Shiwiii

Taken from the article: "A main concern is, not what the practice meant hundreds of years ago, but how it is viewed today in your area. " Really?!? Then why are birthdays bad again? oh yeah, the beheading thing right? Both instances in the Bible given in the articles speak of someone being beheaded, so they MUST be bad. Well then Mothers should NOT be giving their children naps!!!!!!! The practice of taking naps in the afternoon is tied with beheading as well! see below How utterly ridiculous it is to deny a child the fun surrounding their birthday. Its ONE day of the year. Don't give me that BS "we can celebrate a child any day of the year, not just one day" That is a lame excuse to force conformity. Is that why "turkey day" is a day around thanksgiving? OR "present day" is near Christmas? or a costume party in early November is ok? 2 Samuel 4:5-7 "5 And the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, went, and came about the heat of the day to the house of Ishbosheth, who lay on a bed at noon. 6 And they came thither into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat; and they smote him under the fifth rib: and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped. 7 For when they came into the house, he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, and they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head, and gat them away through the plain all night."

I tried exactly what you propose, only to have the subject changed. On top of that, there cannot be an intellectual conversation when one chooses to dismiss a point without hearing it out.

I'd like to continue to have this discussion, but your constant evading and intent to take this down rabbit holes, just doesn't convince me that you are capable of intellectual honesty. Those who follow down this thread to this point will see exactly what I am talking about. If you choose to continue,and truly want to have this discussion, then please by all means make the attempt to try.

You cannot develop a conversation without first laying a foundation of what the topic is. You can try and throw out all of your ideas and thoughts to the other party, but most will just go over their head, So for you the word "trinity" needs to be there for you to accept the view is possible? Got it. Is Governing body in there?

but you first have to demonstrate your ability to have an intellectually honest conversation. Did you forget this part?

John's recordings were that of what the Jews believed. It is not John who is proclaiming the statement, but rather recording it. I'm afraid that your determination to "prove" the word trinity isn't in the Bible just will not work. Everyone knows the word "trinity" does not exist within the manuscripts of the Bible. If that is your "win", then I guess you win.

NOWHERE in the Bible is ANY angel equal to GOD! We can discuss each and every instance where you think so, but you first have to demonstrate your ability to have an intellectually honest conversation.

We are not talking about John's beliefs here, nor mine nor yours. The statement is what the JEWS thought. John only recorded it. I'm beginning to think you don't even care to discuss, but only to dodge and avoid the Biblical facts presented to you.

please elaborate, I'm not seeing where angels being cast into hell and reserved for judgement (by Jesus) has anything to do with the statement I made.

So do you believe Jesus equal with the Father? That was the understanding by the Jews of Jesus claim and why John wrote what he did.

Do you see somewhere where I said the word "trinity" is in the Bible? No, it is a lame excuse to avoid what is actually said. Just answer the question/statement I made. I'll post it again for you: But what DID John write? He wrote that the Jews understood that Jesus claim was that God was His father, and in the minds of the Jews it made Jesus claim a claim of divinity.

Give it up with the jw.borg thing man, if you don't know or can't explain it yourself, then don't even bother. Again, does a King announce himself? No Who is the King? Jesus Would Jesus announce Himself? No, no need to as God's trumpet and the voice of an archangel will do it for Him.

But what DID John write? He wrote that the Jews understood that Jesus claim was that God was His father, and in the minds of the Jews it made Jesus claim a claim of divinity. no way around that one Bruceq.

So you also believe that Jesus is a trumpet? I could see that, i mean from your way of thinking. Does a King announce himself?

And isn't this the whole reason WHY the Jews were going to stone Jesus?(John 10:31-39) The claims Jesus made about Himself, through the eyes of the Jews, made Himself equal to the God of the Jews.

Kinda like "coming with the voice of an archangel" and the WT looks for an archangel?

was your question not addressed to Cos? I believe it was when you quoted. IF you'd like to ask me that question by all means do, but we must have a dialog and not a monologue. You respond and in turn I respond to a question asked and not ignoring a question to ask one of your own.

my statement still stands. You just refuse to answer in your own words and opinion. classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing.

classic answer to any question by one who cannot develop a response on their own; point to someone/something else so that no responsibility needs to be taken by the one pointing. Did God approve of war? Throughout the OT there is plenty of war, wars instructed by God Himself. Why would Jesus command the disciples to gain a sword? To look cool? Defense? Dying for the lack of picking up arms does not make one a martyr.

Why did Jesus command the disciples to get a sword In Luke 22? Was this the command for abstinence of war or fighting? Is there not a need for protection, even as a nation? I knew this would be the standard reply about the trinity and how nations fought against each other who supposedly believed the same thing, but in reality our flesh makes war with our spirit daily and this is the manifestation of that in mankind. This notion of refraining from protecting your fellow nationalists is cowardice. If one finds themselves in a country in which they do not agree with the direction of that nation is headed, he should leave for a nation that suits them or create his own. To take the benefits of a nation but refuse to align with them in times of need(as determined by said nation) is parasitic.

That does not diminish the fact that the policy put in place by the wt failed 1004 others in protecting them as children and in actuality protected the perpetrator. Odd or not, I hardly think a child that was abused is such a fashion would be "normal" after the abuse. In the ARC it was admitted that the perpetrator WAS KNOWN and was still allowed to continue. I can dig up the recording with the admittance if you like. Did you watch the whole thing? Both trials? For the duration of the case? I did. Its very easy to dismiss testimony when it does not suit you and then to label them as "apostate" or having some hidden agenda. So you only take the testimony of current jw's as valid? Not bias are we? See, this is why decisions are left to the Judge in the court case, Justice Peter McClellan specifically. They are trained and vowed to uphold neutrality for the sake of the public and base their decision upon facts and not personal bias. But this what we are talking about isn't it? Besides, "others are bad too", doesn't make it ok.

Ok bruce, sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la,la,la,la I can't hear you" doesn't make facts go away.

Lol, I think it has more to do with your lack of ability to reason than anything else. Once you figured out that your statement was false, and was shown false; not even by me mind you, you tuck tail and run instead of accepting your mistake.

Doesn't this tell the story? Don't print negative stuff, we don't want people to see that this is like any other group who has problems. Easy way to dismiss a problem is to say they D/A'd or we kicked them out by their actions.........that IS IF you have a second witness. Right on point #3, why point out the failings of the elders who were following the direction from above, both written and oral!

So what you are saying is that you also do not acknowledge Scientology as a religion as the Russians do. Some do some don't, ok. Then you are correct. If Scientology is not considered a religion, then it just doesn't count. Gotcha. It's all "apostate lies". I agree with you, then it would be. I have no interest in asking for a corporate answer. try explaining that to the 1006 victims and their families in Au. You probably will not find a direct quote that they said they would allow a known pedo to continue, nah.....I doubt it. But when a known pedo was found out by confession of a child (which SHOULD stand on its own as testimony) and because there was no other witness and the two witness "rule" is in affect, then you can clearly see the "truth" about the handling. I encourage you to read or watch the transcript from the initial inquiry. I do not know, honestly. I think they try and institute something towards correcting the problem. Which is to be paid by each org that was/is involved in the inquiry.