Ola17:


How about you quit complaining and intelligently teach me how to properly “interfere” in a discussion on the internet?

What I have started with you is already lessons on how to handle discussion. I am very much available for you.

The next lesson is for you to know how to ask questions on what you don't know so as to avoid rush conclusion. This will help you to understand well.

LordReed:


And they employed deception in their act for god so deception for god is good and your god approved by blessing them without reprimand.

You were the one trying to read deception into their actions. It wasn't there.

There action was to save the babies. And it wasn't deception. Even Pharoah knew that the kids were alive.


The deception you mentioned was in their words to Pharoah. That is a different thing here. The writer never said God blessed that.

Read verse 17 and 21 again.

You must know that the writer of the scriptures are very meticulous with words and expressions. Time may have passed, but they fully represent God well in their writings to the best of their knowledge. And we only need to read well to know what they wrote. This is one of the case.


Put this scenario as this (though this won't fully explain it)

Of a man who saved children from the hands of bokoharam because he feared and want to obey the government.

Then the Nigeria government was pleased and honored his action.

Yet in his defence when bokoharam caught him, he lied that the children escaped by themselves.

What the government honored wasn't the lie but the action of saving.

The action that led to saving is that they know God and feared him, (verse 17) then verse 21 told you that is what God actually honored. Their fear of God to save the kids.

FOLYKAZE:


Put simply, I am a Spiritual atheist. On a broader note, I am a Naturalistic Pantheist - an atheist with a spiritual life. Asian Philosophies like Taoism, Buddhism, and Jainism captured my real essence. Though, I stand firm with African spirituality, Ifa philosophy and spiritual system. Nature to me is God; it is what is it and only it is. I think someone would forgive me for misusing the word God again.

Okay.

Ola17:


I totally wanted to quote you.
Sorry if you don’t get it.

Okay, I guess you need to know a proper way of quoting and interfering into a discussion. What you wrote seems like a complain. I prefer when you intelligently pose your concerns and submission than trailing emotional tangent to express yourself.

LordReed:


Exodus 1:18-20
New International Version

15 The king of Egypt said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah,

16 “When you are helping the Hebrew women during childbirth on the delivery stool, if you see that the baby is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live.”

17 The midwives, however, feared God and did not do what the king of Egypt had told them to do; they let the boys live.

18 Then the king of Egypt summoned the midwives and asked them, “Why have you done this? Why have you let the boys live?”

19 The midwives answered Pharaoh, “Hebrew women are not like Egyptian women; they are vigorous and give birth before the midwives arrive.”

20 So God was kind to the midwives and the people increased and became even more numerous.

21 And because the midwives feared God, he gave them families of their own.

EDIT: Added ver 21

Let me give you a full text of what you quoted.

Exodus 1
16 And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.

17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive.

To understand this scenario well you must observe key issues.

1. Observe the instruction given to them. To kill the male child.

2 Observed what the midwife feared God for.
They feared God and not kill the male child.


Now what was God pleased with.
You must read context.

Verse 16 pharaoh wanted children killed
Verse 17 midwife saved the children because THEY FEARED GOD.

God's satisfaction is in that action.

But you have read the later discussion of Pharoah and midwife as an action that God was pleased with.

Read verse 21 and 17 together, you will get it.

THERE IS AN EMPHASIS OF THEY FEARED GOD in verse 17 and 21 which you have neglected. That's where your answer is.

To understand well,
Read verse 21 together with verse 17 you will get the context.

17 But the midwives feared God, and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive
21 And it came to pass, because the midwives feared God, that he made them houses.

God's action was premised on this. It's clear in the context.

They feared God and didn't kill, then God was pleased with it.

I guess this is clear?

Ola17:


Being the Christian god got to be the coolest job ever! I mean, you don’t get to be held to any standard whatsoever and when you fvck things up or fail to hold up to your own part of the bargain, your adherents either willfully explains it away somehow or blame the fall guy of all time; satan.

May god help us.

Are you sure you wanted to quote my comment or it's a mistake. I can't find how your respond address my comment.

LordReed:


He blessed the midwives with no reprimand for their use of deception. He gave permission to a lying spirit to deceive Ahab. In the new testament he will send a strong delusion in the end times. Your god is very kool with deception, your bible makes it clear.

I will keep our discussion within the first illustration for now.

Can you point me to exactly where God blessed the midwife deception or even her action. You know wr are speaking about what is documented not what we think.

Point to the place so that I can read.

LordReed:


So basically when your god approves of deception it is good or when he uses deception as in the case of Ahab it is good. LMAO!

No, he never approve any deception.

Can you point to his approval of deception in that Story?

LordReed:


You gave a scenario in which deception was employed with the implication being as Christians you shouldn't employ deception. Yet the midwives employed deception and got blessed by god. So if deception is the sin you think it is why does your god seem fine with it while you think it is bad. I asked the question so that you could see just how awkward your position is and I am sure you realised it that's why you refused to answer the question.

I think the picture you painted, we may need to separate God's actions from man's actions.

In the case of Moses as you examined.

God didn't instruct the midwife to do what they did. They only acted based on what they felt is right to do at that time. Infact with Bible narrative, they never knew that is the boy God will use. No Bible verse showed they were acting by God's instruction. They only knew that one day God will raise a deliverer for them. Who is the person? They never knew.

So what's God's action
God's action here is to work through man's circumstances to achieve his purpose. The reality is, following Moses story and education, we will know why he was chosen by God, likewise, his training by his mother. He was taught to know the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and also his promises. Every Hebrew child was taught that.
This is the reason Moses could communicate it well and write about it.


So, did God make the midwife to deceive pharaoh? No. That is man's decision to preserve Moses, a child.

Did God use the situation to still work out his plan? Yes. As seen in history of God/man relationship documented by the scriptures. God will work through, the weakness, disobedience, deceptions, challenges, rejection of man to still work out his plan.

If they didn't succeed in their action, would God had still achieve his plan?

Yes, this is the essence of being sovereign. To be able to work through human circumstances to work out your plans without distorting man's will.


You will see this in Jacob's story, man trying to use his knowledge to solve problem ahead of God. In the same story of Jacob you will still that its man's action that took them to Egypt not God. Yet God worked through those circumstances to restore his plan for man.

So, in this case, God wasn't employing or certifying deception, but working through man's action to restore his will.

Think of this. If Moses has rejected God, whatever actions of the midwife will count for nothing. So, in the process of this stories, many decisions of man contributed to the endpoint. It means, a man may have bad past, but still used of God in his plan.

Workch:
Yes, we have evidence that specifically the Abrahamic, Hindu and African gods do not exist.
Evidence has always disproven the holy books every now and then that theist now sort to look for evidence, mould them to wrongly suit their specific narratives. Every now and then we have proven that Adam and Eve, Noah's flood, Tower of babel, birth of Jesus, slavery of Israelites in Egypt, creation stories are myths. Evidence has forced believers to move the goalpost countless times on this issues.

But one kind of God that will be hard to disprove is the deistic God, it's that God I am not sure doesn't exist. If I see evidence, I will change my mind but I'm sure the Christian, Muslim, Judaism, hindu gods etc are all nonsense. Nothing about them can be verified outside their primitive holy books.

And as per your OP, you are truly on the right track that your heart craved for, what you desired and longed for, you will soon have it. It's a matter of time.

Workch:
Christian does not exist, stop clinging to the post to justify all the ridiculousness in the Bible.
Those things didn’t happen and that’s why I am sure Christian god is hoax.

You see, I told you, you don't read properly. You are only exercising your hatred to Christians at any given opportunity. You never have a single ideology or conviction. Hatred and anger is what is driving you. Help yourself, because it will only continue to expose your wrong heart.

The person you quoted FOLYKAZE and shouted at about Christianity isn't a Christian nor support it, infact what you claimed (Deist) to likely support is what he believed in, and he asked you an intelligent question to question your conviction, you couldn't provide answer but hatred and abuse.

This is truly an Èmòò as he said.

FOLYKAZE:


Émọ́ wọ́ lu.

You are indeed a psycho!

Adios amor

Leebellow96:
Please enlighten me more

There is no issue of being quoted if you are asking from a honest heart. It's normal to seek to know or get clarity on what seems not clear to you.


Having said that.

The issue here is drawn from partial extraction of Bible teaching from the full doctrine of the Bible. It will always lead to error.

The question is drawn from a knowledge of reading about Jesus alone in NT but not the whole Bible. The Bible must be understood as a whole book.

For example the moment you see the word "die" which you used twice on your question, you must cast your mind back to Genesis which is the beginning and the first place you see the word "die" mentioned as related to God's instruction to Adam.
You must understand Jesus's death for man in that context then the question is solved.

---

Secondly.

The word die for us, in literature will be a figurative expression following the Bible explanation.

Die for us there is a figure of speech called synecdoche (please read about it).

A macrocosm synecdoche is when larger entity is used to refer to a small part within it.


For example,
“Los Angeles beat New York last night”

This is using the city name Los Angeles to refer to a team that plays for Los Angeles.

This is well used in the Bible severally.

---

So when you read/write

Jesus died for us, the US there is to represent a part, the sin of man.

Died for us means
Jesus died for the sin of humanity.

This is what the scriptures taught and is The story of the Bible.

John 1:29 the lamb of God that takes away the sin of the whole world

Rom 5:8 why we are yet sinners, christ died for us.

1 Cor 15: 3, died for our sins according to the scriptures.

Ephe 2:5 we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ

Acts 2:38 in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins

Matt 26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Luke 1:77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins,

Luke 24:48 repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name

Acts 10:43 whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins

Therefore, the context of the scriptures is dying for the fundamental problem of man, sin. Sin issue is a fundamental problem of man beyond man's achievement, wealth, religion, location, age and advancement, this problem cannot be taken away except in the offering of Christ.

Hence, Christ died for our us (our sins) that we may have life. The moment you put it in this context, the should man had to died again question will be solved. Because man's problem of sin brought a separation (died) from God, Christ obedience unto death, brought back man's union (life) with God.

Janosky:

Janosky asks hupernikao:
"Did the one you call "Jesus", refer to himself as 'Jesus'?"
Hupernikao, Carry your GIBBERISH outta this forum.
.

Like I told you. You don't read properly. Still go back to the OP and my first comment and read again to see how your question is supporting my stand. You are only exposing more how wrong your fellow OP is. Fighting over name than essence. When you start reading properly, you will be able to write properly.

LordReed:
Following from your request to make a thread, it will be an ongoing series so this is the 1st part. 1st question: what is your interpretation of the Bible on speaking in tongues, is every Christian supposed to have that gift?

Cc: hupernikao

My First Response Are In Two Posts Read First Part Above

POST 2: TEXTUAL EXAMINATIONS OF PAUL'S TEACHING IN 1 COR 14

---

ARE ALL CHRISTIANS SUPPOSED TO SPEAK IN TONGUES (According to 1 Cor 14)?

1 Cor 14
14 Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye may prophesy.

We will observe that Paul's teaching in 1 Cor wasnt to an individual but to a church. That means, his explanations and instructions are for the church not an individual. Observe some of his words below.

Paul's Language in 1 Cor 14

verse 5 ye all spake with tongues
verse 18 I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
verse 23 all speak with tongues
verse 24 But if all prophesy
verse 26 when ye come together, every one of you hath
verse 31 For ye may all prophesy

As a starter, observe that his language informed us that he was addressing the church and also admit the fact that majority if not the whole church speaks or can speak in tongues.


Observe is final words, he used BRETHREN, that is speaking to all.

39 Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues.

That is, everyone should covet to prophesy and also speak in tongues. How do we know?


1. The word Wherefore
His usage of the word, WHEREFORE BRETHREN is very instructive.

"Wherefore" is a statement that showed a conclusion of what is being said and also carries an implication of instructions.


He used it earlier in verse 13
1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.


Also in other of his chapters

1 Corinthians 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.
1 Corinthians 10:14 Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry.
1 Corinthians 11:33 Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another.
1 Corinthians 14:13 Wherefore let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue pray that he may interpret.

---

2. He used the word Brethren for prophesying and tongues.
That is, he was giving this instructions to the church not individual. The word Brethren is translated from speaking to your brothers, relations.

---

3. He was instructing the whole church to COVET and also not FORBID

This means that even if we assume that everyone in Paul's church isnt speaking in tongues as at the time he wrote, his writings showed that such gift is available to all. That means they all have the ability to do it. All the believers there.

You dont tell someone to covet or forbid something that is outside his ability.

For example,
You cant tell me to covet to grow wings and fly, because its not just that i dont have it, i dont also have the capability to function in such.

Hence If he cant have it or if its decided by the spirit who has it, then there isnt a need to covet or forbid. Forbid means to stop it. That means they have the ability to stop tongues and prophesying, they can decide.

32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

Though it is a spirit gift,Paul's explanation showed that it is within the ability of a man to stop it, also in his ability to covet to have it. If it is subject only to spirit decision, there wont be need for coveting or desiring it.

To covet, desire, is a central theme to Paul's explanation in 1 Cor 14

v1 ....and desire spiritual gifts,
vs13 let him that speaketh ... pray that he may interpret.
39 Wherefore, covet to prophesy

This simply, explains the access of a believer to this gifts. All believers can covet, all can desire, all can pray for...
Hence if all can do this, then that means they have the capacity to receive such gift and function in it.


In conclusion, observing Paul's writing, it is clear that he knew/wanted/experienced the fact that all believers in 1 Cor 14 can/should/do speak in tongues. That means, this ability is available to all and all can function in it. Hence, not a varying gift from one individual to another but the believers gift.

@LordReed

LordReed:
Following from your request to make a thread, it will be an ongoing series so this is the 1st part. 1st question: what is your interpretation of the Bible on speaking in tongues, is every Christian supposed to have that gift?

Cc: hupernikao

Thanks for opening yourself to this discussion. I truly hope you will take time to read my submission and also present your feedback based on what is being discussed.

To help us, i will set a limit to our discussion based on the reasons for creating it. Your comment that originated this is copied below.

LordReed:
So based on this (1 Cor 14: 5) what is your position on speaking in tongues, are all Christians supposed to be gifted with it?

www.nairaland.com/6829808/lunacy-religious-people-christians-conservatives/2#107344715

That means, i will put my explanation within the limit of what Paul explained in 1 Cor 14 only since we are speaking about textual examination.

Also bear in mind here, whether the tongue is human language or NOT is not the focus of our discussion. The focus is if every believer should speak in tongues.

This is important to guide our discussion.

---

MY FIRST RESPONSE WILL BE IN TWO POSTS

POST 1: Background
PROPER BIBLE TEXT INTEPRETATION is not imagination or what you claim to be your own spirit revelations. They are evidences of what was taught in the writer's days as inspired by the Holy Ghost. Hence, He helps us to access the authors mind which is centuries behind us to see exactly what he inspired the author to write not what we want to see. This is what is a true bible study.

Hence, we must allow the text to speak for its self. It means, we will literally observe the text to speak by themselves not on how we feel. When this is done, the interpretation will align with the same usage of words in their days, the culture of their days and what is accepted within the same culture of their days not ours.

WHY?

In textual interpretation, there are 3 elements

- the text
- the author
- the reader

Out of these 3, the author/writer owns the interpretation. But you asked me earlier an intelligent question, What if the writer is long gone?
In this case, the text itself must assume the position of the author, that is we will seek to get a clear way of how such text has been used by the author and also his/her contemporaries. This is what we deliver us.

That means, in Christian theology, no interpretation should negate the meaning of a word as used by its original people, contemporary of the writers and also the authors usage in other places.

---

In a simple illustration below, this is what a correct textual interpretation mean.

What Paul will say if he is called to teach again exactly what he taught in 1 Cor 14[/b]in his days is the correct interpretation. That means,[b] there cant be two correct interpretation. There can only be one, and that ONE is what is in the mind of the author.


That means we must use his text to access his mind and teach exactly what he saw not what we are seeing today. This is the endpoint of every study on interpretation.

@LordReed
CONTINUE POST BELOW

LordReed:


Of course because it is simply man doing all of this, no omniscient god is directing anything. If there was an omniscient god interested in man to have a relationship with us then such a god would have given us the knowledge to create an objective means of discovering him. A rumour went around that my mum was dead and those that asked me I gave them her number to call her by themselves. Yet a god takes thousands of years with no response.

The truth is, if given the opportunity, we all (all humans) want to set the/our standard for God on how he should reveal himself to us. Nothing bad with that, but the answers to our standard will vary with time, while some my find him now, some will take eternity. It all depends on what we seek and know.

LordReed:


My point wasn't that man flies but that the technology to go to space was developed in less than 70years after learning how to do powered flight. Why is objectively discovering a god taking thousands of years? And why is that if such a god exists it does nothing to aid such a search? The god doesn't want to be found by objective means?

I also just gave the instant that span centuries, just as you gave the research of space.

But the truth is scientific research is still limited for now. I know you know this. Even with discoveries outer space, most of what we call technology today may become so irrelevant in ten centuries to come.

Janosky:


Did the one you call Jesus,refer to himself as "Jesus"? Is Jesus Hebrew name?
Is Jesus a Greek name?
Is your John, Jeremiah their actual Hebrew name?
Hypocrisy be like gele for Trinitarian devotees.

You argue in confusion. Go and read the OP again and my first comment. You will see how much you are contradicting yourself and the very OP you are supporting. You are only confirming my stand with everything you write.

LordReed:


I used to be of the same opinion, that someday the tools to find god would be developed but then consider that we have been on the god question though out all of recorded history spanning more than 6000 years yet we still haven't come close meanwhile we went from flightless to space travel in less than a century. Consider also that a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, atheist all drive a car the exact same way and the car is a human invention that's less than 2 centuries old. You have to wonder why the god question amongst all the world religions cannot be resolved with anything approaching the ingenuity of human technology while a supposedly omniscient god sits by and watches humans kill themselves over many centuries over the god question. Seems more likely such a god doesn't exist than it is that its a failure to use technology to find a god.

Hmmm

If you agree. You will know that for example, the desire of man to fly was likely as old as man himself. I mean, man instinct to be able to fly and compete in the air, is likely as old as the first man. But this never came to pass until centuries ahead. And even the flight technology (man flying by himself) is yet to be achieved. But we know in years ahead, man will be able to lift from the front of his house to his workplace in self personal flight. I believe so.

But such achievement was never the idea of the modern man, it was inherent even in the very firstmen in exploring the skies.

Why do I say this. Time isn't a limit to what science will discover, time is just a journey for science. Hence science will arrive someday, to have a feel of the supernatural first, then that will change the whole focus of scientific research and guide us into a new realm of Theo research. But let's leave this for now as science is even yet to find the supernatural talkless of finding God.


Secondly, thank God you said human kills themselves. That's half way solved. But what you called sit back is what we can explain in concept of freewill and omniscience which was in the other thread. Evil is a principle, it's host is man's decision. And I mean everyman. Hence to address the issue of evil will simply means to either take the host out totally or his ability to choose, or better still to find another option of helping man chose what is right. It's a balance between justice, love and power.

LordReed:


If I am going to open a new thread it won't be for only this question but for all questions concerning interpretation of scriptures and the differences. Are you ready for that onslaught? LoL

No issues. But I appreciate you separate them so that issues arent muddled together. Let's handle it in a proper way by taking each question as a separate thread. We can then be able keep focus on each.

You can go ahead and I am available now.

haddeylium:


I know how extremely hard it is for people in other religions to accept biblical truth, I've been there too. Biblical truth is absolute and not relative. Colour blue will always be blue even if a colour blind person sees something else.
Maybe I once told MaxInDHouse that someone that is colour blind is part of discussion, that will never change the coluur to something else. It requires time, effort and maybe ingenuity which I'll employ you to possess.

You have won sè. What else do you want to here.

MaxInDHouse:

It's our heritage so when we are talking about it try to learn not argue, that's why you can't present any group or organized people having that type of faith today!

Heritage of turning scripture upside down? I agree.

Kobojunkie:
Again... the question is simple. Where then in the Bible God or Jesus Christ, the Christ in Christianity send you go give people this "defense" you keep mouthing off about?

You will need to understand simple application of English words and their meaning.

For you not to know that all you yourself do here on NL daily is a defense, it brings a lot out about how you understand what you are doing or write actually.

But I know that, trying to point a direction to someone who isn't going anywhere will only be a waste.

Kobojunkie:
So, where then in the Bible God or Jesus Christ, the Christ in Christianity send you go give people this "defense" you keep mouthing off about?

I am not sure you read the Bible so having this discussion with you may not be productive. If you read Bible we can talk, but as it stands, I am sure you don't read the Bible. Looking at a text or gazing at words isn't reading, reading is what brings knowing. I am not sure you do that.

MaxInDHouse:


Jehovah's Witnesses (God's people) are telling others about their heritage but you want to argue with them over it, no wahala just quote three different versions and allow others to read and reason for themselves whether the three Hebrews were testing their God or ready to die for their faith!

If it must be, our God whom we serve is able to rescue us from the burning fiery furnace, O king, and to rescue us from your hand. But even if he does not, let it be known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold that you have set up! Daniel 3:17-18 NWT

If we are thrown into the blazing furnace, the God we serve is able to deliver us from it, and he will deliver us from Your Majesty’s hand. even if he does not, we want you to know, Your Majesty, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold you have set up." Daniel 3:17-18 NIV

These are the descendants of Abraham (father of all those who are ready to sacrifice anything for their faith) that's our HERITAGE! Isaiah 54:17

Okay. I have done my part.

Kobojunkie:
Who send you this "defence" work wey you dey talk self? Where God tell you im send anyone out to go give Christian defense?

Lalasticlala, mynd44, seun
Please move this to fp abeg!

I am not talking to you, I am talking to people like me, who believe in what bible says not one who cherry pick what suit him.

MaxInDHouse:


Just quote verses 17 and 18 from three different versions and leave the rest for the followers to read and reason if the three Hebrews were certain that they will be rescued or they were prepared to die for their faith! Matthew 16:25 compare to John 11:25

Its the way you read it. I will give you a better way to read it. Is just same English we read daily but most times when we read it in the Bible we read away many things and read our mind.

Daniel 3
16 Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are not careful to answer thee in this matter.
17 If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king.
18 But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.


In proper English, the IF NOT, is to follow the IF IT BE SO. That means the IF NOT, should be referring to IF IT BE SO.

That is how things are read in all lexicon even computer language. You cant change that rule when reading English Bible.
When you have IF, you will then have IF NOT,

So, your interpretation of IF NOT, must fulfil the IF IT IS.


Looking at the text

Verse 17
17 If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us.

Observe their assurance - ABLE TO. They arent mincing words. They are sure,


IF IT BE SO
The if it be so, is referencing what Nebuchadnezzar said he will do. That is, even if he doesnt do it.

verse 15
15 Now if ye be ready that at what time ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of musick, ye fall down and worship the image which I have made; well: but if ye worship not, y[b]e shall be cast the same hour into the midst of a burning fiery furnace;[/b] and who is that God that shall deliver you out of my hands?

The bold is what Nebuchadnezzar said. And that is the reason for their response.


Let me put in a conversational mode/b]

[b]Nebuchadnezzar: If you dont bow, i will throw you into the fire, and your God cant deliver you

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: IF IT BE SO (that is, if you throw us into the fire as you have determined), our God is ABLE to deliver us, and he will DELIVER US.

Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego: IF NOT (If you dont throw us, that is even if you change your mind), we will not still bow to your image.

You should know that it will make no sense saying if god doesnt deliver us we will not bow, because at that point they need not bow again as they will already be roasted by fire if that is the case.

So, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego werent speaking of what they werent sure of, they were sure, GOD WILL SURELY DELIVER, AND STILL YET DELIVER.

Hence, the If not is a further explanation to tell Nebuchadnezzar that whether he threw them or if he doesnt, they will still not bow. Not an explanation of if God doesnt deliver, we will still not bow.

MaxInDHouse:


No need for arguments just quote any version and let's see if Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego weren't prepared to die for their faith just as Jehovah's Witnesses are doing today even when they're not certain that their God will save them from dying!

No Sir.
They knew they aren't going to die Sir.

They were so confident that God will deliver them. Nothing in that verses showed that they have a doubt of God will deliver or not. What they said is,

Our God is ABLE to deliver us

That was their statement of faith.

You can't see anywhere in the history of the Bible where a Jews stand in faith with God and still have doubt of whether he will deliver.

Notice well, they said

He will SURELY deliver us.

The rest must be put and read in this Context.

So, they weren't going to die and they knew it because God will surely deliver them because of their faith.

MaxInDHouse:
Death comes in different ways but the best form of death to Jehovah's Witnesses is that which comes due to keeping their faith!

Listen to few JWs in ancient times:

Shaʹdrach, Meʹshach, and A·bedʹne·go answered the king: “O Neb·u·chad·nezʹzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If it must be, our God whom we serve is able to rescue us from the burning fiery furnace, O king, and to rescue us from your hand. But EVEN IF HE DOES NOT, let it be known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the image of gold that you have set up.” Daniel 3:16-18

So Pilate entered the governor’s residence again and called Jesus and said to him: “Are you the King of the Jews?”  Jesus answered: “Are you asking this of your own originality, or did others tell you about me?” Pilate replied: “I am not a Jew, am I? Your own nation and the chief priests handed you over to me. What did you do?” Jesus answered: “My Kingdom is no part of this world. If my Kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be handed over to the Jews. But as it is, my Kingdom is not from this source.” So Pilate said to him: “Well, then, are you a king?” Jesus answered: “You yourself are saying that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, that I should bear witness to the truth. Everyone who is on the side of the truth listens to my voice.” Pilate said to him: “What is truth?” John 18:33

So they brought them and stood them before the Sanʹhe·drin. Then the high priest questioned them and said: “We strictly ordered you not to keep teaching on the basis of this name, and yet look! you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you are determined to bring the blood of this man upon us.” In answer Peter and the other apostles said: “We must obey God as ruler rather than men. The God of our forefathers raised up Jesus, whom you killed, hanging him on a stake. God exalted this one as Chief Agent and Savior to his right hand, to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these matters, and so is the holy spirit, which God has given to those obeying him as ruler.” When they heard this, they were infuriated and wanted to do away with them. Act 5:27-33

Does it look like this people are scared of dying for their faith?
How do you think their contemporaries will view them, wise or foolish?

Well regarding the blood transfusion that you think can save life Google is your friend, check what experts in the field shared on blood transfusion. We solely rely on the word of our God than whatever people say!

You just quoted Shaʹdrach, Meʹshach, and A·bedʹne·go wrongly now. You imposed your own words into Daniel's statement. You will need to reread the verses and interpret them the way they said it and what they meant. No single Jew will take what you wrong above as true even Daniel himself.

haddeylium:


When Jesus said “to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded” that included the preaching and making disciples. His 12 apostles were to teach the ones they taught how to make disciples, and then those new ones were to teach others how to do it and so on.

I can tell you authoritatively that No other group of people do or can do the work that JWs do.They are obeying Christ command to preach that goodnews which is actively taking place in more than 240 lands and explaining pure bible Truths
But, that's not the discuss here

Anyway, Jesus said wisdom is identified by its children

So, what's benefits of the knowledge you have about God's name?

Jehovah's have utilize this knowledge to form a global brotherhood. We dont slaughter eachother or anyone else in wars. . Jesus said his disciples would be identified by their love among themselves and being seperate from this world. To me its that simple.

Like I said you have won.

LordReed:


So based on this what is your position on speaking in tongues, are all Christians supposed to be gifted with it?

Bros, this your question. It flashed on my mind when I wanted to use the 1 Cor 14 example, I had wanted to pick another example immediately but felt its not necessary afterwards.

Can you do me a favor to create a new tread on this then I will give an explanation. We (I mean others) may derail this tread if I go that direction.

Is this okay by you?

@LordReed?