₦airaland Forum

PastorKun:
I think the onus is on you to show us were christians were instructed to tithe in the bible and explain also why you and your ilk preach tithes of money contrary to God's tithing instruction to the israelites.

You're the one who think we preach ONLY monetary tithe but when I was with my Grandma in the village back then as a farmer she Tithe with her farm products which is what she does for a living and do other farmers too. Me I'm not a farmer but now that I work as a civil servant the way to tithe is through the reward for my sweat (salary).

Well I really appreciate you people opinion on this.

Regards.

Koolking:
Facts have been laid bare from the Bible for you to see, but you have refused to acknowledge. However, there is no crime in being opinionated and believing in what gives one personal fulfillment. The cool fact is, tithe or no tithe, your salvation will never be taken away provided you live a righteous life.

I respect your believe Sir.

Where are the facts sir?

You people claimed that Tithe has been disannulled in the Bible and I asked for the verse but only verse you people can provide is not talking about disannulling of Tithe.

Finally, the reason why Tithe was not part of what Jesus came to earth to set aside is because Tithe itself is HOLY to God according to God's statement at inauguration of Levitical priesthood.

"And all the tithe of the land, whether of the seed of the land, or of the fruit of the tree, is Jehovah's: it is holy unto Jehovah" Lev 27:30 ASV

This shows another misunderstanding of that Hebrews 7 by you people.

JMAN05:
It is not a funny part. It was just the truth, so that you dont copy my own reasons to mean the reason of NWT Committee.

This is very pathetic, you're just following what they just say without evidence of what they said.

"will we" is the right setting. You can't even work out that little thing. sorry.

It is no perversion.

I don't get you here sir.

The rockmass being spoken of in that I corinthians is a literal nonliving object. How can that lifeless object be Christ? Is christ a lifeless object?

Paul was only drawing a symbolic type from that rock. Lol, how can Christ be a literal rockmass?

Your twisting of the scripture is not even funny anymore but see what Paul wrote whether it means the meaning you gave it "and all drank the same spiritual drink.+ [size=14pt]For they used to drink from the spiritual rock that followed them,[/size] and that rock meant* the Christ" 1 Corin 10:4 NWT

It's called SPIRITUAL ROCK and this SPIRITUAL ROCK used to FOLLOW them.

Jehovah sent Michael, [size=14pt]but he was not then the Christ.[/size] He was a spirit.

You've put rope in your own neck.

"Likewise, the Bible indicates that Michael is another name for Jesus Christ, before and after his life on earth. Let us consider Scriptural reasons for drawing that conclusion."

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/bible-teach/who-is-michael-the-archangel-jesus/#?insight[search_id]=38448fa5-a8d5-4a05-a712-9c9faa351f3a&insight[search_result_index]=0

1 Pet 1:12 showed that this secret was not revealed to them.

He esteemed the reproach of his anointing than what Pharoah had to offer. That is the meaning of the verse.

Christ means anointed one.

But they spoke through spirit of Christ.

Lol...According to JWs Michael appeared in OT and it's another name for Jesus Christ.

They are good bible students, if my reasons here are biblical, then they must agree with them.

If they say Jesus is a god without giving reasons, I can produce a reason cos am a bible student.

Thank God you agree that they were just GOOD BIBLE STUDENTS not Greek or Hebrew Scholars.
So why do you chose the word of GOOD BIBLE STUDENTS over that of Greek or Hebrew Scholars?

Christ came in the first century, Christ is not the angelic creature that was operating from heaven. the Christ is a human.

This shows that you don't even know what Bible but yet you called yourself Bible student and more precisely you don't follow what your organization teaches.

"2. Why did Jesus come to the earth?

God sent his Son to earth [size=14pt]by transferring his life from heaven to the womb of a virgin Jewess named Mary.[/size] So Jesus did not have a human father. (Luke 1:30-35) Jesus came to the earth (1) to teach the truth about God, (2) to set us an example in how to do God’s will even when we are in difficulties, and (3) to give his perfect life as “a ransom.”—Read Matthew 20:28.

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/good-news-from-god/who-is-jesus-christ/#?insight[search_id]=fc45b9c4-b4cf-4798-a58f-3e6445a315e7&insight[search_result_index]=1

The bolded part shows that the life of Jesus does not stop to exist which is the reason your organization can say MICHAEL is another NAME for Jesus Christ.

More importantly JESUS CAME to the earth means He existed somewhere before He came to earth.

The PROPHESY at Dan 9:25 shows when we are to see the Christ. A prophesy has FUTURE fulfillment, not prior fulfilment.
Other translations are thus wrong.

SMH seriously...

JMAN05:
Just know that that is not the belief of Jehovah's Witnesses. I wont dwell on what you quoted. those witnesses, if they were here they will answer for themselves, but for the blog, his reasons are clear. You cant hold him for that.

At least I've provided what you asked of me here.

Look at your definition:
It seems you don't understand even your own words. The word that proceeds out of God's mouth is Jesus according to you.

You're too dull for my liken...it's just a shame that you're a time waster.

The WORD was covered with FLESH which we know as JESUS, the HUMAN FLESH is the house that the Word dwells.

Now you've brought another thing - that the word took on flesh. That being the case, the flesh covered the word. The word is inside the flesh in other words.

Did I brought another thing or what THE BIBLE teaches?

So you fully understood my point here but see you later wrote below.

On another occasion, during Jesus' baptism, God spoke. That word that proceeded out of God's mouth at that time is who?

From your puerile point, that word is Jesus. So God was transmitting Jesus to flesh-covered-Jesus.

Yet see this your statement "That being the case, the flesh covered the word. The word is inside the flesh in other words."

Notice the underlined and compare it with the above statement and see how ridiculous you can be.

This has some other implications:

1. Jesus is abstract. But this abstract thing can take up flesh or it can become something or somebody.

2. Jesus are many. there are thus many jesuses. If God speaks, that word that is produced is Jesus.

If you do not agree that there are many Jesuses, even more that a 100 Jesuses, then God cannot speak if Jesus is gone. Because Jesus is that literal word.

Think up nwoke m.

The only implication for person who can't apply logic well.

3. Jesus thus is not God who do produce the word from his mouth.

But the Word is eternal and Alive.

Very simply logic!

Yet couldn't apply the logic very well.

They are the same. Did I say they are not?

See another ridiculous statement below again.

First of all, my using those words, God's knowledge, His knowledge etc, [size=14pt]I was not using them with the thought that they had different meaning. No.[/size]

So if they don't have the different meaning then you're the most confused one.

On the other point. I was just explaining what I said initially, which is: God's omniscience - his ability to know all, cannot be Jesus.

Then what is the meaning of GOD'S KNOWLEDGE? I care to know

Note: I have explained previously that when I said " his knowledge, his omniscience", I was just talking about God's omniscience.

Whether you like change from Omniscient to another thing...God's knowledge, His Knowledge or Knowledge of God has no other meaning.

Please what is the different between God's knowledge and God's omniscient?

[size=14pt]Because God's knowledge is related to His omniscience,[/size] I chose to speak on knowledge. And show that His knowledge is vast. [size=14pt]So even if Jesus is called that knowledge,[/size] it should not be understood to mean that he is the literal knowledge. I gave reasons.

It's evident that Jesus is called knowledge of God but you just decided to give it any meaning that suit your ideology.

Again what is the different between God's Omniscient and God's knowledge?

My words:

Very ridiculous...

So the italic shows that I was explaining what I meant - God's omniscience is not Jesus. [size=14pt]I am not there implying that Jesus is called God's knowledge. No.[/size]

Please just tell me the difference between God's omniscient and God's knowledge.

On the fact that Jesus is not called God's knowledge, I was not being dogmatic [because I ve not checked my concordance to confirm, thats why I went on to comment that even if that is found in the bible, that cannot mean he is a literal knowledge of God or that he knows all that God does. I gave reasons]. However, you have not shown where the bible called Jesus God's knowledge. You just showed where God's knowledge is expressed in His creation. God's knowledge is abstract, it is not a person.

This another fallacy, God's knowledge was not EXPRESSED in His Creation BUT God's knowledge TOOK PART in creation.

Even in the place Jesus was called the power and the wisdom of God what did you say? FIGURATIVE! So even if you find it your conclusion will still be FIGURATIVE.

The matter remains for you to show where the bible called him such.

God through HIS KNOWLEDGE the depth were broken up...but who perform all the act of creation? the pre-existence being who later appeared as man and called Jesus.

Remember where we're coming from before all this, I simply asked [b]what part of God Bible has never called Jesus? And your twisting tongue lead us to this by begin to differentiate between God's knowledge and God's Omniscient as if they mean different things.

You and your organization think you know Jesus FULLY and anyone who think such has turned him/herself to the FATHER because Jesus Himself said “All things have been handed over to me by my Father, [size=14pt]and no one FULLY knows the Son except the Father;[/size] neither does anyone FULLY know the Father except the Son and anyone to whom the Son is willing to reveal him.” Matthew 11:27

I believe you can see what you and your organization claimed.

CANTICLES:
Follow koolking explanation and also the 7 points raised in Captivator's post , and stop givin people unnessesary burden ..... Just Wish u guys could adhere to the apostle pauls fine example found in 1thes 2:9

" surely you remember, brothers, our labor and toil. We were WORKING NIGHT AND DAY, so that we would not put an expensive burden on any of you" ""

You're very funny, I should follow koolking and go against scriptures.

SMH...

I repeat WHERE WAS TITHE CANCELLED IN THE BIBLE?

JMAN05:
Before I respond. Do you agree with what those scholars said on those verses? Again, they never said James had Jesus name in mind.

If I don't agree with them will I quote them

Neither do they say the quotation was to witness of Jehovah.

JMAN05:
Ok! Now you know what we are discussing? Didnt I tell you this when you where segmenting my comments out of context? Now you want to return to what the thread is about? Ok. But any shift by you, I wont reply your post. Bear that in mind man.

Were you not the one who keep shifting the main point of this thread at least I've repeated THE PURPOSE of this thread more than two times.

Oga, Those you quoted above did not say that the name is Jesus, which is your point.

Now can you see life outside? I didn't say it's the name of Jesus BUT WHO JAMES HAVE IN MIND.

So, I refuse to admit that as a good reply. My point is that some who are not JWs even saw that the "name" as spoken of in that verse is about Jehovah God, not Jesus. None above even said the "name" is Jesus. This is another diversion by you. Sorry sir. Try again.

Always understand the point someone is making before you talk.

Oga, you've agreed that true Christians are witnesses of Jehovah. So stop deceiving yourself by saying the apostles witnessed for Jesus, as if it is for him alone. You ve agreed they witnessed for Jehovah too.

Lol...see how the bolded part define your understanding.

If witness for Jesus also means witness for Jehovah this does not prove that the Apostles bear the name Jehovah's witness we can only say witness for Jesus is also witness for Jehovah in some sense not according to the scriptures.

Permit me to import one point here:

Firstly, you are the only one with this misunderstanding because of how hard you understand the scriptures. Your commentary didnt even support you.

When I said James applied those verses to Jesus I didn't mean it is Jesus name that appear their simply because James quoted from OT my point is WHO DOES JAMES HAVE IN MIND BEFORE HE QUOTED FROM OT which was later reinforced in their letter.

I know you will boycott those commentaries because they simply against your understanding of those verses.

James never applied anything to Jesus. We read:

Peter's words first:

Peter rose and said to them: “Men, brothers, you well know that from early days God made the choice among you that through my mouth people of the nations should hear the word of the good news and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness by giving them the holy spirit, just as he did to us also.

Which incident was Peter talking about? what happened in Cornelius house. We read:

Act 10:34-43

"At this[b] Peter began to speak[/b], and he said: “Now I truly understand that God is not partial, 35 but in every nation the man who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him. 36 He sent out the word to the sons of Israel to declare to them the good news of peace through Jesus Christ—this one is Lord of all.

Whom do you think is the architect of the good news about Jesus?

"37 You know the subject that was talked about throughout all Ju·de′a, starting from Gal′i·lee after the baptism that John preached: 38 about Jesus who was from Naz′a·reth, how God anointed him with holy spirit and power, and he went through the land doing good and healing all those oppressed by the Devil, because God was with him. 39 And we are witnesses of all the things he did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem; but they did away with him by hanging him on a stake. 40 God raised this one up on the third day and allowed him to become manifest, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses appointed beforehand by God, to us, who ate and drank with him after his rising from the dead. 42 Also, he ordered us to preach to the people and to give a thorough witness that this is the one decreed by God to be judge of the living and the dead. 43 To him all the prophets bear witness, that everyone putting faith in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name."

Do you agree with Peter that all the way, God has been the one spearheading many things about Jesus?

Whom do you think is the architect of the witness about Jesus? The God who anointed Jesus or Jesus who was anointed?

Chapter 11:1, it was stated that what the gentiles accepted was the word of God. So those words spoken by Peter is the word of God. Jehovah is the true architect of all that.

In verse 17 of Chapter 11, we read:

If, therefore, God gave the same free gift to them that he gave to us who have believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I should be able to hinder God?

Who gave the free gift? So even believers in Jesus, God is the one who gives them the holy spirit. inshort even the disciples Jesus had was given to him by Jehovah. This proves that witness about Jesus became a new way of witnessing for Jehovah. In fact, he was His representative of earth.

Having gotten that context, let's go back:

Acts 15:14

Sym′e·on has related thoroughly how [size=16]God[/size] for the first time turned his attention to the nations to take out of them a people for his name

1. Now, this one is not a prophesy in the "OT", and it has clearly identified who's name James had in mind.

2. Secondly, Do you now get the point? Did you remember what happened when Peter was in the house of the first uncircumcised gentile to become a Christian? Do you now know who has that "name"? Jesus or Jehovah?

Was it not Jehovah who is being discussed here?

James was not deviating from this point in the two verses that followed. He was only supporting this experience of Peter from an "OT" scripture.

so that the men who remain may earnestly seek Jehovah, together with people of all the nations, people who are called by my name, says Jehovah, who is doing these things, 18 known from of old.’

James made a nice quotation from Amos where God's own name appeared. The statement here is isnt about Jesus, but Jehovah.

In verse 26, it was stated that Paul and Barnabas gave there life for the name of Jesus. Your position is that this shows that the "name" spoken of in verse 14 and 17 is Jesus name. That the "OT" scripture was applied to Jesus.

That is very wrong. The point I made above has shown that it was Jehovah's name that was on the discussion, not Jesus'.

The point is about a prophesy which finds fulfillment on what happened in the house of Cornelius, and the story told by Peter. That was the issue here. It was not about a prophesy that finds fulfillment in Jesus. Get that straight.

The problem is whether the uncircumcised gentiles should be accepted as true worshipers of God, it is not about circumcised gentiles to which Paul and Barnabas belonged. So that verse 26 is not in the context of verses 14 - 17.

Secondly, the letter they wrote to this gentiles was not detailing the discussions that took place before the conclusion was reached. Nope! It was only conveying there final decision. The letter is not showing to the gentiles what Peter witnessed and how the "OT" scripture supported it. Never!

They were just conveying there direction which is a product of the discussion they had. Now, the letter went on to describe the reputation and sacrifices Paul and Barnabas had made for Christ's name (which Jehovah elevated). Do the apostles bear Jesus name? Yes. That is a name God had elevated and had given them to proclaim too. And this is part of witnessing for HIM (Jehovah). But this does not bring the "name" here into the context of verse 14.

The result of there long discussion was only conveyed in verse 29. And you can see clearly that they presented there direction which is a product of there discussion. They were in no way saying what was said about God's name by James.

All this your jumping around won't solve the issue here so stop prolonging and deviating from the main issue.

We are looking at the meaning of Acts 15:14, 17 which beg for the question does Acts 15:14, 17 say they SERVE as witness of Jehovah which your organization claimed they are?

So I quoted three different scholars on what James have in mind or how those verses can be understood but you boycott them

Remember you're the first person to quote from Bible commentaries but now that it turns against you, you begin to dance to another tune. So in case you forget here is it again,

"This quotation is not made literally either from the Hebrew or the Septuagint, which differs also from the Hebrew. The 17th verse is quoted literally from the Septuagint; but in the 16th the general sense only of the passage is retained. The main point of the quotation, as made by James, was to show that, according to the prophets, it was contemplated that the Gentiles should be introduced to the privileges of the children of God; and on this point the passage has a direct bearing." Albert Barnes'

"As St. James quoted them as a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles into the Church of God, it is evident the Jews must have understood them in that sense, otherwise they would have immediately disputed his application of them to the subject in question, and have rejected his conclusion by denying the premises." Adam Clarke

"To take from the Gentiles a people for his name (labein ex ethnôn laon tôi onomati autou). Bengel calls this egregium paradoxon, a chosen people (laon) out of the Gentiles (ethnôn). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give." Robertson

What I need now is to prove how Acts 15:14, 17 says THEY SERVE AS WITNESS OF Jehovah.

JMAN05:
Can you stop this rubbish? My friend create a thread and stop leading me to an apostate. Any more of that nonsense, I will see it as a sign of not being serious. So stop stop that rubbish, just stop!

What is rubbish in my post here?

Why are you so furious

Apostate thread so what is the different between Younguz and I remember we don't share the same idea of JWs?

Koolking:
Methinks your mind is made up as a pro-tithe. We will go on and on without a valid statement from you to support tithing in the new covenant.

@bold-Likewise there is no valid statement from you in the New Covenant that against Tithe because initially I didn't explain your OP but only quote someone who claimed that Tithe has been cancelled.

It was a bit of a relief to note that you consciously conceded that "some things like burn offering was set aside. It will be out of place and rather illogical annulling an order due to its imperfection and uselessness and yet allow only one of the commandments or what you termed as tasks - tithe to continue.

The bolded part especially @underlined statement shows that you're not yet understood the point the writer of Hebrew was making.
Let me put it this way maybe you can grab it,

1) Tithe and burnt offering predated the establishment of Levitical priesthood.
2) Sacrifice for atonement of sins was FIRST established on Levitical priesthood.

You have to know the important of all these;
*Burnt offering was performed by people of old to seek God's face which is the ONLY way of drawing near to God and first performed by Noah Gen 8:20.
*Sacrifice for atonement of sins was met for FORGIVENESS of sins and first performed on the FIRST chosen PRIESTS Exo 29:14
*TITHE was not recorded concerning anything about man's IMPERFECTION rather God Himself claimed TITHE belong to Him not as a Burnt Offering for man to seek the face of God nor like Sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins BUT what is solely HOLY unto the Lord.

So it was those things that pertain unto man for entering the holy presence of God and forgiveness of sins which can't be attained through burnt offering and sacrifice for atonement THAT WAS IMPERFECT AND USELESS.

These two imperfections (Entering holy place of God with burnt offering and atonement for sins through sacrifice) were the major reason why Jesus came because God didn't want them or please with them. This was reinforced in Hebrew chapter 10:1-22

The old system under the law of Moses was only a shadow, a dim preview of the good things to come, not the good things themselves. The sacrifices under that system were repeated again and again, year after year, but they were never able to provide perfect cleansing for those who came to worship. 2 If they could have provided perfect cleansing, the sacrifices would have stopped, for the worshipers would have been purified once for all time, and their feelings of guilt would have disappeared. 3 But instead, those sacrifices actually reminded them of their sins year after year. 4 For it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. 5 That is why, when Christ came into the world, he said to God, “You did not want animal sacrifices or sin offerings. But you have given me a body to offer. 6 You were not pleased with burnt offerings or other offerings for sin. 7 Then I said, ‘Look, I have come to do your will, O God— as is written about me in the Scriptures.’” 8 First, Christ said, “You did not want animal sacrifices or sin offerings or burnt offerings or other offerings for sin, nor were you pleased with them” [size=14pt](though they are required by the law of Moses).[/size] 9 Then he said, “Look, I have come to do your will.” [size=14pt]He cancels the first covenant in order to put the second into effect.[/size] 10 For God’s will was for us to be made holy by the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ, once for all time. 11 Under the old covenant, the priest stands and ministers before the altar day after day, offering the same sacrifices again and again, which can never take away sins. 12 But our High Priest offered himself to God as a single sacrifice for sins, good for all time..., 14 For by that one offering he forever made perfect those who are being made holy. 15 And the Holy Spirit also testifies that this is so. For he says, 16 “This is the new covenant I will make with my people on that day, says the Lord: I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.” 17 Then he says, “I will never again remember their sins and lawless deeds.” 18 And when sins have been forgiven, there is no need to offer any more sacrifices. 19 And so, dear brothers and sisters, [size=14pt]we can boldly enter heaven’s Most Holy Place because of the blood of Jesus.[/size] 20 By his death, Jesus opened a new and life-giving way through the curtain into the Most Holy Place. 21 And since we have a great High Priest who rules over God’s house, 22 let us go right into the presence of God with sincere hearts fully trusting him. For our guilty consciences have been sprinkled with Christ’s blood to make us clean, and our bodies have been washed with pure water. (Bold & underline mine) NLT

With your argument, was considering how you would explain to a non-Christian Hebrews 7 vs 5, 11-13: “And those descendants of Levites who are priests are commanded by the law to collect one tenth from the people of Israel, that is from their own countrymen even though their countrymen are also descendants of Abraham.”

Let's jump to verses 11-13 : “It was on the basis of the Levitical priesthood that the law was given to the people of Israel. Now, if the work of the Levitical priests had been perfect there would be no need for a different kind of priest to appear, one who is in the priestly order of Melchizedek not of Aaron. For when the priesthood is changed, there also has to be a change in the law. And our Lord of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe of Judah and Moses did not mention his tribe when he spoke of priests.”

The above passage is self-explanatory and it states clearly the relationship between the Levitical priesthood and the law given to the priest. Note the bold statements above. In vs 5, we were told that one of the laws given to the Levi priests was to collect tithe. In vs 12, we were told that when the Levitical order was changed, the law also changed. Vs 13, went on to expunge us in the new covenant from the Leviticus laws of tithing as we belong to the order of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Thanks for your comments. We are learning

I believe I've provided my view here but you couldn't grab my point still, but what I see here is a mix up of point.

Like I said earlier when verse 12 says For when the priesthood is changed, there also has to be a change in the law does not mean THEIR TASKS IN THE OFFICE but the requirement of choosing PRIEST ONLY in the tribe of Levi this is the point the writer is bringing into light which you couldn't grab even when reading along with verse 13 "And our Lord [size=14pt]of whom these things are said belonged to a different tribe of Judah and Moses did not mention his tribe when he spoke of priests.”[/size] (from the translation you used)

So it's the requirement of choosing ANOTHER TRIBE instead of that of LEVI that was CHANGE since the LAW ONLY permitted Levi tribe to be PRIEST.

Please I can't repeat myself anymore over this.

Thanks for your understand.

(Please don't mind my TYPO because I was in haze while replying your post and I couldn't reconcile verse 5 with other part)

Koolking:
Quite brilliant commentary you had up there, but you still did not convince me on the tenability of tithing in the new covenant.

Thanks for your compliment.

The annulling of the Levitical priesthood cancelled tithing and other laws emanating from that imperfect priesthood.

This part is still where confusion lies, but let me put it this way this time maybe you can get my point.

The LAW only recognized Levi tribe to be performing some tasks unto God which TITHE is among but this LAW that placed this AUTHORITY on Levi ONLY must be change since THE NEW PRIEST won't come from that tribe.

So it was the LAW that ALLOWED ONLY Levi to be PRIEST that was disannulled which means another PRIEST must arise and this priest must not come FROM Levi tribe.

If you are saying, [size=14pt]it was the priestly order ONLY that was annulled and not the accompanying laws,[/size] my question is: why is burnt offering not in practice today but only the adulterated version of tithing? Why is modern day tithing a monthly monetary subscription and not yearly/ triennial tithing in crops and livestock commanded by the same law?

@bolded-The LAW or REQUIREMENT is "ONLY Levi tribe can become PRIEST in Israel"
While the task to perform as a PRIEST are: 1) Collection of Tithes, 2) Burnt Offering, 3) Sacrifice for Atonement of sin both theirs and the Israelite.

Please don't confuse the LAW with the task to perform in the office.

Remember this from my earlier post "Though I need not to read into the word of God here because it was not only REQUIREMENT about the priesthood that was set aside, as we later read from the scriptures that some other things were set aside as well which one also PREDATED the day the office of the priests were established i.e BURNT OFFERRING..."

It is imperative to note that neither Jesus nor the Apostles collected or preached about tithe. Therefore, tithing is irrelevant in the Priestly order of our Lord Jesus Christ.

To help you understand better, you may wish to reference your Encyclopedia history – Tithes in Christendom – only then would you realize how tithe crept to the church after many centuries of non-existence.

Respect

At least Jesus had the opportunity to openly condemn Tithe but He didn't.

Of course, not only that Tithe crept to the church some centuries of non-existence, remember the 66 books you carry today was not arranged by Jesus nor the Apostles not after many centuries of non-compilation.

PastorKun:
I don't have much time to dissect and point out all your faulty submissions and essigesis but one thing to note is that Abraham's one off voluntary tithe was voluntary, not of his inc0ome and there is no suggestion in sc0riptures that believers should emulate this one off practise albeit on a regular basis. That said if according to your illogical reasoning christians are still meant to tithe based on your twisted interpretation of that passage, how come there is no record of tithing in the early church? How come the apostles never preached or collected tithes?

Whether Abraham TITHE is voluntary or not is not the point I brought out from that scripture. Remember what I said before you and @koolking quoted my post was UNTIL YOU'RE ALSO ABLE TO SHOW US WHERE JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES CANCELLED TITHES and both of you pointed to Hebrew 7:18 which I went ahead to show you people this particular verse wasn't talking about disannulling of tithe.

@bolded-where did I twist anything on that passage?

So if there is no record of tithe in early Church is not my point here, my point is the statement I made before you people quoted my post.

So I'm still expecting you people to show me where TITHING was cancelled in the Bible.

TrishaP:
That's why I asked for corrections.

Ok! God is not a thing He is a person likewise the Holy spirit but Jehovah's witness argument is that Holy spirit is an ACTIVE/IMPERSONAL FORCE if that's the case 2 Corin 3:17&18 say Jehovah is THE SPIRIT, and THE SPIRIT here (according to rule of definite article 'THE') is pointing to something that has been mentioned earlier (which we can see from the preceding verses) happened to be the HOLY SPIRIT.

Do you understand now?

TrishaP:
These whole articles boils down to a "thing". Your trying to tell us jehovah is a thing..an "idol".
I stand to be corrected

Are you sure you understand the Op?

I have to come with the below meaning of the Definite article ‘THE’ because of mini discussion I had with some JWs about this issue in another thread.

THE determiner (PARTICULAR)
A1 used before nouns to refer to particular things or people that have ALREADY been talked about or are ALREADY known or that are in a situation where it is clear what is happening:
-I just bought a new shirt and some new shoes. The shirt was quite expensive, but the shoes weren't.
-Please would you pass the salt.
-I'll pick you up at the station.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/the?q=The

It is no doubt to any Biblical student that HOLY SPIRIT is sometimes refers to as The Spirit of God, God’s Spirit and The Spirit. In fact the common one in use is The Spirit though Biblical translators sometimes insert the word HOLY as an adjective to describe the attribute of The Spirit where the word HOLY does not appear in the original manuscript.

Apostle Paul in one of his letter to Corinthians gave this brilliant passage about The Holy spirit,

“3 You show that you are a letter from Christ, the result of our ministry, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. Such confidence we have through Christ before God…, He has made us competent as ministers of a new covenant—not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. Now if the ministry that brought death, which was engraved in letters on stone, came with glory, so that the Israelites could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of its glory, transitory though it was, will not the ministry of the Spirit be even more glorious?..., But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. Now the Lord is THE SPIRIT, and where THE SPIRIT of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, who with unveiled faces contemplate the Lord’s glory, are being transformed into his image with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.” 2 Corin 3:3-18, (bold and capital mine) NIV

No doubt that Apostle Paul was talking about the ministerial works of The Holy spirit in the new covenant here which he also interchangeably used the Spirit of the living God and The Spirit (3x) for the Holy spirit.

The most astonish part is that in verse 17 & 18 he wrote “Now the Lord is THE SPIRIT and …which comes from the Lord, who is THE SPIRIT.”

But according to JWs the Lord in those verses is Jehovah (even though the word Jehovah never appeared in any Greek manuscripts) so in their translation they translated those two verses as “Now Jehovah is THE SPIRIT and …exactly as it is done by Jehovah THE SPIRIT.”

Back to the meaning of our definite article ‘THE’ above, THE SPIRIT in verse 17&18 has ALREADY been talked about/known from the preceding verses which means when verse 17 & 18 say “Jehovah is THE SPIRIT and, …exactly as it is done by Jehovah THE SPIRIT“ they’re referring to THE SPIRIT mentioned earlier which happened to be the Holy spirit/the Spirit of the Living God/The Spirit.

Where the problem lies now is, if God’s spirit/the Spirit of God/The Spirit (as anyone can be used for the Holy Spirit) is an ACTIVE FORCE/IMPERSONAL FORCE as JWs believe then this means that Jehovah is an ACTIVE FORCE/IMPERSONAL FORCE.

What I see as the major point in you people’s post is the emphasis on verse 11, 12 & 18.
@Koolking says I should read from verse 11-18 and @Pastorkun says I should start from verse 5 so that I can understand the FULL CONTEXT of the passage but I will like us to start from verse 1 so that we can both understand the FULL CONTEXT of the passage. In fact I so much love how @koolking interpreted that verse 11 as quoted “begins to draw a contrast between levitical priesthood being imperfect and the need for another priesthood in the pattern or order of Melchizedek and no longer after the order of Aaron.” BUT I disagree with your concluded part “This means that, TITHING which was one of the LAWS governing levitical priesthood was also change.” The reason why I disagree with it is that, TITHING predated the LAW and the laws was ONLY a regulation on who have right to collect TITHE which was later placed at Levi TRIBE.

Now back to the analysis of Hebrew 7:1-18
NOTE: The Bible verse will appear in color

Verse 1-3, was about the attributes of Melchizedek and the blessing he placed upon Abraham before Abraham paid Tithe of all to him: “This Melchizedek was king of the city of Salem and also a priest of God Most High. When Abraham was returning home after winning a great battle against the kings, Melchizedek met him and blessed him. Then Abraham took a tenth of all he had captured in battle and gave it to Melchizedek. The name Melchizedek means “king of justice,” and king of Salem means “king of peace.” There is no record of his father or mother or any of his ancestors—no beginning or end to his life. He remains a priest forever, resembling the Son of God.”

Verse 4, emphasized on how the great Abraham could RECOGNISE the greatness of Melchizedek the unknown priest: “Consider then how great this Melchizedek was. Even Abraham, the great patriarch of Israel, recognized this by giving him a tenth of what he had taken in battle.”

Verse 5, is about how the priesthood was placed in the tribe of Levi who are the descendant of Abraham to collect Tithe NOT that Tithe was established through them: “Now the law of Moses required that the priests, who are descendants of Levi, must collect a tithe from the rest of the people of Israel, who are also descendants of Abraham.”

Verse 6, emphasized on how Melchizedek who had not his ORIGIN in Abraham or his linage could collect TITHE from Abraham himself whom even the linage of PRIESTS who collected tithe was placed: ”But Melchizedek, who was not a descendant of Levi, collected a tenth from Abraham. And Melchizedek placed a blessing upon Abraham, the one who had already received the promises of God.”

Verse 7 -8, point out that, Melchizedek has POWER to bless as he blessed Abraham which means he is far greater than Abraham, and most importantly the Levitical priest are just human as they die and another priest is being raised to continue in collection of TITHE but Melchizedek LIVES forever which means his own collection of tithe continues: “And without question, the person who has the power to give a blessing is greater than the one who is blessed. The priests who collect tithes are men who die, so Melchizedek is greater than they are, because we are told that he lives on.”

Verse 9-10, these verses made it clear that even the CHOSEN Levite priests who collected tithe ALSO paying tithe indirectly to Melchizedek as a result of what Abraham did: “In addition, we might even say that these Levites—the ones who collect the tithe—paid a tithe to Melchizedek when their ancestor Abraham paid a tithe to him. For although Levi wasn’t born yet, the seed from which he came was in Abraham’s body when Melchizedek collected the tithe from him.”

Verse 11, though this verse needs an in-depth attention because without that, verse 12 couldn’t be understood. The main point here is that, the LAWS which is to govern who can collect Tithe, how Tithe should be collected and what to Tithe was based on the PRIESTHOOD of LEVI this is more evident since TITHING predated the govern laws and not that TITHING was established the very day the law was given: “So if the priesthood of Levi, on which the law was based, could have achieved the perfection God intended, why did God need to establish a different priesthood, with a priest in the order of Melchizedek instead of the order of Levi and Aaron?” So here a new priesthood needs to be established in the ORDER of Melchizedek who LIVES forever.

Verse 12, with what we understood from verse 11 above on how the LAW was BASED on the PRIESTHOOD, so since the priesthood must be change; that is, changing from mortal men priests to immortal man priest, the law THAT BASED this PRIESTHOOD on LEVI TRIBE MUST also changes because this new immortal man priest won’t come from the tribe of Levi: [color=brown]“And if the priesthood is changed, the law must also be changed to permit it.” This is more reinforced in verse 13.

Verse 13-14, since the law had placed PRIESTHOOD on Levi tribe and the new PRIEST who never comes from this tribe MUST replaced the mortal men priests then the law who established the Levitical PRIESTHOOD must also change: “For the priest we are talking about belongs to a different tribe, whose members have never served at the altar as priests. What I mean is, our Lord came from the tribe of Judah, and Moses never mentioned priests coming from that tribe.”

Verse 15, now that a new priest had arrived in the ORDER of Melchizedek.
1) The mortal Levitcal priests always chosen according to the law has been dissolved which means we’re no longer having a priest chosen in the law.

2) And since the new immortal priest in the ORDER of Melchizedek who collected Tithe and lives forever has appeared then TITHING continues: “This change has been made very clear since a different priest, who is like Melchizedek, has appeared.”

Verse 16, shows that Jesus as a new priest wasn’t qualified to be the priest if we should follow the requirement of the law as He did not come from Levi tribe: “Jesus became a priest, not by meeting the physical requirement of belonging to the tribe of Levi, but by the power of a life that cannot be destroyed.”

Verse 17, And the psalmist pointed this out when he prophesied, “You are a priest forever in the order of Melchizedek.”

Verse 18, this is the crucial part. It was the REQUIREMENT of chosen the PRIESTHOOD that was set aside/disannulled not TITHING itself. “Yes, the old requirement about the priesthood was set aside because it was weak and useless.” This requirement must set aside since the NEW priest isn’t going to come from Levi TRIBE.

(Though I need not to read into the word of God here because it was not only REQUIREMENT about the priesthood that was set aside, as we later read from the scriptures that some other things were set aside as well which one also PREDATED the day the office of the priests were established i.e BURNT OFFERRING but according to this verse it is only “the requirement of chosen priest that disannulled” which is the main point the writer wants to bring out by considering the preceding verse 16.)

If you’re not being paying TITHE consider these:
1) The mortal men priests have been change to an immortal man priest in the ORDER of Melchizedek.
2) One of the rites performed by Melchizedek is that he collected TITHE from Abraham even when the Levitical priesthood has not been set up.
3) So TITHING never cancelled according to this chapter rather there's an immortal priest who had replaced the mortal men priest in the ORDER of Melchizedek.


All quotations are from New Living Translation (NLT)

JMAN05:
Go and segment by segment respond to all my posts. some of what you posted had been answered already there.

waiting...

This is just a lame excuse.

The purpose of this thread is to iron out wrong interpretation that JWs gave to Acts 15:14, 17 to mean True Christians SERVE as witness of Jehovah which is far from what the verses are saying.

So you quoted from Bible commentaries on 1 Peter 2 to buttress your claim of Acts 15 and since you can from scholars commentaries I went ahead to show you how scholars also INTERPRETED that Acts 15 not as JWs interpreted it to suit their erroneous claim.

In case you forget this is what scholars say about James quoting from OT book of Amos:

"This quotation is not made literally either from the Hebrew or the Septuagint, which differs also from the Hebrew. The 17th verse is quoted literally from the Septuagint; but in the 16th the general sense only of the passage is retained. The main point of the quotation, as made by James, was to show that, according to the prophets, it was contemplated that the Gentiles should be introduced to the privileges of the children of God; and on this point the passage has a direct bearing." Albert Barnes'

"As St. James quoted them as a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles into the Church of God, it is evident the Jews must have understood them in that sense, otherwise they would have immediately disputed his application of them to the subject in question, and have rejected his conclusion by denying the premises." Adam Clarke

"To take from the Gentiles a people for his name (labein ex ethnôn laon tôi onomati autou). Bengel calls this egregium paradoxon, a chosen people (laon) out of the Gentiles (ethnôn). This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch. But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give." Robertson

The purpose of this thread still remains, JWs have wrongfully interpreted those verses which end up calling the Faithful Apostles a false Christian because none of them witness of Jehovah RATHER both The Father, The Holy spirit, Old Testament Prophets, John the Baptist, The Apostles and Christians ARE ALL witness of Jesus.

JMAN05:
Jah is a spirit being, a spirit person. His holy spirit on the other hand is not a person. it is an impersonal force.

Lol...what is the meaning of THE SPIRIT in 2 Corin 3:17 is my question not whether Jehovah is a person or not?

-the holy spirit is God's active force. it isn't a person. When it is at work on the prophets, it impels them to predict the future.

2Pet 1:21

Then Jehovah is an active force just wait for my thread on this.

Who is taking it to mean a human? abeg dont start given me another work. Go check what trinitarians mean by "person". Don't create unnecessary work for me. If you don't know your subject, keep mom.

I should check what Trinitarians say about 'person' or you should stop using your ideology of JWs view of God as person to interpret Trinitarians view because Trinitarians believe The Father, The Son and The Holy spirit are person YET they can still DWELL in our NATURE so that should tell you that you don't know what Trinitarians mean by PERSON of the Godhead.

Oga, it was that rendering in the NWT that I had in mind when I quoted that verse.

God's holy spirit is His active force.

We talk more on the next thread u guys will create.

Don't shift the discussion to Bruce. You can create another thread for renderings in the NWT if you like.

So that's why you have to apply it to other verses...

No I don't shift issue but what is on ground, so no need of creating another thread I know you people purposely avoid this thread by @Younguz

https://www.nairaland.com/1883337/what-notable-bible-scholars-said

JMAN05:
God's holy spirit I said. spirit can refer to a person or to a thing.

So if we should go by your word according to 2 Corin 3:17 what is THE SPIRIT referring to? A person or a thing.

It is the active force that can move someone to utter such speech of prophesy recorded in God's word. God is not an impersonal force that will do that to more than one individuals.

Is it the active force the Bible says that move people or Holy spirit? Remember the Bible gave THE ATTRIBUTES of this Holy spirit.

I didn't know what you're insinuating in your second statement sha.

When God's spirit is operative on someone, it produces those qualities. God is a person who do not dwell in a human.

One thing that baffles me most is the way JWs always take meaning of PERSON about God to mean the meaning of person of HUMAN.
You people need to read dictionary more to understand what PERSON means and the we refer to God as a person.

Read Gen 1:2 in NWT.

You reference THREE different verses but you can only quote one which finally be one of the Greek rendering in NT the Greek scholars including the person JWs always misquote his statement (Dr. Bruce) have condemned about NWT.

JMAN05:
Respond to all my points sir.

Lol...

Please sir kindly list all your points I left out.

thehomer:
You should read your Bible. Mary never gave consent to be impregnated by the Holy Spirit. She was simply told that she would be impregnated.

So what is the essence of sending Angel to inform her?

JMAN05:
When people come to an accurate knowledge of God and want to serve him, they are baptized “in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit.” ( Matthew 28:19 ) They understand and accept the authority of Jehovah and the role of Jesus Christ in the outworking of Jehovah’s purpose. (Psalm 83:18; Matthew 28:18 ) [size=14pt]They also comprehend the function and activity of God’s holy spirit, which is his active force.[/size] — Genesis 1:2; Galatians 5:22, 23; 2 Peter 1:21 .

Since Jesus stated that all authority has been GIVEN to him. Have u ever wondered who gave him that authority? Can the almighty be given an authority?

The bolded part especially the underlined is my concern, please how GEN 1:2, Gal 5:22, 2 Peter 1:21 prove Holy spirit to be active force?

2 Corin 3:17 says Jehovah is THE SPIRIT NWT, is Jehovah a force?

JMAN05:
Better.

This can help:

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1102005145

Don't give me human reasoning give me from the Bible.

What did you understand then?

What we are discussing here.

Where did I insert my word? Do you think am you who inserts word?

Ok

You should know it is a mistake even without being told, just like your corvered was.

Ok

Since they were already Jehovah's witnesses, there is no need of reminding them that as if that status began that era.

You've mixed everything up, who is reminding here?

James quoted from OT and you agree that the quote was referring to the GENTILES which are WITNESS OF JEHOVAH according to you.

Now the verses say this gentiles are CALLED by God's NAME which you believe made them Witness of Jehovah, so WHICH NAME ARE THE GENTILES BEING CALLED today and WHICH NAME DID APOSTLES BEAR BEFORE THE GENTILES is my point?

Why will he say what they were already? Why will he tell them they will bear his Father's name? There is simply no need for that. The ancient Israelites to which they belonged were Jehovah's witnesses, bearing Jehovah's name. Why say, you will bear my Father's name? they bore it already. And as they replaced the natural Israelites, they took up the status borne by that nation. Peter applied a scripture used for this nation of God on this newly established nation. They knew for sure that they were witnesses of Jehovah.

Who is HE in this your post?

When they knew that they were witness of Jehovah why would they accept being CALLED CHRISTian?

As I keep implying, the witness for God came to include the bearing witness to His son. Those were the work of God to which the apostles were to declare. [size=14pt]If the ancient Jews had accepted Jesus as a nation, they, as a whole will bear witness about Jesus.[/size] There status as JWs wont changed. [size=14pt]It would have been the same, but there witnessing about God would include something more.[/size] Why is this point too hard for you?

You hit the nail on head @underlined though not that it would include something more but TAKING ANOTHER SHAPE which is the essence of this thread, when JAMES quoted those verses HE APPLIED IT TO JESUS not just taking them for nothing. Which was further reinforced in their LETTER to the same Gentiles "men that have hazarded their lives for THE NAME of our Lord Jesus Christ." Acts 15:26 (CAPITAL mine), ASV

I have also shown you a commentary that still buttress the same point I do on that Acts 15. Again:

Since you believe in Bible commentary let me quote some commentary about Acts 15 from different scholars

"This quotation is not made literally either from the Hebrew or the Septuagint, which differs also from the Hebrew. The 17th verse is quoted literally from the Septuagint; but in the 16th the general sense only of the passage is retained. [size=14pt]The main point of the quotation, as made by James, was to show that, according to the prophets, it was contemplated that the Gentiles should be introduced to the privileges of the children of God;[/size] and on this point the passage has a direct bearing." Albert Barnes'

"As St. James quoted them as a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles into the Church of God, it is evident the Jews must have understood them in that sense, otherwise they would have immediately disputed his application of them to the subject in question, and have rejected his conclusion by denying the premises." Adam Clarke

"To take from the Gentiles a people for his name (labein ex ethnôn laon tôi onomati autou). Bengel calls this egregium paradoxon, a chosen people (laon) out of the Gentiles (ethnôn). [size=14pt]This is what is really involved in what took place at Caesarea at the hands of Peter and the campaign of Barnabas and Paul from Antioch.[/size] But such a claim of God's purpose called for proof from Scripture to convince Jews and this is precisely what James undertakes to give." Robertson

Let me stop here but one thing is very certain James never quoted those verses to MEANING THEY ARE WITNESS OF JEHOVAH but that the Gentiles must be INTRODUCED INTO THE CHURCH OF GOD.

It must have startled the Judaizers when James called these saved Gentiles "a people for His [God's) name," because for centuries the Jews had carried that honorable title (see Deut 7:6; 14:2; 28:10).
from The Bible Exposition Commentary.

Could it be that you cant at your level study and understand the bible?



Nope! You rather have a hard time understanding the bible. Improve your bible study.

God gave Jesus that privilege to have His witnesses bear his[Jesus] name. That is the way God wants it, the way He wants his witnesses to now operate. By doing so, they are fulfilling there role as Jehovah's witnesses. It was Jehovah who even appointed them as witnesses oF Jesus. My brother, CAPTIVATOR made an interesting point. I quote him.

Peter makes it clear that the apostles are ' WITNESSES APPOINTED BY JEHOVAH GOD , who raised Jesus from the dead' Act 10:40,41



Please answer them. If not, when you make comment that relates to any of them, I will bring all those comments back for you to reply.

The commentaries I quoted above are enough to know the purpose of this thread unless if you deny those commentaries.

CANTICLES:
Just give urself some rest , I can see the guy is giving you headache and a tough time

This is what you can come with after HE ALWAYS BOYCOTTS MOST OF MY POINTS which you can't see as a great DISGRACE ON HIS PART because of the same spirit which is in two of you.

CANTICLES:
The Op isnt saying any part of scripture is irrelevant , or do u still sacrifice animals for forgiveness of sins despite its part of the scripture?

Did he say he still sacrifices animal?

the point is that tithing has been cancelled under the new covenant.

Where

UNTIL YOU ARE ABLE TO SHOW US WHERE JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES COLLECT TITHES.

UNTIL YOU'RE ALSO ABLE TO SHOW US WHERE JESUS AND HIS APOSTLES CANCELLED TITHES.

CANTICLES:
The question is not who cause ? , it goes thus " is the spirit OF Error itself a person ? "

This is the only thing you can quote out of many points I raised

What I posted is enough for a rational mind to conceive.

The question I asked you the other you couldn't attempt it but you rush here to quote only one line, what happen to rest of my point

You've boycott that 2 Corin 3:17 again

Jehovah is THE SPIRIT

Because Holy spirit is THE SPIRIT according to the scripture.

CAPTIVATOR:
His Majesty explained In Psalm 97:2 that though he is surrounded by Cloud and Fire , His throne is firmly established!

WHY is the holyspirit never said to have a throne, if its a person? ANSWER

You're always making off point.

Jehovah appeared as CLOUD and FIRE does that mean Jehovah is not a PERSON? You must first agree before I will further here.

Does being appear in a form disprove something to be a person? THIS IS YOUR FIRST ERROR now you've shifted it to HAVING A THRONE which you never agree that you're wrong in the first place.

Such Personification is common in the scriptures
' the waters are AFRAID' Psalm 77:16
The shining sun is " Ashamed" Isa 24:23

Does anything that has MIND not a person? that's the point.

And I'll show you the meaning of PERSON from different dictionary.

Exactly, [size=24]thats why it was contrasted with the spirit of error in 1 john 4:6[/size], unless you are ready to tell me the spirit of error is a person?

You didn't address my point here rather you attach straw man, [size=14pt]DO YOU MEAN Jehovah is talking to Himself when He speaks to the Holy spirit?[/size] according to John 16:13

It's only a perverted mind like you will read 1 John 4 and said it's not talking about person.

Now let's read it from the beginning, you know you always cry about context.

1 "Beloved, believe not every spirit, but prove the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: [size=14pt]3 and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the [spirit] of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already.[/size] 4 ¶ Ye are of God, [my] little children, and have overcome them: [size=14pt]because greater is he (The Holy spirit) that is in you than he (The Antichrist/False prophet) that is in the world. 5 They (The Antichrist/false prophets) are of the world: therefore speak they (The Antichrist/false prophets) [as] of the world, and the world heareth them.[/size] 6 We (The true prophets) are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he who is not of God heareth us not. By this we know the spirit of truth (The Holy spirit), and the spirit of error (The spirit of Antichrist/Satan). 1 John 4:1-6 ASV (Bold and insertions mine)

Who is causing ERROR? It's Satan!

The point Apostle John was making here is since we have the SPIRIT of God which is Holy spirit then will can differentiate between the FALSE PROPHETS and the TRUE PROPHETS


[s] [/s]


let me add to your confusion even though I know you'll dodge it again.

"14 That one will glorify me,+ because he will receive from what is mine (Jesus) and will declare it to you."+ John 16:14 NWT
"He will bring me glory by telling you whatever he receives from me (Jesus)." (NLT)
"He will honor and glorify Me, because He will take of (receive, draw upon) what is Mine and will reveal (declare, disclose, transmit) it to you." AMP (Bold, underline & insertion mine)

The Spirit will RECEIVE from JESUS, how come?

One problem you have is how you ALWAYS boycott points when FACTS are being presented to you, you will just quote the one you can still fool yourself with.

If you look back to where I first quote you it's so obvious that you've left the main point.

1) You claimed Holy spirit is not a person because He appeared as DOVE and FIRE, I countered you that then The Father is not a person since He also appeared as FIRE and CLOUD

2) You claimed Holy spirit is PERSONIFIED with a reference to some verses where trees or stone are to be TALKING, I countered this by telling you that The Holy spirit has MIND and EMOTIONS.

3) You went ahead to hold on to the idioms 'COME UPON' without even know the meaning of the idioms.

and many claims you've claimed and I've debunked here.

But you buried all these as if you're not the one who started it all NOW if all these points are true about The Holy spirit then WHY IS HOLY SPIRIT NOT A PERSON?

CAPTIVATOR:
If thats the case , U missed it for the following reasons

- if the “spirit of truth” in John 14:17 is a person, then
“the spirit of error” in 1 John 4:6 must also be a
person, since the two are directly contrasted. The fact is
that each “spirit” represents an influence or a power
under which a person acts, but neither is a person in
Itself.


- 1 Corinthians 2:12 directly opposes the “spirit of the
world” with “the spirit which is of God.” As the “spirit of
the world” is not a person separate from “the world,”
neither is the “spirit of God” a person separate from
God. Each is an influence emanating from a source that
produces certain attitudes, behaviors or “fruit.”

This is what I usually say you always miss the point which is just a desperate not to accept the truth.

This is my post that you quoted "You're stressing this far because my main point here is to prove that BODILY FORM of a DOVE doesn't deny His PERSON, hope you can get my point now?

Here I'm talking about how your point about Holy spirit being descended in a BODILY FORM of a DOVE doesn't disprove His person but just check your reply to this whether there's any correlation.

You shifted the point from BODILY FORM to SPIRIT OF TRUTH.

"our Father in heaven, let your name be sanctified" Matt 6:9 ,

This words prove that Father Jehovah lives in " heaven, his established place of dwelling" 1 king 8:43 ,

Jesus went to heaven and appear before Jehovah God on his throne ( Heb 9:24, Eze 1:26) . THIS SHOWS HE IS A PERSON . Even You Urself Knows That.

So where does Holy spirit come from earth or heaven?

"And John bare witness, saying, [size=14pt]I have beheld the Spirit descending as a dove out of heaven;[/size] and it abode upon him. John 1:31 ASV

In 2 Cor 3:17 we read that " Jehovah IS THE SPIRIT" , and yet we also read the " SPIRIT OF Jehovah " .

[size=14pt]If u think this verse says Jehovah is the holyspirit,[/size] then spirit of Jehovah means " spirit of holyspirit" . And luke 11:13 will say " the holyspirt will give you his holyspirit" DO U JUST SEE That absurdity of such interpretation? It doesnt make any sense.

Is THE SPIRIT and HOLY SPIRIT the same, Yes or No?
You never answer this question which I can see you're dodging Jehovah is THE SPIRIT, please which SPIRIT?
The only absurdity here is the interpretation you can come with which an ordinary English student should know that such phrase can never be constructed in such way.

The truth is that the word "Spirit" is used in the scriptures to mean diferent things

1) Wind

2) The active Breath of life in all livin things

3) the force that influence a persons behaviour e.g spirit of the world

4) inspired expression originatin from an invisible source e.g spirit of error

5) SPIRIT PERSONS ( God, Christ and the Angels , John 4:24, 2 Cor 3:17)

[size=14pt]6) God own free gift of holy spirit ( luke 11:13, Act 2:38)[/size]

Imaging you've grouped 2 Corin 3:17 to mean SPIRIT PERSON, just shaking my head seriously for you

NOTE: The definite article must be put into consideration.

The verse says Jehovah is THE SPIRIT

In the light of this, let us reason about this 3 questions

1) UNLIKE Father Jehovah, why does the holyspirit
not have a throne if its a person?

2) why is the holyspirit NEVER described as having
the appearance of a man, whereas it bears the
likeness of a dove ?

3) as discussed above , according to Proverb
30:4, God has a personal name , His Son also have
a personal name .... Why dont the holyspirit have a
personal name if its a person?

All these your questions can never be looking into without solving those questions above.



Let me show you another reason why JWs are wrong about the PERSON of THE Holy spirit.

In link I provided yesterday about Satan from Jws.org the following statement was said;

WHAT PEOPLE SAY
Some believe that Satan the Devil is not a person but, rather, the abstract quality of evil that exists inside each person

WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS
Satan is a real person. He is a rebel angel, a spirit creature who opposes God. The Bible calls Satan “the ruler of this world.” (John 12:31) He uses “lying signs” and “deception” to accomplish his aims.—2 Thessalonians 2:9, 10.

Now after this they went ahead to make this conclusion; The Bible records a conversation in heaven between Satan and God. If Satan were a mere symbol of the evil that exists inside each person, [size=14pt]how could God, who is perfect and morally unblemished, have been talking to an evil part of himself?[/size] (Deuteronomy 32:4; Job 2:1-6) Clearly, Satan is a real person and not merely a personification of evil.(Bold mine)

Now this is very interesting because if God couldn't have been talking to an evil part of himself (NOTE: I'm not saying Satan is not a person BUT I'm only taking the point that GOD can't be talking to himself) will it deem it fit for God to be talking to Himself as of the Holy spirit when we read in the Bible that "Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; [size=14pt]but what things soever he shall hear, [these] shall he speak:[/size] and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come." John 16:13 ASV (Bold and underline mine)

Or is this one PERSONIFICATION too?

So if Holy spirit is a force that comes from God, how can God be talking to the force inside Him?

You can see that JWs never study the PERSON of Holy spirit very well before they make their conclusion, is not even new since they deny most fact in the Bible.

CANTICLES:
Blind argument that shoot you in the leg
Scripture says the Father alone is NAMED Jehovah (Psalm 83:18) And We Are Told That Is Nature is spiritual " God IS Spirit" Joh 4:24

[size=14pt]So u deduce from 2cor 3:17 that the Father is the holyspirit,[/size] then the TRINITY collapse on this platform since this proves they ar not distinct from each other as the trinity agree.

Next ..

No we don't deduce from 2 Corin 3:17 but what the verse says.

Now that Jehovah said to be THE SPIRIT, is The Spirit a force?

OR you agree with your brother that THE SPIRIT is different from HOLY SPIRIT.

CAPTIVATOR:
Good! So dont ever again use him to defend something [size=14pt]that could appear in a dove bodily form[/size] AND NEVER In Human appearance ! Luk 3:22

This is the reason why it look as if I'm harsh in my comment when you leave the main POINT and addressed another thing.

I can still see where you're missing it, Satan is not a SNAKE BUT SATAN appeared in a BODILY FORM of a SNAKE yet Satan is a PERSON.

In your own statement @bolded you said "could APPEAR in a DOVE bodily form" which means The Holy Spirit is not a DOVE BUT ONLY APPEAR AS A DOVE which we can see Satan who is also a person does.

EXACT dove Bodily form, Infact John bear witness saying " I VIEW the spirit coming down as a DOVE out of heaven, and it remained upon him" John 1:33.

Is The Holy spirit a DOVE or only APPEAR in a BODILY FORM of a DOVE?

You're stressing this far because my main point here is to prove that Holy spirit being appeared in a BODILY FORM of a DOVE doesn't deny His PERSON, hope you can get my point now?

Gen 3:14 shows that the creature that speak to Eve was one of the already created " wild beast of the field" " an animal" - (Gen 3:14)

WHILE

Satan is not a snake like u agreed above , REV 12:9 symbolically (( Revelation is presented in symbols/signs (1:1)) portray Satan as a dragon and serpent because he was the power behind the particular " animal ... wild beast of the field " that spoke to Eve ( Gen 3:14)

So do you also agree that The Holy spirit is also the POWER behind the animal 'DOVE' not that The Holy spirit is a DOVE.

Now if Holy spirit can assume the form of DOVE or FIRE, do you mean He can't assume the form of MAN?

" the eyes of Jehovah are everywhere, watching both the bad and THE GOOD " Prov 15:3

Then this teaches us that's how Jehovah makes His abode with those who LOVED Him, right?

VERY CLEAR " and were DISTRIBUTED, and ONE came to rest on EACH OF THEM" Act 2:3

The funny thing is that you never even take into consideration of the PLURALITY and SINGULARITY of these verses

"And there appeared unto them tongues (PLURAL) parting asunder, like as of fire; and it sat upon each one of them. 4 And they were (PLURAL) all filled with the Holy Spirit (SINGULAR), and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance." Acts 2:3-4 ASV (Bracket words mine)

After the TONGUES (plural) appeared and sat upon THEM (Plural) then they (plural) were all filled with Holy spirit (singular), and you couldn't know that this is what we called OMNIPRESENT.

[size=14pt]-Father Jehovah God is the Spirit ! Is this refferin to Father Jehovah as same with holy spirit? NO![/size] Why? The verse immediately separates the holyspirit when it said " the SPIRIT OF Jehovah"

The bolded above is so sad that's why I said earlier that "Your rejection to this will not only ridiculous but expose you more."

THE SPIRIT in that verse is what? Remember you agree that Father Jehovah IS THE SPIRIT.

Can you see what I'm saying? So THE SPIRIT is not the same as HOLY SPIRIT, I can't stop laughing.

NOTE: ANYTHING that is OF or FROM Somethin else Cannot BE that Same something .

Father and the SON Cannot Be SAME Person.

The Spirit of Jehovah can be written as Jehovah's Spirit or His Spirit (which means POSSESSION), so what that verse is saying is The Holy Spirit is Jehovah or Jehovah is THE SPIRIT.

Jehovah is the Spirit, INFACT Jesus already said Jehovah God is a Spirit , Even the scripture said Christ Jesus is " a ... Spirit" 1 Cor 15:45.

Please you need more understanding on English language, DEFINITE Article (THE) is different and used in different way from INDEFINITE article (a, an)

God is A spirit different from God is THE spirit, OK!

This two whom are adressed with a PERSONAL NAME Which Showed they are persons are called Spirit because they have a " Spiritual Body" or " heavenly body"1 Cor 15:40,45.

They were called a Spirit (which means they don't have HUMAN BODY) according to the your quote but not THE SPIRIT.

MEANWHLE, Eze 1:26 Jehovah is said have "the appearance of a man" NOT likeness of a Dove , it also state further that he sits on a THRONE .

MR. This beg the questions. And pls answer it for this thread

1) UNLIKE Father Jehovah, why does the holyspirit not have a throne if its a person ?

2) why is the holyspirit NEVER descrbed as having the appearance of a man, whereas it bears the likeness of a dove ?

3) as discussed above , according to Proverb
30:4, God has a personal name , His Son also have a personal name .... Why dont the holyspirit have a personal name if its a person?

I don't want to prolong the issue I only want this answer from you.

Jehovah is THE SPIRIT, is Jehovah a force?

Maamin:
This topic has been flogged over and over again on NL before. The trinity co-equality is hoax. The Father is not the Son the Son is not the Father the Holy Spirit is more like a force nature and attribute of God, the Holy Spirit can only be of God it proceeds from God who in his nature is a spirit...it was this very spirit that Christ was Anointed with. The bible also made it clear that "it pleases God for His spirit to dwell fully in bodily form of Christ"


Shalom Aleikhem le'makhbir

And yet ISLAMIC Scholars take Holy spirit to be Angel Jibri, so you mean Jibri is of God, Jesus was anointed with Jibri and Jibri dwell inside Jesus?

CAPTIVATOR:
The book of Job makes it clear that Satan is an Angel NOT A SNAKE,

Then who says Satan is a SNAKE?
Did the verse you quoted about Holy spirit says Holy spirit is a DOVE?

Satan only cause a snake "of the field" Gen 3:1 to speak, the same way Jehovah cause Balaam She- Ass to speak as human ( Num 22:26-31, 2pet 2:15,16)

Whereas the curse went straight to the serpent and not on the being who spoke through it. This is a pure lie in the face of the scripture after I quoted YOUR OWN BOOK who CALLED Satan [size=14pt]“The original serpent,[/size] the one called Devil and Satan, . . . is misleading the entire inhabited earth.”—Revelation 12:9.

Here JWs called Satan THE ORIGINAL SERPENT not THE ONE THAT SPEAKS THROUGH SERPENT.

In fact the way you've exposed yourself little knowledge about scriptures is enough for you to open your mind towards the truth.

See reasoning ! SHOW ME WHERE JEHOVAH is said to be distributed among people?

I wonder how you always put your reasoning into action,

Can Jehovah make His abode with more than two people? which Bible confirmed that He can, if yes! then what does that mean?

Another thing is you take the word DISTRIBUTED which is as a result of the translation you used but reading another translation you can get what the writer is saying.

Finally, I don't even need to argue with you much because I'm about to open a thread about JWs and Holy spirit but let me just show you a piece of it here how JWs lack scriptural knowledge.

[size=14pt]"Now Jehovah* is the Spirit,+[/size] and where the spirit of Jehovah* is, there is freedom.+ 18 And all of us, while we with unveiled faces reflect like mirrors the glory of Jehovah,* are transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another,* exactly as it is done by Jehovah* the Spirit.* 2 Corin 3:17-18 NWT (Bold and underline, mine)

So the Bible confirmed by NWT called THE SPIRIT Jehovah, is Jehovah a force?

Your rejection to this will not only ridiculous but expose you more.

The funny thing about you is how you always beating around the bush when facts have been presented to your open eyes.

CAPTIVATOR:
1) A person Can Never Appear IN THE BODILY FORM of a Dove . LUKE 3:22

show Me Where Jehovah appear in a BODILY FORM of any animal?

Now it is BODILY FORM not just a Dove.

Awake 2013 page 6-7 talks about Satan as “The original serpent, the one called Devil and Satan, . . . is misleading the entire inhabited earth.”—Revelation 12:9. In fact there is a picture of a Snake with an image of a woman depicting Eve on the page which shows that the Satan appeared to Eve in a BODILY FORM of an Animal yet you believe Satan is a person.

http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102013204

I think the reasonable question to ask here is, why will HOLY SPIRIT descend in a BODILY FORM of a DOVE? Which I will leave for another day to tutor you Bible.

I can see that you purposely boycott Jehovah being appeared in FORM of CLOUD, so how can a PERSON appear in form of CLOUD?

2) " tongues as if of fire became visible to them and were DISTRIBUTED" Act 2:3 ..... A PERSON can Never be DISTRIBUTED .

Show me where Jehovah is said to be distributed on people?

So DISTRIBUTED is your another headache now.

How Jehovah or Jesus won't distribute Themselves if They will make their abode with more than 10 people who loved Him?