Jump to content
The World News Media

Chioke Lin

Member
  • Posts

    146
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

Recent Profile Visitors

469 profile views

Chioke Lin's Achievements

  1. So, what you are saying, Tom can disrespect certain people he doesn't like, but those people can't disrespect him because he is in charge here, got it. Thanks for that revelation.
  2. Doesn't a century end on 99. How are you configuring when he died after 1284? Shouldn't the birth be more relevant? I don't understand how the death of a person would matter before he configured the name of God and used it by the way he formed it. Doesn't that imply the 12th century? I guess the point to be made here is, Raymundo Martini was before the 16th century. Do you wish to debate that?
  3. Thanks for confirming the Watchtower article. Perhaps the monk I was thinking of in the 11th century is actually "Raymundo Martini" of the 12th century, far before the 16th century.
  4. This is why I leave the deep thoughts to the professionals. I get you, there are many that want to debate the true name of God. God is God. Just showing respect to that fact and call him by his deserved sovereign name, which ever you choose without disrespecting his sovereignty, that's all he asks of us. For us to believe in Christs words, and to know God's truth, will come to pass. Do we need to show God our appreciation and praise? We definitely do. Can it be done as ONE, no it can't. Jesus formed Christianity to mean unity. The same unity God spoke of for his chosen people. There definitely needs to be a "oneness" within that unity. Eventually, it was transformed that way for easy understanding. Don't get me wrong, The YHWH or THVH is appropriate.
  5. *** w70 6/1 p. 343 A New Bible Translation—Does It Honor God? *** However, regarding the name “Jehovah,” The Argus of Cape Town, South Africa, said on March 9, 1970: “The man who has been most intimately concerned with the revision [New English Bible], Prof. Sir Godfrey Driver, . . . said: ‘There never was such a word [as Jehovah] until the French scribes invented it in 1520 or whenever it was. It is a monstrosity.’” But French scribes did not invent the name “Jehovah.” It was in use centuries before, Raymond Martin’s Pugio Fidei using it in the form “Jehova” in the year 1270. Yet, because of such negative attitudes toward this name, the introduction to The New English Bible, on page xvi, states: “The present translators have retained this incorrect but customary form [Jehovah] in the text of passages where the name is explained with a note on its pronunciation (e.g. Exodus 3.15) and in four place-names of which it forms a constituent element; elsewhere they have followed ancient translators in substituting ‘LORD’ or ‘GOD’, printed as here in capital letters, for the Hebrew name.” Before that, A monk used the (i) in the beginning to form the name of God. I believe it was around the 11 century when the crusaders roamed.
  6. I don't disagree with your logic. Just, know that Yahweh is also a made up English word. Yud-hey-vav-hey. How did the name become Yahweh? It can also be composed as Yod-hey-vav-hey. How did the "tetragrammaton" develop the W if it wasn't for the English form of the alphabet? Can you answer that? To me, it was formed as they refined the sound, thus transforming certain letters. This is why, the "Waw" came just a tad latter, after they eliminated the "a" from the "Vav" to become "Vv" or VV=W.
  7. Thank you for proving your dishonesty in wanting to alienate only those you wish to terminate.
  8. I beg to differ. You drew me in to your argument, accept your fault. However, what the commentator Tom is implying, anyone other than witness can disagree with you without getting kicked out. That makes me wonder, you have status just like George Benson here. Should be we be critical of that friendship? Should we follow the example of men, or God? But, I agree, it's time for you to be argumentative with someone else that has that same status as you, and leave us low ranting posters alone.
  9. Instead of insulting people here you don't like, why not apply those text to yourselves. Like that commentator Tom said, don't make it about others, make it about you, and stop playing these senseless games to have someone you don't like removed. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves, especially when treating people you don't know with disrespect. NOW, THE TOPIC IS ABOUT GEORGE BENSON.
  10. Then it's true. You only keep people that you like. I get it now. Even though you can be so wrong with labels, you're not worth my time to be defending something that is not. Just answer this question, why do others that are new get that same respect from you older posters? That is the reason I liked the comment, the commentator "witness" expressed as hypocritical. For the last time, if you wish me to stop posting, just say so. You people don't need to have me removed, I'll leave on my own.
  11. The topic by the commentator Librarian is, George Benson in Concert - Cardiff, UK Let's return to that topic and not make it about a commentator's identity, or what people misguide themselves to believe about that identity, and mistreat a commentator because of that misguided identity. Once again, I find myself having to defend what is not. If anyone wishes to muzzle my freedom to express my opinion, then simply say so. I don't need anyone to be playing games with me, so I will be removed from this forum. I will leave voluntarily. Right, now, I'm actively seeking for a better forum where I'm not judged because of being labeled by someone. It appears, the term "open forum" is restricted to only those that people like here, regardless if they are from the Org or opposed to the Org. It's sad to say, that's a cult mentality. I continue my search, Everyone, have a peaceful day.
  12. Then you should understand your own abusive behavior and apply your response, by deceiving people that you are Christian. 3 Why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but fail to notice the beam in your own eye? Once again, being labeled, here by people that don't know me, has no influence on me, but a great deal of influence by Satan to cause this kind of Christian division. Your opinions are no better than mind. Likewise, the topic has now become about me, because of the whims of another instead of the topic. I'm forced to defend myself when you don't question the validity of others. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves.
  13. You mean a bit abusive like you, and others here that can't reframe from being part of this world with your tone? What are you teaching exactly by doing that? I will not continue this discussion since, I do not wish to be influenced by bad behavior. If you cannot conduct yourself as a Christian, then there is no point to your words of expressed opinion as a Christian. Didn't you have an outcry of coming to this forum in order to freely express your opinions without intrusion or repercussions? Why can't I have the same without you trying to prevent me from the same? I think, only a few here can post, and you find people disagreeable to you removed. How is that fair?
  14. I like this comment. I would just say, that, not all of us are drawn to the same type of goals here. It would be an individual problem that you are being critical with. If it was, then we would have to blame society for an individual's action. I haven't seen, where anyone is forced to be a bad example by their own reckoning. That would be a choice.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.