Jump to content
The World News Media

Having “Come to Know God”—What Now? “You have come to know God.”—GAL. 4:9. – ?????????


Bible Speaks

Recommended Posts

  • Member

Having “Come to Know God”—What Now?

“You have come to know God.”—GAL. 4:9.

?????????

We can compare our spiritual growth to the physical growth of a tree. A tree may grow to an amazing size, especially when its root system is deep or extensive. For example, some of the majestic cedars of Lebanon can reach the height of a 12-story building and have strong, penetrating roots and a trunk circumference of up to 40 feet (12 m). (Song of Sol. 5:15) After the initial growth spurt of such a tree stops, the tree still grows but not as noticeably. Year after year, the trunk widens and the roots go deeper and spread farther, producing a more stable tree. 

?????????

The same can be said of a Christian’s spiritual growth. During our initial period of Bible study, we may quickly grow spiritually and then get baptized. Those in the congregation happily notice our progress. We may even qualify as a pioneer or receive other privileges. In the following years, our continued spiritual growth may not be as noticeable. 

?????????

Nevertheless, we still need to grow in faith and knowledge “to a full-grown man, to the measure of stature that belongs to the fullness of the Christ.” Thus, we progress, as it were, from a tiny sprout to a mature Christian, a sturdy and well-developed tree.  But our growth should not stop there. Our knowledge needs to broaden and our faith needs to deepen. Thus we become ever more anchored in the soil of God’s Word. Whether you are newly baptized or you have been serving God for many years, regularly checking the depth of your faith and devotion to Jehovah God is essential. Failure to check on this regularly and diligently can lead to spiritual ruin. The Bible warns us: “Let him that thinks he is standing beware that he does not fall.”—1 Cor. 10:12. 

?????????

Lesson for today. (1 Cor 10:12) 

https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2013204?q=roots+deep&p=par#h=31

IMG_1971.PNG

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Views 622
  • Replies 0
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Having “Come to Know God”—What Now? “You have come to know God.”—GAL. 4:9. ????????? We can compare our spiritual growth to the physical growth of a tree. A tree may grow to an ama

Posted Images





  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Popular Contributors

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • … and donchew forget now … the GB now allows Sisters to come to meetings and go out in field service in slacks or Mumus.  Or slacks AND Mumus, if poundage appropriate. Did I ever mention I once dated a Sister that made Mumus out of parachutes? She was an Opera singer, and had a UN diplomatic passport. She was on “speed”, couldn’t blink, and typed 600 words a minute with 100% errors. Occasionally she would get lipstick in her eyebrows.  
    • In my perspective, when the Smithsonian Magazine covers a topic, I am inclined to trust their expertise. As for the shadows here, I see no benefit in entertaining irrational ideas from others. Let them hold onto their own beliefs. We shouldn't further enable their self-deception and misleading of the public.  
    • Hey Self! 🤣I came across this interesting conspiracy theory. There are scholars who firmly believe in the authenticity of those artifacts. I value having conversations with myself. The suggestion of a mentally ill person has led to the most obscure manifestation of a group of sorrowful individuals. 😁
    • I have considered all of their arguments. Some even apply VAT 4956 to their scenarios, which is acceptable. Anyone can use secular evidence if they genuinely seek understanding. Nonetheless, whether drawing from scripture or secular history, 607 is a plausible timeframe to believe in. People often misuse words like "destruction", "devastation", and "desolation" in an inconsistent manner, similar to words like "besiege", "destroy", and "sack". When these terms are misapplied to man-made events, they lose their true meaning. This is why with past historians, the have labeled it as follows: First Capture of Jerusalem 606 BC Second Capture of Jerusalem 598 BC Third Capture of Jerusalem 587 BC Without taking into account anything else.  Regarding the second account, if we solely rely on secular chronology, the ancient scribes made military adaptations to align with the events recorded in the Babylonian Chronicles. However, the question arises: Can we consider this adaptation as accurate?  Scribes sought to include military components in their stories rather than focusing solely on biblical aspects. Similarly, astronomers, who were also scholars, made their observations at the king's request to divine omens, rather than to understand the plight of the Jewish people. Regarding the third capture, we can only speculate because there are no definitive tablets like the Babylonian chronicles that state 598. It is possible that before the great tribulation, Satan will have influenced someone to forge more Babylonian chronicles in order to discredit the truth and present false evidence from the British Museum, claiming that the secular view was right all along. This could include documents supposedly translated after being found in 1935, while others were found in the 1800s. The Jewish antiquities authorities have acknowledged the discovery of forged items, while the British Museum has not made similar acknowledgments. It is evident that the British Museum has been compelled to confess to having looted or stolen artifacts which they are unwilling to return. Consequently, I find it difficult to place my trust in the hands of those who engage in such activities. One of the most notable instances of deception concerning Jewish antiquities was the widely known case of the ossuary belonging to James, the brother of Jesus. I was astonished by the judge's inexplicable justification for acquittal, as it was evident that his primary concern was preserving the reputation of the Jewish nation, rather than unearthing the truth behind the fraudulent artifact. The judge before even acknowledged it. "In his decision, the judge was careful to say his acquittal of Golan did not mean the artifacts were necessarily genuine, only that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan had faked them." The burden of proof is essential. This individual not only forged the "Jehoash Tablet," but also cannot be retried for his deceit. Why are they so insistent on its authenticity? To support their narrative about the first temple of Jerusalem. Anything to appease the public, and deceive God. But then again, after the Exodus, when did they truly please God? So, when it comes to secular history, it's like a game of cat and mouse.  
  • Members

    • BGR

      BGR 0

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • misette

      misette 213

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • derek1956

      derek1956 220

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
  • Recent Status Updates

  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      65.4k
    • Total Posts
      159.4k
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      17,680
    • Most Online
      1,592

    Newest Member
    Techredirector
    Joined
×
×
  • 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.