₦airaland Forum

achorladey:
Jozzy4: You don't know what's doing you.

Achorladey: Oga Jozzy4, I know, na this ONE and ONLY NEW COVENANT palaver.

Jozzy4: Christ is mediator of all men, 1 Tim 2:5.

Achorladey: That's an open SECRET. The reason we have been asking all this while what is this MEDIATORSHIP based upon?

Jozzy4: pray in his name, Get salvation through his name, have access to God through him , etc it says " ALL " men . anyone either true Christian or not. If they would have access to God, its through Christ.

Achorladey: What made all the above you MENTION POSSIBLE Oga Jozzy4?

Jozzy4: That's for everyone.

Achorladey: Open secret from time IMMEMORIAL?

Jozzy4: Christ also Mediate of a new covenant ( Heb 9:24).

Achorladey: Here is the Hebrew 9:24 but will quote before and after this scripture you cited.......

Indeed according to the law almost everything was purified with BLOOD, and without the SHEDDING of BLOOD there is no FORGIVENESS. 23 So it was necessary for the sketches of the things in heaven to be purified with these sacrifices, but the heavenly things THEMSELVES required BETTER SACRIFICES than these. 24 For Christ did not enter a sanctuary made with hands—the representation of the true sanctuary—but into heaven itself, and he appears now in GOD’S PRESENCE for US. 25 And he did not enter to offer himself again and again, the way the high priest enters the sanctuary year after year with BLOOD that is NOT his OWN, 26 for then he would have had to SUFFER AGAIN and AGAIN since the foundation of the world. But now he has appeared ONCE for all at the CONSUMMATION of the AGES to put AWAY SIN by his SACRIFICE. 27 And just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment, 28 so also, after CHRIST was offered ONCE to bear the SINS of MANY, to THOSE who eagerly await him he will appear a SECOND TIME, not to BEAR SIN but to bring SALVATION.

Jozzy4: Strictly for his chosen followers NOT ALL MEN

Achorladey: You only need to bring out the STRICTLY FOR HIS CHOSEN FOLLOWERS in the scripture you cited Hebrew 9:24. Which I believe its restricted to 144,000 "anointed Christian"

The FOR US is it equal to FOR THEIR( 144,000 alone)? Hebrew 9:24

So when Paul wrote to Timothy in 1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one MEDIATOR between God and men, a man CHRIST JESUS.


Did you in anywhere see STRICTLY for 144,000 in that scripture by APOSTLE PAUL a member of the 144,000 according to the JWS THEOLOGY?

Jozzy4 ...with a better promise to be kings and priest just as you agreed ( 1Pet 2:9, Luke 22;28-30)

Achorladey: You can see I separated this part of your post from the other part, because your believe is only 144,000 are the only Party Christ is MEDIATING for in the ONE and ONLY NEW COVENANT.

By now you will get to see why I have been sorting CLARIFICATION. Christ MEDIATORSHIP is based on that ONE and ONLY COVENANT. It is that ONE and ONLY NEW COVENANT that every blessing Christ brings emanated from.

Hebrews 9:28 also, after CHRIST was offered ONCE to bear the SINS of MANY, to THOSE who eagerly await him he will appear a SECOND TIME, not to BEAR SIN but to bring SALVATION.

Does the scripture above pass any massage?

Am glad we agree on one thing. In quote " Members of the new covenant are a Royal priesthood " . this hope is reserved for them in the heavens , as they shall be kings priest over the earth .

In line with the quoted words, Explain to me how Those who will be on earth whom ARE NOT Kings and Priest are part of New covenant ?

rottennaija:
So Christ mediates for all men, You pray in his name, Get salvation through his name, have access to God through him etc. But he is a mediator of the new covenant and the New covenant is not for all men?


Common sense doesn't tell you that in the old covenant, the Jews (proselytize) didn't pray through Christ, sacrifice animals, they salvation was guaranteed by their obedience through the law which they couldn't, had Moses as mediator not christ etc, that it is only in the new covenant that they have Jesus blood as sacrifice, pray through Christ, no longer animal sacrifice, pray in his name, get salvation through him, forgiveness of sins etc.

Common sense doesn't tell you that these provisions became possible because a new covenant was in force and has Jesus Christ as mediator? Common sense that people of the nation couldn't have access to God through the old law covenant and its only possible because of the new covenant which Jesus is a mediator and came into force by his blood?

Hmmm, Jehovah’s Witnesses, common sense is not so common, especially among yourselves. Jozzy4, me and you know quite well that you believe this because your religion teaches so, the day they stop teaching it, you believes will change automatically. It's that simple and common sense.

If you want do math, let's do common sense maths

Jesus = Mediator of New Covenant Heb 9:24
Jesus = Mediator for all Men 1 Ti 2:5
Therefore,
Mediator of New Covenant = Mediator of all Men
New Covenant = All Men Q.E.D.

All Benefits because new covenant is invoke and has Jesus as mediator are: sins are forgiven forever, pray through Jesus, salvation through Jesus, one sacrifice for all, only way to God is through Jesus not obedience to the mosaic law covenant. That is why you are a Christian today! That is why you pray through Jesus and have faith in him. That is why salvation is open to all, not just jews. Because of the New covenant.

NB: I'm preparing a comprehensive article on new covenant vs old. When through, I'll post it and tag you.
budaatum, TATIME, Maximus69, Jozzy4, Jessicha

1. Let me highlight the brown part, Good u showing your true color. Don't cry if people hit you too , you also do same by insulting their intelligence .


You did a silly maths , wrong one ... 1Tim 2:5 encompasses all men, living or dead . all ADAMIC offsprings . this is not new covenant .

Heb 12:24 Jesus mediatorship of a new covenant is established on better promises , one of which you DELIBERATELY omitted in your write up. pROMise for a Kindom and sit on THRONES. - Luke 22:28-30 , 1Pet 2:9,10


If members of New Covenant will sit on thrones as Royal Priesthood, Tell me how those whom they Rule Over are included in the new covenant ?


Simple maths . am waiting

rottennaija:
Are you afraid to say yes? Don't worry, there is no landmines no where. It wouldn't explode in your face. Just say yes or no.

1 Pe 2:9,
. 9 But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,+ a people for special possession,+ that you should declare abroad the excellencies”*+ of the One who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.+

Re 1:5,6
and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood 6 and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—yes, to him be the glory and the might forever. Amen.

Re 5:9,10
And they sing a new song,+ saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God+ out of every tribe and tongue* and people and nation,+ 10 and you made them to be a kingdom+ and priests to our God,+ and they are to rule as kings+ over the earth.”

The above scriptures I quoted were applicable to the audience at a particular time, whether back then or today? Yes?

Not everyone will be King and Priest . commom sense . the new covenant is with a promise of King and Priest . Yes .

rottennaija:
I have restrained myself from using bad languages but sometimes, it is necessary. these guys are really without ability to think for themselves. Really and are so myopic.

No, you have hit the wall . you are now getting to understand you lacked comprehension of what you were peddling around.

achorladey:
Did I see you type THINK! That's the job of the GOVERNING BODY every other member is to PARROT the THINKING of the GOVERNING BODY.

In Jehovah's organization it is NOT necessary to spend a lot of time and ENERGY in RESEARCH, for there are brothers in the organization who are ASSIGNED to do that very THING. Watchtower June 1 1967.



Avoid questioning the COUNSEL provided by GOD'S VISIBLE ORGANIZATION. Some who point out that the ORGANIZATION has had to make some ADJUSTMENTS before, so they argue: " This shows that we have to make up OUR OWN mind on what to BELIEVE" This is INDEPENDENT THINKING. Why is it so DANGEROUS?"
watchtower 1983 Jan 15 p. 22



Who are this FOREMOST brothers you bet most of them are from THE office of the WRITING and SERVICE committee. GB and the HELPERS combination.

We will keep trying to restrain ourselves from bad languages nothing is gained when one resort to that level.

Says a fellow who said those in the new covenant are made a Royal priesthood.

Now explain how with your thinking , Those whom are not Royal priesthood on the new Earth are in the new covenant ?


This is gonna be interesting.

achorladey:
Of recent Janosky was busy dragging Ubenedictus over how the office of the POPE get to see to the EXECUTION of DISSENTERS and INDEPENDENT THINKERS still on this INDEPENDENT THINKING of a THING. Here is Janosky in another tone on this thread when the JWs are shown not to be DIFFERENT.
For more on his conversation with Ubenedictus check below
https://www.nairaland.com/3793815/how-one-witness-jehovahs-witness/68

Baba Twister , I hail you wella.

Pls situate my post in the context of my discus with Ubenedictus rather than come here and now twist it.
That post was in respect of the insertion of comma johanneum into 1John5:7.
Pope Leo X endorsed Erasmus work where in he made that dubious insertion into the Bible.
My point was that would Erasmus ever dare to reject adding that fake insertion, since he already knew the fate of individuals dissenting against the Pope?

If it wasn't the plot of the church to place that fake stuff in the Bible, why was the church against any dissent to the comma Johanneum ,300 years later even though it was already proved to be fake?

Pls your claim dey weak

Janosky:
Baba Twister , I hail you wella.

Pls situate my post in the context of my discus with Ubenedictus rather than come here and now twist it.
That post was in respect of the insertion of comma johanneum into 1John5:7.
Pope Leo X endorsed Erasmus work where in he made that dubious insertion into the Bible.
My point was that would Erasmus ever dare to reject adding that fake insertion, since he already knew the fate of individuals dissenting against the Pope?

If it wasn't the plot of the church to place that fake stuff in the Bible, why was the church against any dissent to the comma Johanneum ,300 years later even though it was already proved to be fake?

Pls your claim dey weak

This guys have been exposed with this thread on this new covevant of a thing. All that's left is turning left and right., so don't mind them .

Jozzy4:
That's your assignment
It say " Seems " , which supported my position.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2016046

From the link you sent, here are some point.

Those who partake of the emblems at the Memorial should carefully consider the warning found at 1 Corinthians 11:27-29. (Read.) What point is the apostle Paul here making? An anointed Christian would partake unworthily if he did not maintain a good relationship with Jehovah. (Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-29)

So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?

Jehovah began choosing anointed ones after Jesus’ death and resurrection, and it seems that all in the first-century Christian congregation were anointed. From the first century until the beginning of the last days, the vast majority of those who claimed to follow Christ were false Christians; Jesus likened them to “weeds.” Even so, Jehovah continued to anoint some faithful ones throughout that time, and they proved to be like the “wheat” Jesus described.

Second they say it seems that all in the first-century were anointed. That throughout that period, Jehovah was also choosing anointed. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

If there is any clear statement, I'll like us all to see it.

Jozzy4:
1. Let me highlight the brown part, Good u showing your true color. Don't cry if people hit you too , you also do same by insulting their intelligence .


You did a silly maths , wrong one ... 1Tim 2:5 encompasses all men, living or dead . all ADAMIC offsprings . this is not new covenant .

Heb 12:24 Jesus mediatorship of a new covenant is established on better promises , one of which you DELIBERATELY omitted in your write up. pROMise for a Kindom and sit on THRONES. - Luke 22:28-30 , 1Pet 2:9,10


If members of New Covenant will sit on thrones as Royal Priesthood, Tell me how those whom they Rule Over are included in the new covenant ?


Simple maths . am waiting

Do the math, I have not seen any math. I'm waiting for you to relate them mathematically

Jozzy4:
Not everyone will be King and Priest . common sense . the new covenant is with a promise of King and Priest . [/b]Yes .

Finally there is a yes. As for the bolded, I know your position on it, one you have made clear repeatedly. But you can still continue to emphasize it, for reference purposes.

So, yes, the quoted scriptures apply to a particular audience at a particular time, whether today or 2000 years ago. You said yes. That's fine. For reference purposes, the scriptures are quoted below again.

1 Pe 2:9,
. 9 But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,+ a people for special possession,+ that you should declare abroad the excellencies”*+ of the One who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.+

Re 1:5,6
and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood 6 [b]and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—yes, to him be the glory and the might forever. Amen.

Re 5:9,10
And they sing a new song,+ saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God+ out of every tribe and tongue* and people and nation,+ 10 and you made them to be a kingdom+ and priests to our God,+ and they are to rule as kings+ over the earth.”



Okay, I'll like to know. With special reference to Re 1:5,6 and Re 5:9,10.
Is being a Kingdom the same as being King?
If not, who are the kingdom and who are the kings?

Janosky:
Baba Twister , I hail you wella.

Pls situate my post in the context of my discus with Ubenedictus rather than come here and now twist it.
That post was in respect of the insertion of comma johanneum into 1John5:7.
Pope Leo X endorsed Erasmus work where in he made that dubious insertion into the Bible.
My point was that would Erasmus ever dare to reject adding that fake insertion, since he already knew the fate of individuals dissenting against the Pope?

If it wasn't the plot of the church to place that fake stuff in the Bible, why was the church against any dissent to the comma Johanneum ,300 years later even though it was already proved to be fake?

Pls your claim dey weak

But at the same time, you mentioned it. Why didn't you simple keep quit about it and go your way? You men Martin Luther, Monarchy British...

Is it not the same thing your and your kinds do against other pastor? So why should you want to be treated any different?

rottennaija:
Finally there is a yes. As for the bolded, I know your position on it, one you have made clear repeatedly. But you can still continue to emphasize it, for reference purposes.

So, yes, the quoted scriptures apply to a particular audience at a particular time, whether today or 2000 years ago. You said yes. That's fine. For reference purposes, the scriptures are quoted below again.

1 Pe 2:9,
. 9 But you are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation,+ a people for special possession,+ that you should declare abroad the excellencies”*+ of the One who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.+

Re 1:5,6
and from Jesus Christ, “the Faithful Witness,” “the firstborn from the dead,” and “the Ruler of the kings of the earth.” To him who loves us and who set us free from our sins by means of his own blood 6 and he made us to be a kingdom, priests to his God and Father—yes, to him be the glory and the might forever. Amen.

Re 5:9,10
And they sing a new song,+ saying: “You are worthy to take the scroll and open its seals, for you were slaughtered and with your blood you bought people for God+ out of every tribe and tongue* and people and nation,+ 10 and you made them to be a kingdom+ and priests to our God,+ and they are to rule as kings+ over the earth.”



Okay, I'll like to know. With special reference to Re 1:5,6 and Re 5:9,10.
Is being a Kingdom the same as being King?
If not, who are the kingdom and who are the kings?

Kingdom can refer to a king ( 2King 11:1 for reference " and destroyeth all the seed of the kingdom; " meaning seed of the King

rottennaija:
Do the math, I have not seen any math. I'm waiting for you to relate them mathematically

It would do u much good, to digest the post and stop show casing ignorance

rottennaija:
From the link you sent, here are some point.

Those who partake of the emblems at the Memorial should carefully consider the warning found at 1 Corinthians 11:27-29. (Read.) What point is the apostle Paul here making? An anointed Christian would partake unworthily if he did not maintain a good relationship with Jehovah. (Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-29)

So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?

Jehovah began choosing anointed ones after Jesus’ death and resurrection, and it seems that all in the first-century Christian congregation were anointed. From the first century until the beginning of the last days, the vast majority of those who claimed to follow Christ were false Christians; Jesus likened them to “weeds.” Even so, Jehovah continued to anoint some faithful ones throughout that time, and they proved to be like the “wheat” Jesus described.

Second they say it seems that all in the first-century were anointed. That throughout that period, Jehovah was also choosing anointed. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

If there is any clear statement, I'll like us all to see it.

The point Is made " Seems " . which was in line with the opinion I also stated Earlier. Based on John 3:8

Jozzy4:
It would do u much good, to digest the post and stop show casing ignorance

I digested your post and now, I want to see the math. Did you not say it's simple math? Isnt it casing ignorance that you cannot show the math?

Jozzy4:
The point Is made " Seems " . which was in line with the opinion I also stated Earlier. Based on John 3:8

So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

Jozzy4:
Kingdom can refer to a king ( 2King 11:1 for reference " and destroyeth all the seed of the kingdom; " meaning seed of the King

So we have kings that refers to kingdom. Who are the seed of the kingdom or royal seed?

rottennaija:
So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

John 3:8 is there for you. If someone say " seems " he has a strong opinion but since this Is a decision by God, admitted his knowledge may be limited in some aspect out of respect for him.

rottennaija:
So we have kings that refers to kingdom. Who are the seed of the kingdom or royal seed?

You can read it again if you are shocked

The king [kingdom ] sons .

Jozzy4:
John 3:8 is there for you. If someone say " seems " he has a strong opinion but since this Is a decision by God, admitted his knowledge may be limited in some aspect out of respect for him.

You have not answered any of the questions. You keep running from pillar to post.

1. So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
2. Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
3. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

rottennaija:

You have not answered any of the questions. You keep running from pillar to post.

1. So anointed can partake of the emblem unworthily?
2. Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
3. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?

Annointed can partake unworthily . Jesus already make mention of other sheep, they may be there or not. So " Seems " was used .

Jozzy4:
You can read it again if you are shocked

The king [kingdom ] sons .

2 Kings 11:1 When Athaliah, the mother of King Ahaziah of Judah, learned that her son was dead, she set out to destroy the rest of the royal family.


So we have 144000 that are kings. I asked who are the kingdom, your said kings can also refer to kingdom, quoting 1 Ki 11:1 where your reference means royal line (children of the kings who succeed hims after death).

Now, I am asking you, who are the children of these 144000 kings or should i l say, seeds of this 144000 kings? Their royal line or kingdom?

rottennaija:
2 Kings 11:1 When Athaliah, the mother of King Ahaziah of Judah, learned that her son was dead, she set out to destroy the rest of the royal family.


So we have 144000 that are kings. I asked who are the kingdom, your said kings can also refer to kingdom, quoting 1 Ki 11:1 where your reference means royal line (children of the kings who succeed hims after death).

Now, I am asking you, who are the children of these 144000 kings? Their royal line or kingdom?

You should be sensible to understand that was quoted to back the point that serving in the position of a King can be called Kingdom.

Jozzy4:
Annointed can partake unworthily . Jesus already make mention of other sheep, they may be there or not. So " Seems " was used .

Good. You have answered one. Answer these.

2. Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
3. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?
4. The paragraph mentioned that the heavenly calling began after Jesus death and resurrection. Other watchtower articles mention 33 CE. So, When did the calling of the other sheep begins?

rottennaija:
Good. You have answered one. Answer these.

2. Did the paragraph mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep?
3. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?
4. The paragraph mentioned that the heavenly calling began after Jesus death and resurrection. Other watchtower articles mention 33 CE. So, When did the calling of the other sheep begins?

Just as you showcased your ignorance the other time, asking sons of anointed . we are discussing " New Covenant " and the promise to be Kings and Priest .

Explain to me how those who are not part of the royal priesthood are members of new covenant for Kings ?

Jozzy4:
You should be sensible to understand that was quoted to back the point that serving in the position of a King can be called Kingdom.

Jozzy4, I am sensible enough to understand the context of your quotations. But you were not sensible enough to understand the follow up questions, which you created avenue for. I understand that you wanted to avoid the contraction of Kings also being kingdoms, but you lack sense when you said kings can also be kingdoms when you referred to 1 Ki 11:1 which obviously referred to the royal line. It's you who created your problems not me. I am just trying to understand every facet of this new lights.

Now, I am asking you, who are the children of these 144000 kings? Their royal line or kingdom?

Jozzy4:
Just as you showcased your ignorance the other time, asking sons of anointed . we are discussing " New Covenant " and the promise to be Kings and Priest .

Explain to me how those who are not part of the royal priesthood are members of new covenant for Kings ?

First and foremost, the context of my question was about seed. Probably the use of children carries a wrong signal in your head.

Secondly, it's you and your kind who brings promise of kings and priest to the new covenant. I had explained to your friends earlier in the thread that the new covenant was made for the forgiveness of sins, where Jesus explicitly said in Luke 22:20 " This wine is the token of God's new covenant to save you—an agreement sealed with the blood I will pour out for you.


We have always said the new covenant was made for the forgiveness of sins. This Jesus confirms while fulfilling the prophecy of Jeremiah 31:33

"But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day," says the Lord. "I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.
Jeremiah 31:34 And they will not need to teach their neighbors, nor will they need to teach their family, saying, 'You should know the Lord.' For everyone, from the least to the greatest, will already know me," says the Lord. "And I will forgive their wickedness and will never again remember their sins."

It was our position that the new covenant was designed for the forgiveness of sins, having God's law written in our heart, now obeying the mosaic laws etc (I'm working on an article on it and will post it soon)

Jozzy4:
Just as you showcased your ignorance the other time, asking sons of anointed . we are discussing " New Covenant " and the promise to be Kings and Priest .

Explain to me how those who are not part of the royal priesthood are members of new covenant for Kings ?

2. Did the paragraph or the whole article mention that Paul's warning was to the other sheep? Infact, is there any watchtower publications that says Paul was warning people not to partake of the emblem?
3. Do you see anywhere in the article or anywhere in watchtower publications where it is said that the other sheep gathered in the first-century?
4. The paragraph mentioned that the heavenly calling began after Jesus death and resurrection. Other watchtower articles mention 33 CE. So, When did the calling of the other sheep begins?

Jozzy4:
That's your assignment
It say " Seems " , which supported my position.

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2016046

15 Jehovah chooses when in history he will select anointed ones. (Rom. 8:28-30) Jehovah began choosing anointed ones after Jesus’ death and resurrection, From the first century until the beginning of the last days, the vast majority of those who claimed to follow Christ were false Christians; Jesus likened them to “weeds.”


Seems all

Why didn't they says" and it seems that some in the first-century Christian congregation were anointed"?

And most importantly, when did the calling of other sheep begin?

Janosky:
Baba Twister , I hail you wella.

Pls situate my post in the context of my discus with Ubenedictus rather than come here and now twist it.
That post was in respect of the insertion of comma johanneum into 1John5:7.
Pope Leo X endorsed Erasmus work where in he made that dubious insertion into the Bible.
My point was that would Erasmus ever dare to reject adding that fake insertion, since he already knew the fate of individuals dissenting against the Pope?

If it wasn't the plot of the church to place that fake stuff in the Bible, why was the church against any dissent to the comma Johanneum ,300 years later even though it was already proved to be fake?

Pls your claim dey weak

Janosky: SINCE HE ALREADY knew the FATE of INDIVIDUALS DISSENTING AGAINST the POPE?

Achorladey: and you are SHOUTING I twisted your post. E get as e be oooo.


Achorladey: Here you are on that same page @ 6:37pm April 11

Yes, Calvin instigated the murder of Michael Servetus.

Servetus.
The Vatican still had it's fair share in the brutal persecution and killing of thousands of people who DISAGREED with CATHOLIC DOCTRINES (or were wrongly accused of dissent) whom the Church labeled as "HERETICS".
Church and secular history contains the GORY EVENTS of the INQUISITION and other forms of CHURCH BRUTALITY .

Still Janosky April 5 @ 11:24pm


What was the fate of individuals who expressed dissent to Catholic Church doctrines or opposed the Vatican official position in the 1400/1500?
What was the fate of Michael Servetus who rejected the Trinity?


What would be the fate of Erasmus if he had declined to insert the Comma Johanneum (a fraud the Catholic Church staunchly supported for over 300 hundred years after the deed was done)?

Achorladey: It still boils down to you pointing out the fate of INDEPENDENT THINKERS and DISSENTERS within the the CATHOLIC CHURCH and when the JWS are SHOWN not to be DIFFERENT you cry BLUE MURDER.

Oga Janosky I know what I quoted and the message am passing across when I cited your post. I am not BABA TWISTER.

Jozzy4:
Says a fellow who said those in the new covenant are made a Royal priesthood.

Now explain how with your thinking , Those whom are not Royal priesthood on the new Earth are in the new covenant ?


This is gonna be interesting.

Jozzy4: Says a fellow who said those in the new covenant are made a Royal priesthood.

Achorladey: Are they not a royal priesthood?

Jozzy4: Now explain how with your thinking ,

Achorladey: Yes


Jozzy4: Those whom are not Royal priesthood on the new Earth are in the new covenant ?

Achorladey: Who are the THOSE not IN the ROYAL PRIESTHOOD?

Jozzy4: This is gonna be interesting.

Achorladey: Yes it has been interesting all this while only that you disrupt the FUN with INSULT, TAGS, NAME CALLING and holiday diversion.

Jozzy4:
This guys have been exposed with this thread on this new covevant of a thing. All that's left is turning left and right., so don't mind them .

The thread is not closed yet and let the interesting thread keep it flow don't divert it with YOUR BEEN EXPOSED.

Concerning being EXPOSED, what is CHRIST MEDIATORSHIP based upon? 1 Timothy 2:15.

A. No COVENANT just mediating.
B. On NEW COVENANT with better promises.
C. OLD COVENANT.