also condemned by Muslims claim that they're following Islam by killing others, you people will say it's Islam that truly taught them.

Was it not stated clearly in the Quran?
When Clinton says (according to you) America created Al-qeada does it support it with Biblical quote?
When Bush says (according to you) God inspired him to fight Iraq did he have any Biblical support for it?

I believe as Muhammad claimed that Allah sent Gabriel to him if Muhammad never wrote it down will you just believe in his claim?

The claim that violence in the Middle East are supported by the Quran is pure lies and propaganda that generations of Islamophobes like you have heartlessly circulated for long. [size=14pt]If all your attacks against Islam had worked, no Muslim would be alive today.[/size] But you've always ended up right where you started and you ALWAYS will.

Imaging Islamophobes are circulating what was boldly written in the Quran.

That bolded part is pure delusion is it only Islam that has been attacked in history of religions?
All religions have their attackers, Muslims attacked Christians for manipulations of their Bible, called Paul a liar e.t.c does that stop Christianity from being alive today?

You need wisdom man!

Yooguyz:
Bruce M. Metzger, Professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Princeton Theological Seminary, one of the world's leading authorities on the Greek language, and recognized as such by the Jehovah's Witnesses who quote him on occasion in a favorable way, wrote an article in 1950 pointing out the errors in many Christological passages in the New World Translation of the Christian Greek Scriptures. 26

In fact this is the main problem with the Jehovah witness, how can JWs so trust this man by taking his writing as a prove? Yet this same man has pointed out the errors in their Bible.

9jaforlife:
[size=14pt]If it was a Muslim who did this,[/size] you would have seen the likes of Ifeann aka parisbookaddict drooling all over this place. [size=14pt]She would have claimed that it's the spirit of Muhammad but now that it's a Christian,[/size] she will perfectly understand that devil is at work. Crazy world!!

In fact the two bolded parts fall out simple sense.

Not that I'm in support of this act but comparing this with what is happening in Muslims world today is pathetic.

Firstly, I believe you'll prefer someone impregnating your daughter than the person to kill your daughter. At least if Boko Haram, ISIS, Taliban e.t.c are only impregnating women today the case will be different (Husband will warn his wife and parents will warn their daughters not to move anyhow) but taking LIFE is so heartfelt.

Secondly, what is going on in Muslims world today ARE PRESCRIBE in the Qu'ran that's why the evil men always have Qu'ran back up for their act but this man ONLY CLAIMED GOD DIRECTED him, which doesn't have any scriptural back up or can be traced to JESUS CHRIST or ALL the blessed Apostles who took over from Jesus. It's now left for you to do a research whether God truly told him so or not but I can challenge you to bring any verse where it was commanded to practice this from the Bible.

So if a Muslim killed it is as a result of what Muhammad practiced and prescribed for him/her.

JMAN05:
We witness for Jah and Jesus too. Witnessing about Jehovah today involve speaking about what he did through His son. This son he elevated. how many times will I tell you that witnessing about Jesus is witnessing about Jehovah?

But that statement read "True Christians SERVE as witness of Jehovah" (I'll add ONLY) which doesn't include Jesus which is different from your point.
How many times have I asked that if witness of Jesus means witness of Jehovah then do you agree that ALL Christians are WITNESS of Jehovah or Jehovah's witness?
Remember what you called witness of Jehovah "Witnessing about Jehovah today involve speaking about what he did through His son."

the article you quoted is speaking from a different context.

So what is the context does it speaking about?

You poor scriptural understanding is a major problem I don't think I can help you out from.

Lolzzz the above statement so fits you like cloth

The Bible Exposition Commentary states about that verse: "James called these gentiles 'a people for His [God's] name". this scholar and many more knew the verse is talking about God's name. only your childish understanding won't grasp it.

I know you purposely inserted 'God's' there but the point is not THE QUOTATION OF OT by James The point is WHO DID James HAVE IN MIND Before QUOTING from OT? This is the vital point I see you missing from this thread. Jesus Himself told Paul that he will bear HIS NAME before gentiles and the believers belong to Jesus.

If you don't get it. please forget it. if you like believe the devil created you. that's your biz. you won't say no one told you.

Lolzzz talking out of frustration.

After telling the crowd how God poured out the spirit, how He raised Jesus and more, the account called it "thorough witness". Acts 2:39,40.

God stated he would raise his son from the dead. What prove does God have for this? the apostles were witnesses of this great work of God. acts 3:15

And you believe that The PRINCE of LIFE of Acts 3:15 can die...

See how you keep confusing issue, let me bring out the point the Blessed Apostles were making when they say God raised Christ from Christ own word "and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. Luke 24:46-48 RSV

In fact Jesus Himself said here it is through HIS NAME NOT JEHOVAH that people will be going from place to place as a result of what have been written.
Though it's still through the WORK of God that Christ resurrected in a sense that to unbeliever someone who they knew AS HUMAN BEING can't rise from dead without divine intervention but from scriptures God raised Christ and Christ raised Himself.

So the Apostles were only talking about the LIVING CHRIST which is no more in GRAVE.

They are people for his name, they replaced the natural Israelites. the commentary above gave the same point.

And I then asked whose NAME are we being called today? why simple question is so difficult for you to answer

What do you call people called to proclaim God's excellencies? 1Pet. 2:9

Please show me from any translation where the phrase [b]God's excellences appear in 1 Peter 2:9 what was written there is the excellences of the "ONE WHO CALLED YOU OUT..." the question now is who called US? the Bible made answer it both God and Jesus Christ called US.

Whose witness is he? Did he proclaim his message?

Lolzzz Witness of Himself.

He proclaimed the message of His Father and His own.

who elevated Jesus and gave him a great name?

The Father

But my question is, WHOSE NAME DID THE APOSTLE BEAR BEFORE GENTILES?
Did Jesus lie when He said Paul will bear HIS NAME before the Gentiles?

whose message did Jesus bear?

At least it is message not NAME, see above answer

During Pentecost, the people were declaring the magnificent things of who? acts 2:11

God or do you want them to declare the things of MAN before.

what do you call that? weaknessing? tomorrow you will start making noise you argued in nairaland. rubbish!

Lolzzzz it pains you sorry ooo

First do you agree that the Christian congregation was formed as God's name people?

YES because Jesus is God

2. When you proclaim someone's excellencies are you witnessing for Him?

Proclaiming excellences is different from witnessing
According to JWs A witness is a person who proclaims views or truth of which he is CONVINCED. (Bold and capital mine)
www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/name-jehovahs-witnesses/

Please how does this definition fit the mixing up of your proclaiming excellences with witnessing

3. Do you believe that Jesus powerful works and resurrection were all possible cos of God? Acts 2:22-24

I do and at the same time don't forget the Son can do whatever the Father does.

4. Do you believe that proclaiming the magnificent things of God is a witness about God? Acts 2:11

Yes and that makes us all Christians witnesses of God, do you agree?

Do you believe that what God did on the side of Jesus is among this magnificent thing?

I do,
NOTE: All these your human terminologies won't save you unless you embrace the sovereign Word of God over your own by simply agree that Jehovah never commanded anyone to witness for Him rather it is Jesus who made the COMMANDMENT and all the Apostles including the FATHER Himself bear witness of Jesus.

Please kindly provide answers to my questions the way I did to yours here.

JMAN05:
The sources you provided was wrong. the other one never gave an authoritative information. that was clear. However, Jehovah's witnesses never said so.

I don't know why you're stressing this to this time, the link I provided isn't from Anti-JWs site but a DEFEND of JW. If my sources was WRONG then the problem is not mine it's theirs.

I will repeat this for the last time, since I can provide A LINK and also HEARD it from TWO different JWs then it evident that my claim is right.

So now you know, but you were asking silly question.

Lol...it's only people like you can reason this way when my statement was a pure rephrasing one to tell me the meaning SINCE YOU ASSUME I don't know it.

just short short up, do I look you like someone you can deceive? Jesus is the literal word of God. If God speaks, that utterance is Jesus. Since the literal word is no longer there in heaven, God can no longer speak. That is the folly of the reasoning.

Unless you will raise another funny statement that there are many 'Jesuses'. Jesus is the spoken word, so when God spoke to Jesus, He was transmitting Jesus to Jesus. lol. doctrine. nawa o!

If he talk, wettin e talk na Jesus na. ie two Jesuses or a speech of Jesuses. Ekwe! doctrinology.

Man you need to grow in knowledge because I don't know how simple sentences are so hard for you to comprehend.

For the last time, The WORD of God WAS CORVERED with FLESH (INCARNATED) seen in HUMAN form and called Jesus Christ, that's why Jesus Christ has TWO NATURE both Human (flesh) and DIVINE form (God) and the TWO natures never MIXED together.

Your problem is viewing my point as Jesus is the Word of God and as being found in human flesh to mean The Word of God CHANGE! CHANGE!! CHANGE!!! to Jesus Christ. Jesus doesn't cease to exist as the Word of God while on Earth since The WORD ONLY CORVERED WITH FLESH. So when the Father speaks while Christ was on earth doesn't mean the Father is speaking out THE HUMAN FLESH OF CHRIST which is what a grown man like you couldn't comprehend.

No, I only see how confused you are. what's wrong with what I said.

oh! na run you won run? Nwoke m answer the question.

Lolzzz it is so shameful that you couldn't see how confused you are after I've brought out all your points.
If I will run away not for a confused soul like your who couldn't comprehend simple statement mixing HUMANITY WITH DIVINTY.

Now let me help you open your confusion more clearer;

Very IMPORTANTLY both God's knowledge, His knowledge, and Knowledge of God mean the same thing.

*You first said: "God's knowledge is not a person." here you agreed [b]God's knowledge (WHICH can also be written as His knowledge or Knowledge of God) is NOT a PERSON.
*You also said: "God's knowledge was expressed in His creation...," God's knowledge again (WHICH can also be written as His knowledge or Knowledge of God
*You go further to say this fantastic statement: "I never claimed Jesus was not called God's knowledge...," Here you said YOU NEVER CLAIMED Jesus was NOT CALLED God's knowledge (WHICH can also be written as His knowledge or Knowledge of God)
*You then asked: "If Jesus is called God's knowledge, does it then mean that he is the literal knowledge of God?...," Now see how you switched in your question from God's knowledge to knowledge of God as if these two phrases have different meaning.

*The most RIDICULOUS one is when you finally asked: ""Where is he called this "knowledge of God"? Whereas you've already CLAIMED that Jesus is called GOD'S KNOWLEDGE (WHICH can also be written as knowledge of God or His knowledge) but after this you can still ask that question.

Please is there any difference between these two phrases 'God's knowledge and knowledge of God'?

It is evident that you don't know that God's knowledge and knowledge of God mean the same thing.

If you like tell us that Jesus is the literal knowledge of God. let's keep adding your errors. You will earn an award for that.

SMH, just face your confusion above.

AgricSalt:
I did not join the world this year. Besides, I tap from the knowledge of my ever existing God - Jehovah, through His Word - the Bible, and His faithful and dynamic organisation on earth - the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses.

If you want to learn more visit http://www.jw.org/en/

You tapped from the knowledge of Jehovah yet you couldn't comprehend my posts.

Thank God that you said it yourself that YOUR organisation is DYNAMIC no wonder they keep changing their teaching.

TroGunn:
To be a witness means to "testify to; give or afford evidence of" (dictionary.com). Thus a witness is "a person who proclaims views or truths of which he is convinced".

Jesus himself is a witness of Jehovah. He did or said nothing by his own power, but as he was instructed his Father, Jehovah.

John 6:38 - "For I have come down from heaven not to do my will but to do the will of him who sent me".

John 14:23,24: "Jesus replied, “Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them. Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me" .

Thus Jesus could pray thus to Jehovah, at John 17:25,26 - "O righteous Father, although the world has not known You, yet I have known You; and these have known that You sent Me; and I have made Your name known to them, and will make it known, so that the love with which You loved Me may be in them, and I in them.""

Clearly, witnessing (proclaiming the truth) about Jesus Christ is actually witnessing about Jehovah, the one who sent him and is the head of the Christ (1 Cor. 11:3).

Jesus and the early apostles clearly understood that. Anyone who is humble and ready to drop false/confusing traditional beliefs, and peer into the bible would also.

The funny thing is after your own definition of WITNESS you still went ahead to go against it.

Please is "testify to; give or afford evidence of"" according to your dictionary the same as "He did or said nothing by his own power,"?

Now I will insert your meaning of WITNESS (testify to; give or afford evidence of) into my previous post on those who witness of Jesus Christ and you will do me a favour by providing equivalent word of it from Jesus Himself or the Apostles IN JUST A SINGLE VERSE without your caricature explanation.

1) The Father Himself: When reading the scriptures one thing that is very sure is that NOWHERE Jesus Himself witnesses about The Father rather it's The Father who WITNESSED about His Son, in fact the GREATEST witness is that of the Father;
*John 5:36-37 "But I have greater witness than [that] of John:..., And the Father himself, which hath sent me, hath testify to; give or afford evidence of me..."(KJV)
*John 8:18 "I am one that bear witness of myself, and the Father that sent me testify to; give or afford evidence of me."(KJV)
*1 John 5:9 "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is greater: for this is the testify to; give or afford evidence of God which he hath testified of his Son. (KJV)

2) The Holyspirit: 1 John 5:6 "This is he that came by water and blood, [even] Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that testify to; give or afford evidence of, because the Spirit is truth." (KJV)
*Acts 5:32 "...and [so is] also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him." (KJV)

3) The Prophets: Acts 10:43 "To him give all the prophets testify to; give or afford evidence of, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins." (KJV)

4) The Apostles:[/b] *Acts 4:33 "And with great power gave the apostles testify to; give or afford evidence of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all." (KJV)
*Acts 5:32 "And we are his testifier; given or afford evidence of these things;..." (KJV)

5) John the Baptist: *John 1:7-8 "The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all [men] through him might believe. He was not that Light, but [was sent] to testify to; give or afford evidence of that Light." (KJV)
*John 5:33 "Ye sent unto John, and he testify to; give or afford evidence unto the truth." (KJV)

6) Paul: Acts 23:11 "And the night following the Lord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer, Paul: for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou testify to; give or afford evidence of (me) also at Rome." (KJV)

AgricSalt:
I wanted to brand him apostate, but I see he does not even have a base. He just blabs.
That scripture I ascribed to him is what fits him. 'because he says he sees, he will remain blind' ~ John 9:41

You join this forum this year and you quickly want to brand someone an APOSTATE, don't worry you're welcome.

JMAN05:
Your detaching my writeup out of context is hilarious. The reason for the post is to prove that the apostles were witnesses of [size=14pt]Jehovah too.[/size]

Please how did I detach your post out of context? I only reply your post quote by quote.
Funny of you, at the bolded part if that's what Watchtower claimed this thread won't have been opened but Watchtower claim was "True Christians SERVE as WITNESS of JEHOVAH but your post only showed that The Apostles were Witness of Jehovah TOO notice the word "TOO"

I have also stated why the quotation the article made from that Acts 15 is not wrong. The spiritual replaced the natural and it retained its status as Jehovah's witnesses. It never ceased God from having witnesses.

Neither do I claim that the quotation is wrong too but misapplication of that verse by JWs is my major concerns. This is not the only place where NT writer apply OT scripture to Jesus Christ, the purpose of quoting that verse was stressed out in their letter to the SAME GENTILE Acts 15:26 "men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.(NIV)

Since you said "It never ceased God from having witnesses." then just give me a SINGLE VERSE where any of the Apostles WITNESS of Jehovah, this is another time I'll ask for this.

[size=14pt]As a group they were witnesses of Jehovah.[/size] there they're witnessing about Jesus being a part of that witness for Jehovah. He elevated Jesus to occupy a prominent position in the outworking of His purpose. Many miracles performed concerning this Jesus were God's work that need to be proclaimed.

Please provide the scriptures for the bolded part if there's no scripture for it then I still take it as your own word to justify JWs claim.
Did they witness of Jesus or Jehovah? answer this and stop dancing around.

I ve shown why Jesus is a witness of Jehovah both as a natural Jew, the head of the new nation and by his own teaching. compare Rev 1:5

Still referring to Rev 1:5 as if it says Jesus is a witness of Jehovah whereas I gave verses where Jehovah Himself witness of Jesus.

Jehovah called them to declare His excellencies (1Pet. 2:9), part of which is witnessing about Jesus. JW's witness for Jehovah and Jesus. The former encompassing the latter.

The questions according to those verses are;
1. Whose name did the Apostles bear before the Gentiles? Jesus Christ!
2. Whose name were the NATURAL Israelite and SPIRITUAL Israelite (Gentiles) been called? It is Christian! because it was at Antioch (Gentile city) that the DESCIPLES were FIRST CALLED Christian which is the NAME we were been called till today not Jehovah's name unless if you want to tell me that the name Jehovah and Jesus Christ are the same.

That is the purpose of the thread. When you agree that the article was not in the wrong, you can now point out what you disagree with in the other points I made there.

The purpose of this thread is misinterpretation of Acts 15:14,17 by JWs that made the Faithful Apostles a FALSE CHRISTIANS because they never SERVE as witness of Jehovah but witness of Jesus Christ which were BOLDLY spelled out throughout the New Testament. Since this is true then the article was wrong.

JMAN05:
JW do not teach that. finish with.
You go ask that JW why he said so, he is the rightful person to answer that.

I should go and ask only ONE person when I gave TWO INSTANCE together with A LINK to buttress my claim.
Well I've done what you required of me.

sorry, I wont. If you a lad, check your dictionary before talking.

LOl...since you assumed that I don't know what literal mean, so you who know it why can't you tell me?

Now you are specific, yet the point is childish.

When JESUS was doing his baptism, what do you call that voice that came from heaven?

When Jesus died, what happened to God's speech?

Didn't it look so ridiculous if you couldn't have known what I'm talking about before

I don't even know your problem, The Word of God which (was given the name Jesus Christ on earth) ONLY TOOK ON FLESH NOT THAT HE CEASED TO EXIST AS THE WORD OF GOD, that's why I asked you the other time is it possible for God to speak in all 36 states of Nigeria at once? but unfortunately you couldn't provide answer to it.

So if the Word of God was on earth in form of HUMAN, is it still possible for God not to talk again?

oga, comma can take the place of a parenthesis. That is done, only try and get the point the writer is making.

Alright

Just see how your below post confirmed that you're confused.

God's knowledge is not a person. God's knowledge was expressed in His creation.

I never claimed Jesus was not called God's knowledge. I implied that God's omniscience, which is part of him, cannot be Jesus.

If Jesus is called God's knowledge, does it then mean that he is the literal knowledge of God? Even without being told, the answer must be no. why? for that will mean that God lacked knowledge when Jesus died. Or that He lacked knowledge in heaven when Jesus was on earth.

Secondly, Jesus' knowledge cannot be compared with the endless knowledge of Jehovah. rom 11:33

If there is something Jesus do not know, God shouldn't know it. If that statement is not true, then Jesus isn't the literal knowledge of God.

Where is he called this "knowledge of God"? Maybe we can start from there. Col 2:2 didnt say so.

Now imaging all these from the above post; "God's knowledge is not a person. God's knowledge was expressed in His creation..., I never claimed [size=14pt]Jesus was not called God's knowledge..., If Jesus is called God's knowledge,[/size] does it then mean that he is the literal knowledge of God?..., you then asked "Where is he called this "knowledge of God"?

Maybe you've forgotten that knowledge of God, God's knowledge, His knowledge all mean the same thing. Can you see how confused you are now? SMH...

JMAN05:
[size=14pt]Of course, rearrangement do change meaning of the verse.[/size] That is why an overall understanding of the bible is essential to bible translation. [size=14pt]But is there scriptural basis for the rearrangement? Yes,[/size] I however cannot give an official reason why the NWT Committee worded it so.

So you agree that rearrangement can CHANGE THE MEANING OF A VERSE and at the same time you know there's a SCRIPTURAL BASIS for the rearrangement BUT THE FUNNY PART is that YOU cannot give an official reason why the NWT Committee worded it so.

Mr. the only reason why you can't give an official reason is the question you asked below "Has Christ come prior to Jesus being born on earth?" this is what Watchtower has hide from you people.

I dont actually see the big deal in wording the verse that way. But will we we will not ask why it was worded - the spirit of Christ? Has Christ come prior to Jesus being born on earth?

Please ask why it was worded because IT IS A PURE SCRIPTURAL PERVERTION and way of hiding the TRUTH from you.
Bible tells us that Christ was in active in the OT "and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ." 1 Corin 10:4 ASV even this particular verse has been worded to mean another thing by NWT

Also, you believe Jesus is an Angel and do you thing Jehovah wouldn't have sent Michael (which is now Jesus according JWs) to earth just once throughout the OT?

and They are yet to understand that sacred secret of Christ not to talk of knowing his spirit was in them.

Who told you they don't? The verse simply says "...they were searching..." we were told that Moses "esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than that the treasures in Egypt" Heb 11:26

So that arrangemnt is correct than the other ones.

Very pathetic conclusion when you don't even know the reason why rearrangement was employed.

The question is; is there anything grammatically or scripturally wrong with the arrangement?

No one is talking about gramma here BUT SCRIPTURALLY is wrong because Christ's Spirit or Spirit of Christ or His Spirit means it belongs to Christ whereas NWT changed the meaning by showing that the SPIRIT was only INDICATING CONSERNING Christ.

Can't you see the different?

Please don't derail this thread if you don't know what is all about.

AgricSalt:
Emusan don't you see the proverbial statement fulfilling in your case? "Jesus said to them: 'If you were blind, you would have no sin'. But now you say, 'we see'. Your sin remains." ~ John 9:41

So how does this one fulfil in my post?

You want to be called a Jehovah's Witness, [size=14pt]but you refuse to acknowlegde Jehovah's Sovereignty(by words and deed).[/size] You do not accept [size=14pt]the full distinction between Jehovah and Jesus.[/size]

Sorry to burst your ass, I DON'T WANT TO BE CALLED a Jehovah's WITNESS, read in between lines before you quote someone next time your brother said and I quote "Witness about Jesus is to witness about God" and I asked that question, so can you do me a favour by answering that question?

On the two bolded parts, can you kindly tell us here how those statements were true about me?

You want to claim you witness about Jesus where you do not accept his main theme of teaching. For Jesus says: "I must also declare the good news of the Kingdom of God, to other cities because for this I was sent".

Sorry again, I DON'T CLAIM TO WITNESS ABOUT JESUS but JESUS HIMSELF COMMANDED ALL HIS FOLLWERS TO WITNESS FOR HIM in which the Father Himself is a WITNESS FOR His Son, so I'm simply following the instruction of our Lord the question is do you follow the commandment of Jesus or not?

Do you even know what the "Kingdom of God" is, not to talk of why it is a "good news"?

No I don't! Please kindly tell me.

Or do you imagine that by calling yourselves "Christians", you are Christians?

I may not BUT AS LONG AS I WITNESS ABOUT Jesus and according to your brother I'M ALSO WITNESSING about God, true or false?

Do you also believe this may be true about you?

"Not everyone saying to [Jesus], ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the Kingdom of the heavens, but only the one doing the will of [Jesus'] Father who is in the heavens will. Many will say to [Jesus] in that day: ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and expel demons in your name, and perform many powerful works in your name?’ And then [Jesus] will declare to them: ‘I never knew you! Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness!’"

BUT ANY ONE WHO PROCLAIMED Jesus WITNESSES about JESUS and according to your brother it's still the same as WITNESS about God.

johnydon22:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha thats all...

read my above post sir... no need going over it again...

btw i dont believe any God exist... be it Zeus, yahweh, horus, mithras, thor, odin, krishna..

Are we clear now?

You see i hate long unnecessary arguments, moreover we have derailed this thread long enough... am done..

Then what was your intention for asking such question if not because you're a confuse dude?

johnydon22:
I asked a simple question... nobody can even answer me...lolzzzzz

Why dont you answer mine first then i will answer urs immediately..

[size=20] what do you have against God[/size] (zeus)

Listing to yourself "nobody can answer you" when you're confused.

I don't have anything against Zeus

So do you believe Zeus exists?

JMAN05:
Why did you drift away from the line of explanation you are making about that Acts 15? Is this deliberate or you dont know the context?

I didn't know where you see me explaining anything, I only quote those verses and underlined the needful part.

First of all, the article you quoted shows that the Jews as a whole served as witnesses of Jehovah. This does not necessarily mean that the Israelites would go from house to house proclaiming Jehovah's name. But whether they proclaim God's name or not, The Jews as a group were a testimony of Jehovah's godship. Isaiah 43:10-12

The key point here is the underlined sentence "...were a testimony of Jehovah's GODSHIP"
You agree they were witness of Jehovah but ONLY a testimony for Jehovah's GODSHIP not for HIS NAME.

The preaching as we know it today was largely copied from Jesus and his disciples.

How can you say preaching as we know it today was LARGELY COPIED from Jesus and His disciples? was it copied or COMMANDED?

Jesus was a natural Jew, so he is a Jehovah's witness. Jesus did not come on earth of his own accord. The Father sent him in fulfillment of His promise. So Jesus bears witness that all God's promises will fulfill. Jesus himself proclaimed God's name (john 17:6, 26). He also stated that he came in his Father's name. So he is a witness for God. Rev 1:5.

Now witness of Jehovah has taken another meaning here to make Jesus fits into it.

When you proclaim Jesus, you are proclaiming God's means of salvation. That is a witness for God too.

See how you change the word just to continue spreading your false teaching "Proclaiming to Witness"
Now if proclaiming Jesus is equivalent to witness of God then ALL CHRISTIAN denominations are WITNESS OF JEHOVAH/Jehovah's witness, do you agree?

Secondly, God had always had witnesses for his name.

Can you provide scriptural evidence for this?

God's name is so important that you cant ignore it and say you know God. In short this is a secret that many religionist are yet to understand.

The secret JWs are also yet to understand is that the NAME of God has taken another dimension in the NT as "And in none other is there salvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is given among men, wherein we must be saved." Acts 4:12

Here a NAME IS GIVEN, which name is that? Jesus Christ!
After all JWs has unknowingly said this name is also Jehovah since they applied Romans 10:13 to Jehovah

The natural Israelites were God's name people, but they rejected His son, who served as His representative while on earth. But God had already uttered a prophesy that one day, He would form a new nation. That nation latter became the Israel of God, spiritual Israelites (Gal 6:16). Previously, God's name people never included uncircumcised gentiles. But in the first century CE, God made that possible.

You're absolutely right.

In the book of Amos God had declared that he would bring about a new nation, which will now consist of the uncircumcised gentiles. This new nation, the Israel of God, are still God's name people. The account says "people who are called by my name". Whose name? Jehovah's.

Then whose name the Apostles witness to Gentiles? Jesus Christ!
Whose NAME are the believers being called today? CHRISTian,
This is even the key message of Jesus to Paul during Paul's encountered with Jesus Christ "But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear MY NAME before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:" Acts 9:15

Please is there any contradiction here?
Here both NATURAL ISREAL and SPIRITUAL ISREAL are mentioned together.
I think what JWs failed to agree with is how the NT writers APPLIED everything in the OT to Jesus Christ and for Holyspirit to allow these writers to do so is enough message for a true believer.

Peter told about the witness God had made by given his holy spirit on the uncircumcised gentiles, which is strange, but which had proven that God had chosen this gentiles as among His people.

Now James recounted this testimony of Peter and added that this occurence which Peter stated is in line with God's prophesy through His prophet Amos. So the prophesy of Amos, which James quoted is still talking about God's name people. As a group this nation are witnesses of Jehovah, He created them for His name.

You're still right here.
Remember according to you witness of Jehovah simply means a testimony for Jehovah's GODSHIP which is totally different from witnessing to NAME.

Peter adds to that truth:

1Pet. 2:9

But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for special possession, that you should declare abroad the excellencies” of the One who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Peter here used a scripture that was applied to the natural Israelites and applied it to the spiritual Israelites.

Ok!

So the spiritual replaced the natural. God did not form this nation and now cease to have witnesses on earth. No.

And did you know that in the process of replacing the spiritual with natural something happened which is Jesus Christ that ALL NT centred on.
The only witness on Earth now is the witness of Jesus Christ as He commanded "...and ye shall be MY witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Acts 1:8

Show me just a single verse where THE APOSTLES WITNESS OF Jehovah.

Rather, since the natural Israelites, there activities, there Law and its power proved to other nations that there God Jehovah is the greatest and the Almighty among other deities, the new nation's proclamation of Jesus and the kingdom is another phase in declaring the godship of Jehovah - this proves that he can redeem obedient mankind from sin and death. That thus will sanctify His name. They had to proclaim many things, one of which is that Jehovah raised Jesus as a means to redeem us. All these and more are witness about Jehovah.

Again if proclaiming Jesus is also mean witness about Jehovah as you repeated it here, do you agree that ALL CHRISTIANS proclaiming Jesus Christ are Witness of Jehovah/Jehovah's witness?

All those are witnessing about Jehovah. Witnessing about Jesus is just one act made possible by Jehovah, so that too is witnessing about Jehovah.

Thank God you finally use the word WITNESS for Jesus, so are now ARE YOU WITNESSING FOR JESUS or JEHOVAH?
Another time you'll repeat this statement, now do you believe ALL CHISTIANS witness about Jesus? If Yes! then that makes THEM(Christians) Jehovah's witness too and what does your organization say about the rest of Christendom?

johnydon22:
Do you have anything against God (zeus)??

Do you believe Zeus exists?

JMAN05:
And you assume that possibility stated inside a parenthesis can be used as the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses? His words was worded in a way that you shouldn't have cast hope on it. You can ask him why he said so, but JW do not teach that God was talking to Angels.

The site stated:

"This site counters virtually every false claim from opposers of Jehovah's Witnesses. For the authoritative information on JWs' beliefs look to the OFFICIAL WEBSITE: www.jw.org."

Why dont you go to that site to get an authoritative info?

I said it before I provided that link a NL JWs has said something like that sometimes ago and also during house to house evangelism one JWs also made the same claim, the point you're missing here is that for you to see a quote with my claim should tell you that SOME people may hold the believe among JWs but might not be ALL JWs.

That question suites you better. Maybe you dont know what literal means.

Please tell me the meaning

Again, if God said 50 times at the same time, Jesus is that word 'cos he is the literal word of God. That is your puerile point man.

I asked the question to know whether you understand my point but you didn't just unfortunate.

[quote]The comment just exposed what you just gave a baptismal name - dumbness.

If the bible is the word of God, and Jesus is that literal word of God, the bible you have in hand is Jesus. Think up nwoke m.

You're talking about dumbness but can you see how that word fit you?
Bible is the word of God, but is Bible THAT LITERAL WORD OF GOD THAT COMES OUT FROM THE MOUTH OF GOD? I can see how you misunderstood the point at hand.

I hope am not talking to a lad here?

Your lack of understanding made you ask that. When I said knowledge, after the comma was expanding on what I said earlier - that I was talking about God's omniscience.

See your life outside, if you're talking about the same thing you won't repeat "His" you will rather write "His knowledge (Omniscient)" not with a comma to SEPERATE the two phrases.

God's knowledge is vast, that his knowledge was expressed in His creation does not mean that it is limited there.

I give up for purposely PERVERTED the word of God and BOLDLY spew this lie.

DOES God's knowledge was expressed in CREATION or the KNOWLEDGE was TO PARTAKE IN CREATION?
What that verse says is that HIS KNOWLEDGE was INVOLVED in CREATION and you know that IT IS JESUS WHO CREATED EVERYTHING.

Remember your claimed was that Bible never CALLED JESUS knowledge of God but what you are here doing is separating God's knowledge in creation from God's knowledge Himself

In fact the highest way God ever applied His knowledge is CREATION because after creation it's only GOD HIMSELF.

I wonder how that relates to Jesus who knew a fringe of what God knows. Is he still God's knowledge and yet had things he never knew that God does?

Did Bible called Jesus knowledge of God or not mr twister?

God's word is alive to its promises. Its promises come true, not that His utterance is a conscious being. Enough of your dancing to run away from the main issue. seems you love that so well.

2. Bear in mind that elohim is elohim, dont deceive your brain. The word appears both for Jehovah and for false gods which we know are not two or three in one.

When you want to make research, search for how elohim is used in the bible as a whole, not only in Genesis. (note that even in genesis elohim is used for foreign gods). Dont limit it as an available ground to fall on to save face.

Until you clear the mess you posted above before I will reply this.

JMAN05:
And who told you that of "Christ" was removed? Neither that nor "spirit" was removed in that verse. Rearrangement of words is normal in bible translation. You can present your prove that such rearrangement is against Greek grammar and the whole bible message. Thats what you should be doing. Time and again you keep exposing yourself.

Note: "of" is used to complete the sentence.

The point is, on what basis do you based your word rearrangement?

If rearrangement is normal in Bible translation you should also agree that rearrangement can also CHANGE the meaning of a sentence, which is what you're trying to use as an excuse here.

Compare the NWT with other versions:

"They kept on investigating what particular time or what season the spirit within them was indicating concerning Christ..." NWT

"searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto,..." ASV
"Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify..." KJV

Both KJV and ASV said the SPIRIT of CHRIST in them was pointing to something which means it is Christ's spirit
But NWT was claiming that it was the spirit that was INDICATING CONCERNING Christ which is not the Spirit of Christ.

JMAN05:
oga prove your claim

You just like shading shadow sha, are you trying to say the above is not true? Anyway I couldn't remember the person name and post again here on NL where a JWs said so and one person during house to house visitation of you people.

Though I still found this "When God said "Let us make man in our image" at Gen. 1:26, Jehovah God was speaking to His Son Jesus, His Master Worker, the first-born of all creation (and, possibly, to the rest of the angels also), who were also made in God's image. (Pr 8:30, 31; also compare John 1:1-3; Col 1:15-17)"
http://defendingjehovahswitnesses..com/2014/06/is-gen-126-really-proof-of-trinity-let.html

Wether 50 states, is it not the word of God? Jesus is that literal word according to you.

I believe you don't even understand yourself.

Thats exactly what your idea is, dumbness. Thank God you reached that conclusion I want to bring to light.

I can see your low understanding of that my point, who and who reach your dumbness conclusion?

Do you not believe the trinity?

2. Now respond to the other point I made there.

How does my believe in Trinity got to do with the question I asked you?

Respond to what again?

His knowledge, his omniscience.

Are you confused or lack knowledge? What is the difference between omniscient and God's knowledge?
Beside you're wrong to say Bible never called Jesus "His knowledge"
"By wisdom the Lord laid the earth’s foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; by his knowledge the watery depths were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew. Prov 3:19-20 NIV

I started from verse 19 so that you can see that the writer is talking about CREATION.

The answer is there. Read the context of Paul's words. If you dont understand, just paste it form context here, and your eyes will open.

Talking about context as you're also following the same principle.

Oga dont expose yourself. If I were you I would have done a research on that matter and shut up instead of talking further on that point.

I'll rather advice you to do the same.

CHESSBOARD:
No, It is me that have a personal vendetta with you because of your beauty

Bro clean the left side of your eyes, the thing you clean there is what we called "ojukokoro" . Do you know that there is a ring in her hand?

But how can her face so smooth like that

kallmemrB:
Gen 5 :1-2 NIV student bible Version


"This is the written account of Adam's Line.
When God created man,he made him in the likeness of God.(2) He created them male and female and blessed them.And when they were created,he called them "Man"

And this mean?

In their translation (the New World Translation) John 1:1 reads: “In the beginning the Word was, the Word was with God, and the Word was a god.” This teaches them that “god” is not unique to any one person but is applicable to the Word who was with another God.

The first couple lived alone in the garden. The two are to be viewed as one.
A. Genesis 2:24 - In the garden, two persons, the man and the woman, “became one flesh.”
B. Genesis 5:1,2 :
• “God created man” (singular)
• “He made him” (singular)
• “named them Man” (singular)
Yet it also says:
• “He created them male and female” (plural)
• “He blessed them” (plural)
• “and named them” (plural)
• “they were created” (plural)

Note: that the first couple was collectively named “Man.” This was their original name for the woman was not given her individual name “Eve” until after her sin (in Genesis 3:20; see Genesis 2:23). The reference to “man” was interchangeable with “them” and included both the male and the female.

C. Genesis 1:26,27 -
• “Let Us make man” (=“adam”, singular)”
• “God created man” (singular)
• “He created him” (singular)
In contrast the same text also says:
• “. . . let them rule” (plural)
• “male and female he created them” (plural)

Again, the reference to “man” was interchangeable with “them” and included both the male and the female. “Man” meant “mankind.”

D. Mark 10:6-8 - Jesus refers to the first couple and after stating they were one flesh adds “they are no longer two.”

These verses imply that in the creation account singular references to “man” include the two persons in the garden. This is unusual with the more common meaning of the term “man” referring to the primary person in the couple, the male (Genesis 2:21). Likewise, although the term “God” can on occasion mean “Us” and “Our” (“Let Us make . . . Our image . . . Our likeness . . .” - Genesis 1:26) likely the more common meaning is the “Father,” the primary person in the ‘Godhead.’

JWs how do you understand this statement and do you agree with it?
“In the garden was the woman, the woman was with the man and the woman was man.”

Would it be correct to say “the woman was a man” or “the woman was the man?”

Please let's focus on these two questions

Rilwayne001:
Okay. you can call him anything thats your cuppa.

After you jump into what doesn't concern you.

Rilwayne001:
Face the topic

What Concerns you here? Remember the person who opened this thread didn't say Jesus is not the Son of God so you and him are not the same.

CAPTIVATOR:
TELL us if this scripture is a fabrication ! If its truth , the doctrine of trinity ( the word "trinity" itself is a theological concept, the word "trinity" neva appeared anywhere in the scripture) is UNSCRIPTURAL, 1 COR 8:5,6


New Living Translation
But we know that there is only one God, the Father,
who created everything, and we live for him.

New International Version
Yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom
all things came and for whom we live;

This scripture NEED NO EXPLANATION, BUT I WILL COMMENT .

1) this scripture tell us there are how many God ? ONE !

2) as this scripture explains, hw many persons are composed in this ONE GOD ? ONLY THE FATHER ! The FATHER NOT The FATHER, SON AND HOLYGHOST ! BUT ONLY THE FATHER.

Is dis scriptural definition not more clear and direct than the theological One God + One God+ One God = One God nonsense .

But wait , probably that scripture is a fabrication AND IF ITS TRUTH ..... TELL US !


Comments welcomed.

Truth you're about to preach is so far from you, why? you quoted the first part and ignored the last part simply because it against your claim.

This is the full verse 1 Corinthians 8:6 "yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; [size=14pt]and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.[/size] (NIV)

Here it says There is "ONE LORD" and this Lord is Jesus Christ. So going by your analogy then Jesus is God because in Deuteronomy 6:4 we read "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. (NIV)

So tell us who is ONE LORD, the Father or Jesus?

Even in your own post you use the word of Trinitarians as you asked "1) this scripture tell us there are how many God? ONE!"
It should be How many Gods(Plural) not MANY GOD(singular). You will modify your post now because of this.

I know you'll appeal to another translation after reading my post.

JMAN05:
Pls prove the bold face.

Through mathematical expression or what?

2. If Jesus is the literal word of God, how did God speak during Jesus baptism?

Is it possible for God to speak in all 36 states of Nigeria at the same time?

When you burn the bible, did you burn Jesus?

As the Bible is the literal word of God, dumbness!

3. If Jesus is the literal word of God, how do you say Jesus is equal to God? and do you say that Jesus is YHWH of OT? Is your word all there is about you?

In what sense have I said Jesus is equal to God?

Are all the parts of God's body made up of His literal word alone?

God's body
Tell me any part of God that Bible never called Jesus?

You better check the meaning u are attaching to "ALIVE" in that Paul's words before you expose your lack of bible knowledge. explore the context.

Tell us the meaning nah Bible scholar

4. You statement about elohim as being plural shows your limitation. If you knew how elohim is used in the scriptures, you wont use that as a point.

My limitation or yours? It's not how Elohim is being used in the Bible BUT HOW ELOHIM is being used in Genesis unless you want to tell us that Elohim in Genesis' creation account is not YHWH.

CANTICLES:
Of course, the literal translation from the greek manuscript reads " the spirit of Christ in them" , but a translator must know that this may confuse some readers

This is a pure lie nothing will confuse the reader in that verse.

and they will think the spirit of Christ is actually a ghost livin inside christ himself.

I believe only JWs will think like this, so does Holyspirit a ghost living inside the Father?

Whereas this refers to the holyspirit . SO THE NWT renders it properly , and the literal translation was put in d footnote for reference .

Pure lie not to Holyspirit BUT the Spirit of Christ which means Jesus in his prehuman existence also ministered in the time of OT prophets and indicated the relationship between the Godhead that's why Paul could interchangeably use the Spirit of God with Spirit of Christ which you couldn't give straight answer to as per Rom 8:9 the other time.

Lie NWT disrupted the Word of God by removing the words that appeared in the ORIGINAL Greek that is the point here.

The same way NIV renders the manuscript that said literally " dispersion of the greeks" , this may confuse the readers who know Jesus is speakin with the Jews , so it was properly rendered " scattered AMONG the Greeks" JOHN 7:35 for easy understanding

This is just an open excuse to support your fabricated book, NIV ONLY used another English word in REPLACEMENT of "Dispersion" NOT that the REMOVE any word from that verse.

The point in that verse is very clear and only you and your organization will take it and an excuse "...Does he intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks? RSV

The point here is Jesus MIXING with the Gentiles.

so, tell us what the spirit of Christ is, if not holyspirit??

The Spirit of Christ shows that Jesus in His prehuman existence also ministered in the TIME of OT Prophets.