Governing body will sue anyone?

[Dmitar]

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Yes, there is always a choice. On the one hand, it is interpreted that man decides for himself, and on the other hand, it is said that demonic influence is so strong that it blinds people.

Only if people allow it. Then, whose fault would that be?

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

From this we could say that the people of Noah's time were seduced by the great influence of demons, so they were unable to change their condition and choice.

You can only be seduced if you allow it to take hold of your desires. Demonic influence can be rejected. If it isn't, what do you call that? A weak mind.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

On the other hand, God failed to persuade them to change their choices. So God was left without his choice and was forced to show anger instead of grace. 

How could God persuade someone to make the correct choice. Are we talking about robots or human "imperfect" beings? Noah made the correct choice, others could have also, but they refused. That's not on God, it's on them. The same choice we all have today.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

In most cases, God has no problem with someone like me questioning Him and his reasons. And in general, people on Earth do not pose any threat to God and his authority. Criticism and questions can only be a threat to religious leaders as GB.

This is your personal choice, if you believe in your heart you can challenge God. Some believe Abraham, and Job Challenged God without understanding their true intent.

However, Nimrod also challenged God. What happened with that challenge?

Now Spiritual leaders are separate. If you are challenging God for his appointment of spiritual helpers on earth, then, that is a judgment you will have to argue come judgment day, since you are taking away from his judgment and placing it for him.

You stated, "people on Earth do not pose any threat to God and his authority" without understanding how you are taking from him his authority and sovereignty.

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

If it is exactly as the Bible says, then the only real threat God faces is one that comes from his immediate vicinity (the angel he created — the devil). Who gave the devil a choice? The God who gave him free will. Or God is/was naive, so he has given free will to individuals for whom no one guarantees that they will not abuse it. Or he knew that there was a great possibility that it would happen and everything would go to ruin, but he did not think that it would be a problem for him that would not be solved in one way or another.
Either way, people are a party in the process that is where it is.

Only if you believe Satan to have greater power than the Creator himself. This is your free will to think that way. Once again, you will have to accept judgment upon your thoughts, action, and behavior by God and Christ. 

 

Your voice is as a pharaoh among the gods

God's long-suffering a demonstration of His almighty power

3. We have all heard of the infidel challenging God to prove His existence by smiting him, His denier. Now you can hardly picture to yourselves a being exercising over himself so perfect a command that, with all the apparatus of fiery reply at his disposal, he should not answer the challenge by levelling him who utters it to the ground.

TEMPT

PROVE, TRY); in a bad sense, "to tempt" (a) of attempts to ensnare Christ in His speech, e. g., Matt 16:1; 19:3; 22:18,35, and parallel passages; John 8:6; (b) of temptations to sin, e. g., Gal 6:1, where one who would restore an erring brother is not to act as his judge, but as being one with him in liability to sin, with the possibility of finding himself in similar circumstances, James 1:13,14 (see note below); of temptations mentioned as coming from the Devil, Matt 4:1; and parallel passages; 1 Cor 7:5; 1 Thess 3:5 (see TEMPTER); (c) of trying or challenging God, Acts 15:10; 1 Cor 10:9 (2 nd part); Heb 3:9; the Holy Spirit, Acts 5:9: cf. No. 2.

[Dmitar]

NIV Eph 4:11-13
11 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, 12 to prepare God's people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up 13 until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ. 

“Salute your (spiritual) leaders.” [1] At the one end of the ecclesiastical gamut of Christendom we have sacrificing priests, and at the other extreme all ministers are systematically denied a formal or definite recognition. The one is sheer paganism, the other is chargeable with ignoring or belittling the Lord’s provision of ministers until the end (Ephesians 4:11-13). The foundation of Apostles and Prophets remains, but the “building of the body of Christ” is the work of evangelists, pastors, and teachers, and to ignore them is to dishonor Him Whose gifts they are.

[1] Another form of respect.

It's sad that former Jehovah's Witnesses really don't understand what the body of Christ is and represents. It's even sadder, there are Jehovah's Witnesses that think along the same line.

[Space Merchant]

On 1/28/2022 at 9:09 AM, xero said:

I'm not sure how you could be confused as it does indeed point out clearly who wrote the article "Catherine Hickley". It is, the NYTIMES, not some unknown publication. Also I think your adjective "despicable" isn't consonant w/the matter, nor does the case deal w/"profit[ting] off of a genocide".

This is dealing w/the archive of a specific family who suffered at the hands of the Nazis and which family legally passed the archive on to the society and an individual who had no right to profit off the sales of the archive. (the only one making money here).

Think again. You can dislike the organization all you like, but do it for legitimate and rational reasons. Tell the truth when you criticize otherwise all your other criticisms are devalued. (Were you high or drunk when you stumbled on this?)

In the Truther and Independent Journalist community, we often joke that "Some people read ONLY  the Headline/Title, but do NOT read the article in question." It was often coined by an Independent Journalist by the name of Timothy Pool otherwise known as Beanie King or Beanie Lord by randoms on the internet.

That being said, this is a common occurrence on forums too. It also shows no one reads reports or articles, they see a name that do not sit well with them, and form a conclusion and or an exegesis.

That being said, not a fan of The New York Times though, their agenda was to peddle war mongering. Even today with the situation overseas, they do this.

[Srecko Sostar]

8 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Only if people allow it. Then, whose fault would that be?

Of course, the share of the individual is important. The bottom line is that JW members and their leaders often allow demons to seduce them with the so-called “new light” attributed to HS, but it actually comes from the opposite side.

8 hours ago, Dmitar said:

You stated, "people on Earth do not pose any threat to God and his authority" without understanding how you are taking from him his authority and sovereignty.

With free will that came from God because it was his choice of his free will. Since God has kept for himself all wisdom and power, man's action can in no way call into question God's position.

But revolt against the so-called "human representatives" of God certainly calls their position into question. Leading people of WT and other related companies of the BS / JW organization have proven in each of their mandates that they believed in "false teachings". Do you want believers to respect such a position of "God's representatives"?

 

[Dmitar]

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Of course, the share of the individual is important. The bottom line is that JW members and their leaders often allow demons to seduce them with the so-called “new light” attributed to HS, but it actually comes from the opposite side.

This is a matter of opinion unless you can prove how spiritual leaders are being seduced.

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

With free will that came from God because it was his choice of his free will. Since God has kept for himself all wisdom and power, man's action can in no way call into question God's position.

This is your misconception of free will. God never intended for man to know between good and evil. 

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

But revolt against the so-called "human representatives" of God certainly calls their position into question. Leading people of WT and other related companies of the BS / JW organization have proven in each of their mandates that they believed in "false teachings". Do you want believers to respect such a position of "God's representatives"?

Jesus had his opposers, and those opposers killed him. How do you factor free will into revolting against Christ? Doesn't the book of Revelation speak on how those opposers will ultimately be dealt with? Christ was God's primary representative on earth. The apostles were God's secondary representatives. Before that, the Prophets.

[Srecko Sostar]

8 hours ago, Dmitar said:

This is a matter of opinion unless you can prove how spiritual leaders are being seduced.

Proof is in the background, because what good is it if someone’s eyes are blinded?

8 hours ago, Dmitar said:

This is your misconception of free will. God never intended for man to know between good and evil. 

Judging by the words of Genesis, you are right. Man did not need to gain knowledge of that kind. But that doesn't mean that man has enough of it today.

 

[Dmitar]

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Proof is in the background, because what good is it if someone’s eyes are blinded?

This has zero proof. This would mean, you can apply your deduced logic of being blind to yourself, since you have closed your mind to all reason. 

2 hours ago, Srecko Sostar said:

Judging by the words of Genesis, you are right. Man did not need to gain knowledge of that kind. But that doesn't mean that man has enough of it today.

Are you referring to Adam or his descendants? How could Adam see the outcome of man's imperfect state, today? Are you saying if Adam and Eve had "not" been disobedient to God, they would still have learned between good and evil?

[Srecko Sostar]

21 hours ago, Dmitar said:

This would mean, you can apply your deduced logic of being blind to yourself, since you have closed your mind to all reason.

It applies to me, you and everyone else.  

21 hours ago, Dmitar said:

Are you referring to Adam or his descendants? How could Adam see the outcome of man's imperfect state, today? Are you saying if Adam and Eve had "not" been disobedient to God, they would still have learned between good and evil?

1)The Bible text refers to; God spoke to himself or to someone in heaven while he was saying this ...., and perhaps he said the same thing to Adam. It means that he meant Adam, and consequently his descendants, because the descendants came from Adam and not someone else.

2)How do I know what Adam saw?

3)I don't saying neither one nor the other . 

 

[Space Merchant]

13 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

1)The Bible text refers to; God spoke to himself or to someone in heaven while he was saying this ...., and perhaps he said the same thing to Adam. 

Friend, look at the context, it is clear. The remark regarding Adam and Eve, was discussed before, as to Ryan, who made a claim of the early parents of mankind. Don't rely on your own exegesis.

That being said, his response to you was to draw in a specific point, of which I can see.

[Srecko Sostar]

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: - Genesis 3

To whom He said?

[Space Merchant]

35 minutes ago, Srecko Sostar said:

And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: - Genesis 3

To whom He said?

Short Answer: He was talking to Jesus (possibly Angels also), he was not talking to Adam, hence pervious verses in the chapter, and other chapters, namely Genesis 1:26.

 

You are referring to Genesis 3:22 in which our God stated the following (after he spoke the original promise).

Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

The Most High was most likely speaking to his Son, Jesus (possibly nearby angels, we cannot say definitely, but it isn't unlikely granted Angels are always in God's presence), but granted of what is considered, as is the majority of Genesis 3, God was communicative with Jesus, which is extremely logical granted Jesus was with his Father (The Son who rejoices at the works that is done from the Father's hand); this excludes what our Trinitarian counterparts think for their assertions are incorrect.

As for Genesis 3:22 you have to consider the context.

God (of whom you call Jehovah, Yahweh or Yehovah) said what he said after passing some form of judgement to Adam and Eve after the first promise was professed by Him.

The fact he mentioned "one of us" in plural form is also liken to the pervious verse of a pervious chapter, such as Genesis 1:26, which reads,

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”

Outside of the Trinitarian narrative of multi-personnel idea, some would try to rope in Satan the Devil, however, Satan was not present with God in Heaven at all, we all know where he was at the time.

Granted God, Christ and the angels are spirits, God has made man, such as Adam, in his image, hence 1:26, which pertains to that of likeness as well. In regards to Jesus, he himself is a perfect being. Man is also the image of the invisible God, as according to Scripture, Apostle Paul (which is a call back to God's Order, which you took issue with a while back).

In addition, 3:22 seems to make it clear that the Son was indeed in his vicinity, hence Right hand of God.

One thing to note about both God and Christ (Father and Son) is that they, prior to Adam and Eve, had knowledge of what is good and what is bad, therefore, they had said knowledge before Adam, and later Eve, therefore, they know, even prior to the day that man was molded out of the earth's clay. In Jesus' case, he knows just as the Father does because Jesus worked closely with his Father, who is his God, mainly when it comes to God's purpose, will and standards, as is the principles that stem of God's qualities - therefore knowledge of what is good and bad, he knows and how to operate, even determine what is clean or unclean, something of which Satan cannot do, and later, Adam and Eve, who made the wrong choice which categorized them as disobedient, thus, our early parents serve as an example, from their perfect life, to a disobedient one.

[Dmitar]

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

It applies to me, you and everyone else.

On the contrary, it applies to those that don't have faith in God, or have lost that faith on their own. What they use as an excuse to justify their actions becomes inconsequential.

1 hour ago, Srecko Sostar said:

1)The Bible text refers to; God spoke to himself or to someone in heaven while he was saying this ...., and perhaps he said the same thing to Adam. It means that he meant Adam, and consequently his descendants, because the descendants came from Adam and not someone else.

The angels knew the difference between good and evil. What does Genesis stipulate.

the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil. And now, lest he reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever...”

Man's perfection was predicated on obedience. A privilege they lost after sinning. How far man has come to that sin, Adam would not be able to imagine.