HERESY?

[Aunty Jane]

You are a JW, @Aunty Jane ? (No judgement, I’m just trying to get to know people).

I sure am....:)

 

[Jane_Doe22]

I sure am....:)

Ok.

 

[Enoch111]

Cooper, Greek had no capital letters.

Nonsense. Hundreds of Greek manuscripts of Scripture are in ALL CAPS.

 

[Enoch111]

I sure am....:)

Well at least you admitted it. No wonder all we see is opposition to sound Bible doctrine. The Watchtower Society makes sure its adherents are thoroughly brainwashed. So you should seriously consider going back to square one. Many JWs have abandoned that cult.

Why I Left the Jehovah’s Witnesses
A personal testimony by a person born into the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
A Personal Testimony by Jean Eason
Why I Left the Jehovah's Witnesses | Cults | Lamb and Lion Ministries

 

[Aunty Jane]

Well at least you admitted it. No wonder all we see is opposition to sound Bible doctrine. The Watchtower Society makes sure its adherents are thoroughly brainwashed. So you should seriously consider going back to square one. Many JWs have abandoned that cult.

Why I Left the Jehovah’s Witnesses
A personal testimony by a person born into the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
A Personal Testimony by Jean Eason
Why I Left the Jehovah's Witnesses | Cults | Lamb and Lion Ministries

So this is all you have? I know when people resort to the muck raking that they have run out of arguments...

Do you believe all you read on the internet from one side of a sob story?

Do you have all the details from both sides? Would you like a court case against you held when your side never got told?
Ever been on the receiving end of an "ex's" testimony?

If you had been around in Jesus' day would you have sided with the Pharisees and clamored for Jesus' death, believing all the lies they told about him? (Matthew 5:11-12) Most of the Jews did, and to this day they still believe that Jesus was a phony.

I think you are a wee bit desperate Enoch.....use your Bible to counter what I say and then perhaps you might have some credibility...but as of now, I believe you should be ashamed of yourself, resorting to digging in the pig's trough for your dirt.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Nonsense. Hundreds of Greek manuscripts of Scripture are in ALL CAPS.
View attachment 18907

You missed the point...there is no upper and lower case.....seriously, do you never get anything?

 

[Cooper]

Cooper, Greek had no capital letters. So putting a capital on “God” or “Savior” in the Greek scriptures doesn’t mean a thing. It’s up to the translators to do that, and to alter phraseology to suit the language into which it is translated. Bias can turn a translation into something other than what the original language meant, which is why it is good to do word studies. Translation is a very important assignment in which the translators own biases must not alter the meaning of a word or text. Interpretation is another thing that gets in the way of the truth, which is why we must compare all of scripture rather than to rely on a quoted verse out of context.

Yahweh, who sent Jesus, is also a savior. Just as the one who sends the rescuer is also a rescuer.
Jesus identified his Father as “the only true God” and said that he had been “sent” by him. (John 17:3)

Not once in all of scripture is Jesus called “Yahweh”.
Why would Jesus call his “Father” by that designation and call himself his “Son” if that was not the relationship between them? Yahweh is said to have “sons” (plural) whereas Jesus is said to have “brothers”. Jesus cannot be the father of his own brothers.

Jesus is said to be God’s “servant”.....(Acts 3:13) so how can God be his own servant?

If they were equals then sonship does not exist. The pre-human Jesus was “the Son of God” before his life was transferred from heaven to the womb of Mary. The Bible indicates a long history between Father and Son well before man’s creation. These are two entirely separate entities, only one of which the Bible described as “immortal”. Only after his successful mission on earth did his Father reward his Son with a new name and immortality. (Romans 6:9)

When the “son of man” was given his kingship, Daniel 7:13-14 says...
“I kept looking in the night visions, And behold, with the clouds of heaven One like a son of man was coming, And He came up to the Ancient of Days And was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, Honor, and a kingdom, So that all the peoples, nations, and populations of all languages Might serve Him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion Which will not pass away; And His kingdom is one Which will not be destroyed. (NASB)
Jesus was crowned as King of God’s Kingdom and was “GIVEN” dominion over nations and peoples of all languages....if he was God, who can give God these things? This is a scene in heaven....Jesus is no longer a human but raised as a spirit, because humans cannot exist in the spirit realm. The Ancient of Days” is his God and Father, granting him authority over things that he did not already have.

God’s immortality made it impossible for him to come to earth and die at the hands of man. It would mean that mere humans can kill God. Jesus was not an immortal being in heaven which allowed him to come and offer his life for us. After his death, Jesus relied on his Father to resurrect him, as foretold after 3 days. (Acts 2:32)

The whole of scripture must guide what we believe or we will fall into the trap that Satan has set for those who blindly accept what is fed to them.

In modern Hebrew the Jews put capital letters on everything they worshipped, regardless of whether it was Baal or Yahweh, see the golden calf that was Lord with a capital L. You, are in error as always. Furthermore, Psalm 82, as you well know, differentiates between human gods and the almighty God by the use of the upper and lower case g and G.

Spin doctors write reams in order to deceive, so you can stop it with your JW epistles, thank you.

Four sentences is all it takes.
.

 

[Aunty Jane]

well, Jesus did not speak in English, so you might be changing your mind there, someday…i would at least maybe keep an open mind there, maybe not speak as if i was quite so sure?

But we have Greek to English translation to guide us....
“Do not mē let your hymeis heart kardia be troubled tarassō. · ho You trust pisteuō in eis · ho God theos; trust pisteuō also kai in eis me egō. 2 In en · ho my egō Father’ s patēr house oikia · ho there are eimi many polys dwelling monē places ; if ei · de that were not mē the case, would an I have told legō you hymeis that hoti I am going poreuō there to prepare hetoimazō a place topos for you hymeis? 3 And kai if ean I go poreuō and kai prepare hetoimazō a place topos for you hymeis, I will come erchomai again palin and kai take paralambanō you hymeis to be with pros me emautou, so hina that where hopou I egō am eimi, there you hymeis may be eimi also kai."

Is there something there that makes you question what Jesus meant? Does he not clearly state that he will "come again" so that he can gather his elect and they can be where he is?

am i?

Yes but not in the way you think....
You said..."which would somehow not be a kingdom that comes by observation at all?"
The 'observation' is not something seen with the literal eyes but something that is discerned by "eyes of faith"....that is seeing the signs that Jesus gave and "knowing" what we are looking at.

Jesus' "presence" (parousia) precedes his "coming". This is the time when Jesus "rules in the midst of his enemies" foretold in Psalm 110:1-2. Jesus was to wait at God's right hand "until his enemies were placed as a stool for his feet". Then he was to begin ruling whilst those enemies were still active, here on the earth.

”was?”

Yes, past tense. Christ is already here, directing his disciples in the greatest preaching campaign the world has ever seen. (Matthew 28:19-20) Giving instruction to his "faithful slave" to dispense to his fellow slaves "at the proper time", which means that we are given what we need to know, when we need to know it. (Matthew 24:45)
He has been 'present' since the outbreak of the Great War in 1914, which was the first part of the sign....unprecedented warfare...never before in history had all the nations been drawn into a global war....it was followed by food shortages and pestilences and great earthquakes, like a fingerprint in this "time of the end". All happening in these last days on an unprecedented scale, identifying it clearly to Christ's genuine disciples.

prolly not, ok? i mean imo at least prepare for the possibility

Its not a possibility...its a foregone conclusion. Its "when", not "if". Those who are judged as 'goats' on that day when Jesus comes as judge with his angelic executioners, the time for 'possibility' will have disappeared. The unprepared will perish and the unbelievers will not stand. (2 Peter 3:11-14)

well, there is a pretty good argument for Yah being at rest now i think, and my guess is our patience has nothing to do with it, but you might be right. But what if you are not? You got a “Yah is testing our patience” ?

Jesus told us to "keep on the watch" because we "do not know on what day our Lord is coming".
God is resting only from his creative works. He has been very busy sorting things out to the benefit of all the faithful as he deals with the rebellion that started in Eden.

Mankind continues to test Jehovah's patience, and he continues to test ours because his fight is not with us humans per se, but with his adversary who has dwelt in the same timeless realm as God does, up until these last days. He is now confined to this earth where he is wreaking havoc, knowing his time is running out. (Revelation 12:7-12)

The prophet Habakkuk prophesied...
"For the vision is yet for its appointed time,
And it is rushing toward its end, and it will not lie.
Even if it should delay, keep in expectation of it!
For it will without fail come true.
It will not be late!" (Habakkuk 2-3)
So things might seem 'delayed' from our perspective, but it will be right on time from God's view of things.

Who is this “we” btw?

Those who will live under the rulership that Jesus and his "bride" will bring to mankind. (Revelation 21:2-4)

but you are not addressing my post, aj; we are not even having a conversation?

TBH, I find your way of phrasing things a little confusing, so If you need a conversation, please use the plain English language so that I don't misunderstand what you are saying.....

 

[Jane_Doe22]

How should we treat those whom treat us as enemies? Who do or preach what we see as evil?

I'm reminded of Christ in the garden of Gethsemane, truly betrayed by one he called friend, to be brutally murdered as a criminal, despite His innocence. Peter sprung to Christ's defense, attacking those that attacked the Lord-- such a natural reaction and one which seems so easy to admire. But what did Christ do? Not only called Peter to stand down, but showed mercy on His attacker and healed him.

 

[Aunty Jane]

In modern Hebrew the Jews put capital letters on everything they worshipped, regardless of whether it was Baal or Yahweh, see the golden calf that was Lord with a capital L. You, are in error as always. Furthermore, Psalm 82, as you well know, differentiates between human gods and the almighty God by the use of the upper and lower case g and G.

Good grief mate, I said Greek not Hebrew. Perhaps you need to read a little more carefully before you put your foot in your mouth.

Spin doctors write reams in order to deceive, so you can stop it with your JW epistles, thank you.

So who are your spin doctors? I don't think you would know "spin" if it jumped up and bit you?..what do you really know that someone else didn't tell you? Who are your teachers? Lets examine them and give them the same scrutiny....

Four sentences is all it takes.

If four sentences was all it took, then the Bible would not contain much, would it?

 

[Aunty Jane]

How should we treat those whom treat us as enemies? Who do or preach what we see as evil?

Like Jesus did. He defended what he taught and even showed the Pharisees up for the wicked hypocrites that they were, (Matthew 23) but when it came to confrontation that could lead to physical violence, he preferred to make himself scarce.

I'm reminded of Christ in the garden of Gethsemane, truly betrayed by one he called friend, to be brutally murdered as a criminal, despite His innocence. Peter sprung to Christ's defense, attacking those that attacked the Lord-- such a natural reaction and one which seems so easy to admire. But what did Christ do? Not only called Peter to stand down, but showed mercy on His attacker and healed him.

I think you are concentrating on the wrong action here.....Christ rebuked Peter because the message he was conveying was lost in Peter's actions. He told the disciples that two swords was "enough". But we also know that a large armed mob was sent to arrest Jesus led by Judas. Two swords would have been nigh on to useless against these many opposers.
Jesus told Peter....
“Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)
The following morning, Jesus told Pontius Pilate: “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 delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.” (John 18:36) This ties in with Israel's defense of their God-given kingdom....but once the Jews had left their homeland, there was no longer any land to defend. Hence, Jesus words to Pilate. Because his Kingdom was in heaven, no sword would be needed to protect it.

What was the attitude of the early Christians toward what Jesus taught about not resorting to violence?
The book The Early Christian Attitude to War says: “Inasmuch as they [Jesus’ teachings] ruled out as illicit all use of violence and injury against others, clearly implied [was] the illegitimacy of participation in war . . . The early Christians took Jesus at his word, and understood his inculcations of gentleness and non-resistance in their literal sense. They closely identified their religion with peace; they strongly condemned war for the bloodshed which it involved.”

How different the course of history would have been had all those who claimed to be Christians actually followed this teaching!
No true Christian could have taken up arms to fight in any war, or to participate in bloodshed of any sort. It would hinder their prayers. (Isaiah 1:15)
That does not rule out self defense, but even then it does not encourage violence against anyone. We would not carry a weapon because it shows intent to use it. And if we did and it killed someone we would stand before God as a manslayer.

 

[Jane_Doe22]

Like Jesus did. He defended what he taught and even showed the Pharisees up for the wicked hypocrites that they were, (Matthew 23) but when it came to confrontation that could lead to physical violence, he preferred to make himself scarce.


I think you are concentrating on the wrong action here.....Christ rebuked Peter because the message he was conveying was lost in Peter's actions. He told the disciple that two swords was "enough". But we also know that a large armed mob was sent to arrest Jesus led by Judas. Two swords would have been nigh on to useless against these many opposers.
Jesus told Peter....
“Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword.” (Matthew 26:52)
The following morning, Jesus told Pontius Pilate: “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 delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source.” (John 18:36) This ties in with Israel's defense of their God-given kingdom....but once the Jews had left their homeland, there was no longer any land to defend. Hence, Jesus words to Pilate. Because his Kingdom was in heaven, no sword would be needed to protect it.

What was the attitude of the early Christians toward what Jesus taught about not resorting to violence?
The book The Early Christian Attitude to War says: “Inasmuch as they [Jesus’ teachings] ruled out as illicit all use of violence and injury against others, clearly implied [was] the illegitimacy of participation in war . . . The early Christians took Jesus at his word, and understood his inculcations of gentleness and non-resistance in their literal sense. They closely identified their religion with peace; they strongly condemned war for the bloodshed which it involved.”

How different the course of history would have been had all those who claimed to be Christians actually followed this teaching!
No true Christian could have taken up arms to fight in any war, or to participate in bloodshed of any sort. It would hinder their prayers. (Isaiah 1:15)
That does not rule out self defense, but even then it does not encourage violence against anyone. We would not carry a weapon because it shows intent to use it. And if we did and it killed someone we would stand before God as a manslayer.

What about war with your words?
FAR too often we are like Peter, wanting to attack others (including with words), resulting only ears being cut off.
Christ instead, took the peaceful route, healing his attackers And then the man was able to hear and his heart change.

 

[Cooper]

Good grief mate, I said Greek not Hebrew. Perhaps you need to read a little more carefully before you put your foot in your mouth.


So who are your spin doctors? I don't think you would know "spin" if it jumped up and bit you?..what do you really know that someone else didn't tell you? Who are your teachers? Lets examine them and give them the same scrutiny....


If four sentences was all it took, then the Bible would not contain much, would it?

Whether in Greek, Hebrew or any other language, JESUS IS LORD.
.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Whether in Greek, Hebrew or any other language, JESUS IS LORD.
.

Yes he is...but he is not God, Yahweh. I feel like I am in a revolving door.....

The title "Lord" means the equivalent of "Sir" or "Master" in English. It applies to anyone who has authority over others.
Sarah called Abraham "Lord"...but he wasn't God. (1 Peter 3:6)

You have a House of Lords in England, but none of them are God either....

 

[bbyrd009]

Is there something there that makes you question what Jesus meant?

not at all; the word "return" is never invoked at all, and you are reading an english translation by some other well-meaning cult-of-sol scribe, surely. Jesus "comes," "appears," "is revealed," but never "returns."

Does he not clearly state that he will "come again" so that he can gather his elect and they can be where he is?

ah well, there is an "if" in there too, so imo no, He does not "clearly state" what we would so like to read, me incl fwiw

 

[bbyrd009]

Whether in Greek, Hebrew or any other language, JESUS IS LORD.
.

a "lord" is an englyshe loafwearden, and imo a terrible translation
is Yah “lording it” over anyone here?

 

[Cooper]

Yes he is...but he is not God, Yahweh. I feel like I am in a revolving door.....

The title "Lord" means the equivalent of "Sir" or "Master" in English. It applies to anyone who has authority over others.
Sarah called Abraham "Lord"...but he wasn't God. (1 Peter 3:6)

You have a House of Lords in England, but none of them are God either....

Do your worst and deny the deity of Jesus.

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
(Heb 13:8 KJV)

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
(Mic 5:2 KJV)
.

 

[Aunty Jane]

Do your worst.

......Oh c'mon Cooper.....is this the best you can do?
You remind me of the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail....

You just keep coming back for more....you've got no arm and legs mate....

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
(Heb 13:8 KJV)

Mounce Interlinear...."Jesus Iēsous Christ Christos is the ho same autos yesterday echthes and kai today sēmeron and kai for eis all ho time aiōn!"

ISV..."Jesus, the Messiah, is the same yesterday and today—and forever!"

Darby..."Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to-day, and to the ages [to come]."

This is saying that Jesus is the same personality he has always been, and always will be, as long as he exists which will be forever.

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
(Mic 5:2 KJV)

NET..."As for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, seemingly insignificant among the clans of Judah—
from you a king will emerge who will rule over Israel on my behalf,
one whose origins are in the distant past."

MEV...."But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, although you are small among the tribes of Judah,
from you will come forth for Me one who will be ruler over Israel.
His origins are from of old, from ancient days."

Jewish Tanakh..."And you, Bethlehem Ephrathah-you should have been the lowest of the clans of Judah-from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from days of yore."

All this says is that Jesus has been around a long time. The Bible says that he has been "with God" since "the beginning" which is correct because he is the "Beginning of God's creation". (Revelation 3:14)

You should perhaps broaden your knowledge base and use some modern English translations.....let your head go...you might actually learn something.

 

[Cooper]

......Oh c'mon Cooper.....is this the best you can do?
You remind me of the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail....


You just keep coming back for more....you've got no arm and legs mate....

Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
(Heb 13:8 KJV)

Mounce Interlinear...."Jesus Iēsous Christ Christos is the ho same autos yesterday echthes and kai today sēmeron and kai for eis all ho time aiōn!"

ISV..."Jesus, the Messiah, is the same yesterday and today—and forever!"

Darby..."Jesus Christ [is] the same yesterday, and to-day, and to the ages [to come]."

This is saying that Jesus is the same personality he has always been, and always will be, as long as he exists which will be forever.

But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.
(Mic 5:2 KJV)

NET..."As for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, seemingly insignificant among the clans of Judah—
from you a king will emerge who will rule over Israel on my behalf,
one whose origins are in the distant past."

MEV...."But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, although you are small among the tribes of Judah,
from you will come forth for Me one who will be ruler over Israel.
His origins are from of old, from ancient days."

Jewish Tanakh..."And you, Bethlehem Ephrathah-you should have been the lowest of the clans of Judah-from you [he] shall emerge for Me, to be a ruler over Israel; and his origin is from of old, from days of yore."

All this says is that Jesus has been around a long time. The Bible says that he has been "with God" since "the beginning" which is correct because he is the "Beginning of God's creation". (Revelation 3:14)

You should perhaps broaden your knowledge base and use some modern English translations.....let your head go...you might actually learn something.

WHY then do you deny Jesus is Lord?
.

 

[Aunty Jane]

WHY then do you deny Jesus is Lord?
.

Cooper, I have never denied that Jesus is Lord.....but being my “Lord” does not make him my “God”.

Can you understand that Jesus never once said that he was God. Don’t you think that such an important thing would be clearly stated by God and his Son? There is not one.

I love my Lord Jesus, but with him, I love “Our Father”....the Creator and God that we hold in common.

It does not discredit Jesus to see him as the Bible portrays him....he is “the Son of God” who is dearly loved by his Father. I can love them both, but I worship only one of them.