Space Merchant

Some people do not believe he died on a cross, but a wooden beam/tree of some kind. Most of mainstream Christendom will state that the Jehovah's Witnesses only make remark to this, however, most Christians outside of the mainstream believe the Cross isn't what Jesus was crucified on, and that the Cross is pagan, in addition, the remark that people care more about the cross than the Christ is also noted, more so, to how it was involved with various things and persons, namely, Constantine. It also proves problematic because the pagan roots are so visible, people often equate Christianity to paganism, on the other side of the spectrum, Freemasons themselves have also adopted the cross in order to adhere to their blood oaths to gain converts. Unfortunately you can't find a lot of information on this because many articles and videos are flooded with anything pertaining to this with JWs, via by former JWs, as is with Trinitarians, Baptists, etc. In turn, Atheists and the Irreligious will use said information to attack everyone, despite some of them use the cross in form of a black mass type affiliation, Satanism, putting it up side down; even worse if the Orobous is included. To some level, you can even find some Muslims and Jews calling out the pagan roots of the cross, and even addressing people worship the cross more than God himself. Also as for hands and wrists: Crownjewel82 from CSE - The word used in the Bible can mean any part of the hand or arm. People who study crucifixion in general found that the nails most often went through the wrist and that the weight of the body would cause the nail to tear through the flesh of the hand as is most commonly depicted in Christian art. Thus, a fairly common view is that the nails actually went through the wrist. Notes - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion#Nail_placement Common view, even more so regardless if Cross or Stake in discussion in various communities. Well that might not be as as overly exaggerated compared to this - Jesus becoming Ant-Man, growing like that of a giant, and a wooden inanimate cross comes to life like that of a beauty and a beast type manner, rushing out the tomb being Jesus, bursting into song of praises, proclaiming the Christ (The Giant Jesus and the Talking Cross - The Gospel of Peter). This apocryphal text is like something straight out of low tier comic book for all sense is thrown out of the window.

Yes, Jesus made it clear that he is God's Son, and to God, he acknowledged Jesus is his beloved Son. All this is true, but the latter believes Jesus and God are one in the same, not only due to the teachings of the Trinity itself, but the errors and forgeries in the Bible that pushes a reader to not recognize the distinction between the two. That being said, the verse you cited, Mark 10:18, is used by Trinitarians to justify their view of equating the Son to the Most High which is against what us Non-Trinitarians believe, as is our Subordinationist counterparts of old. Trinitarians see in this verse that Jesus himself is still God; being good. They resort to ignoring as well as nullify Jesus' words. If each of us tell them what Jesus is really saying here, not only they'll rush John 1:1, but they will make the claim that we are saying Jesus is not good. In their minds, Trinitarians are suggesting that the issue is about moral goodness. Trinitarians act as though that Jesus is coyly suggesting that he himself is that "good God", however, the passage is not about whether we say Jesus is good or not, but rather, it is about what Jesus himself has said. And regarding what he said, Jesus recognizes that God holds the highest of standard of what it means to be good, being the fact, God can make the determination of what is good and bad. And Jesus being humble leaves the determination of setting the standard to his Father and God and we can see this in his Word, of which Jesus proclaims. They fail to see what was mentioned here, that no one would say such a thing to someone else unless they wanted to correct them and point out that their words were misdirected. That being said, this is why research and taking in context of core teachings is vital. Because to the unexpected, The Trinitarian Troop can easily sway people into the opposing Teaching of what is true.

Same. To me Trinitarianism is problematic, the only reason why I myself and the Christians of CSE are as they are, hence the Anti-Trinitarian vs Trinitarian fight continues for years upon years, now and onward.

If you read his original post, nothing of a date was ever mentioned, he simply compared Noah's Day to how Present Day mirrors it with events happening throughout the years, especially even now. Moreover, he made mention of the presence of the Christ, and how it is compared, hence his quote: [Notice Jesus compared the days of Noah to his Presence, they took no note until the Flood came and swept them all away. Therefore, we can conclude that both Prophecies are 'timed events'. Time and again Jesus kept reminding his disciples just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be. How long were the days of Noah? Then Jehovah said: “My spirit will not tolerate man indefinitely, because he is only flesh. Accordingly, his days will amount to 120 years.” (Genesis 6:3) We can be certain to expect a plethora of events to unfold in a timely manner at the end of Christ's Presence, sweeping the ungodly away, but not in the manner you think...] You should already know I do not pass on anything, for you made that clear several times. Again the presence of the Christ, but you throw a wrench to @Arauna. You only made a small remark with no substances to said remark on this 2034 notation. JWI had already covered that a while back with detail, again, you clearly do not know the WHY and HOW Rando came to that conclusion - JWI's response. Best to look at that thread and all of JWI's references. That being said, it isn't too far-fetched because although not anything pertaining to God's Day, there are those who hold an expectation of something that is to take place in 2034, series of events, which seems to be the case with Rando, ironically enough some Christians made a notation to that, even the non-religious mainly when it comes to fulfillment, for some they even interjected superpowers and groups associated with both Babylon and the Beast, whom since 2016, have been doing a lot if you paid attention well into the pandemic. I've mentioned the man known as Reslite before, and he made note to 2034, and this man not only studied the pastor Taze Russell, but knows a lot about what he said: He stated this (only a portion of it because Res takes time before he gets to a point) - As for the other remarks: And the Watchtower / JW Org have always wanted to push forward such a date. They did so many times, and all were wrong. Once again this has all been discussed over and over again on here. It get boring. 1914 was in regards to Christ compared to them. And the whole 1975 was a result of people overreacting and thus spread misinformation. Evidence to that was due to those who were alive that day and year. I even told you in the past an Ex-JW called this out, spoke the truth despite not 100% agreeing with JWs, yet who were the people who came to said him death threats, shame him, attack him to the point they got YouTube to shutdown his channel? That is an obvious answer, one you do not like. Same situation with 2017 when misinformation spread only for an Ex-Bible Student was the one responsible for stopping a protest, but to this day, the lie continues to be spoken. That said, if it is so boring, why are you so intrigued, several times over? But you will continue to hassle me, because for some reason you have chosen me to dislike. However that is good, for it gives me reason to think that I'm on the right lines. And of course we are to forgive each other more that 77 times. Because to this day, you didn't live up to what you made note to a long time ago after breaking something that would have helped you. How is it good to not do the research to take in the facts? We should not be going about mere opinion mainly something dealing with a group or community. Although not a political person, to adopt a Left-Wing paradigm in this regard is dangerous. Not too long ago you tried to speak of traditions of Men, yet nothing of which you stated comes close to equating to that. Traditions of Men vs. Traditions out of the Christian Church differs. More so, the group in question are of Restorationism. But you do not really forgive anyone, and when you are corrected, you react as though you are not immature. If the FBI is mentioned, you get angry, if you didn't know a term in Hebrew or Greek, you get angry, if someone even memes, you get angry, corrected on your own faith group, you get angry, not proving a claim, you get angry, if even a teenager corrects you, you jump out of your seat, ironically enough he was the one who purposed Forgiveness can be exploited and abused by some. If @Arauna or @TrueTomHarley even breathes, you light up like a volcano. How does that make sense? Even so, if one is to focus on the Bible only, you solely bring up your faith group. Facts is over everything, not opinions duped as unproven. The original quote of which I purposed to you was from a written work from a College in NY, by the way. If you checked the originally links and example links, those in of itself knock the basketball out of your hands, JB. This isn't the first time the notation of being "Saved" was brought up, and baptism is a declaration, hence the linked notes; in this regard, if they believed only them are to be saved, then they would not make any remark of those that predate them, the Bible Students, etc. Even to specific few in Jesus' day. Again, you are just going by means of your own opinion pieces, which proves the point made. That being said, the only reason I react the way I do because as I mentioned, to which you even made note to, I hate falsehood, I hate misinformation, and I hate conspiracy theories. Therefore, I am the guy who would speak if I see something that is not right, say something or even refute if need be, mainly when the Core Teachings of God and Christ is hindered and I have a disdain for Trinitarianism and the Interfaith, but it didn't stop you from saying otherwise before only to be corrected.

Something to do with Hall Turner, correct? 1913? In seismology, he is credited with the discovery of deep focus earthquakes. He is also credited with coining the word parsec, an astronomical unit of distance equal to the range at which the semiannual change in parallax of a celestial object is equal to one second of arc (equal to 3.26 light-years.) Star Wars made some homage to Turner's term. https://www.rasc.ca/honorary-member-herbert-hall-turner He coined the term. Other than that, in relation to what JB said, to be brief, regarding beards it equates to the culture and vicinity of who the person is preaching to, as for clothing, modesty vs immodesty of how males appear and how females appear. The list thing someone needs is a male Christian minister in a dress and a female Christian minister in a suit coming to you preaching the gospel at your house or in the streets. That being said, may come as a shock for some of how some folks react to certain greetings or having a beard.

So what exactly did they spread misinformation about in regards to Noah's Day vs. Present Day specifically in relation to Brando's original post? We can start with that.

You said Traditions of Men, so we can go with that. Best you start a thread about it to not deviate from here. That being said, Example 1 and Example 2 already addressed such from your older threads/posts. I hope you do realize their take on acceptance of a Beard or not stems even outside of their faith as is the time period of why they adhered to such, to a degree, it correlates with culture. As to why in some areas they can have beards, and in other areas they can't, mainly with the type of people within their vicinity, i.e. in my culture personally, to some not all, beards can make one a threat, or a sign of disrespect, and that is one of several reasons. Even outside of culture you have various groups, such as, for example, the US Military and or the equalivate (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_hair_in_the_military). For beards and even various hairstyles can detract from what you are trying to convey, even the gospel. Also it comes down to cleanliness too. Addressed Here # 1 and Here # 2, you were in one of these discussions. Other sources similar to secondary subject: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2020/10/14/navy-will-review-its-ban-beards-after-sailor-feedback.html https://www.quora.com/Why-cant-military-personnel-grow-a-beard-What-is-the-science-behind-it Even to a degree, police officers - https://www.quora.com/Why-do-cops-have-mustaches-but-not-beards Addressed in this discussion of which you were part of as seen Here # 3. Also [And ladies not being allowed to wear trousers even though they are designed and made for ladies.] Are you serious? Christians outside of Mainstream Christianity will strongly refute that statement. Perhaps in an alternate dimension. Just not this one. One has to be spiritual strong in order to make a declaration to God. I can understand as to why they study and adhere to various questions before subjecting one of their members to baptism. Jesus' instruction was clear - make disciples, and it was evident in how people were baptized back then, even in regards to Acts 8. To go further on instruction, Jesus gave command to the Christians, as we read in Matthew 28:18-19, to make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, and such was baptism in this sense was full immersion in water baptism for declaration of the True God. Also check out Acts 8; 18:24-26; 19:1-7. Also your older remarks related to this discussion Here # 4 and another related Here # 5. If I am not mistaken this is more so to track their ministry. It isn't much for providing "proof" per say, but in their view of how a minister should operate when it comes to preaching of the gospel it is a voluntary based work to which when they track their progress in the ministry, it shows how active they are, however, the only person who can see one's zeal with sheer accuracy is God himself, and in the gospel work, it has to be honest at all times. Perhaps if the person isn't preaching the gospel due to various circumstances, it may yield that result. Life and or other events can get in the front of activities which, to them, yields the inactivity status. Your experience does not apply to everyone else who differs. Mainly if the person in question, or people in general who seeks God and wants to speak about him are both eager and vocal, even at times wanting to speak the Word in their own personal voice or what they've personally written in relation to various Biblically subjects. You should know how joyful people are when speaking about God to others, even children who in turn do the same - I already mentioned I myself was an example, but of course, my experience differs from your own upbringing, granted, you came out of the JW faith in the EU. True pleasure is talking about God and his Word to anyone, to those up on high, to those on the low. Bible principles. People can give counsel, but it is up to your own conscience to take action on something or make a decision. Restorationist are known for constantly giving counsel and encouragement, likewise, with the latter. Although households can be different, one strict, one who isn't strict, or ones that simply do not care. That being said, if a pastor tells you smoking is bad constantly, clearly you can see where he is going with that despite you making the decision smoking itself. As asked you specifically for misinformation and traditions of men, all you did was did what you just said; thus taking us down memory lane. More so, instead of bothering to comment on some, I linked the discussions, ironically enough, you didn't even bother with Examples 1 and 2, which touched on the Tradition of Men remark. That being said, facts is far above mere opinion, which is seen on in this thread, but the linked examples. I strongly advice you to do research. You can disagree with your former faith all you want, but you should be wise to not let your own personal opinions go over facts, let alone mixing things up in your favor.

Anywhere where there is extreme conflict of interest such as Reddit* Discord* 4Chan YouTube Specific Gaming communities

Most of the time - this. Some people who simply read the verses when they see THEOS quickly come to a conclusion. The title can be applied to anything or anyone, for it does not automatically make them The True God. Other similar examples would be Isaiah 9:6 and Titus 2:13, where as for this verse, Trinitarians often appeal to the Granville Sharp Rule in order to identify Jesus as God. 1 Timothy 3:16 is also another interesting one, for "God" being included into the verse proves problematic.

Because information is vital. It is one of those things, annoying things when dealing with Jehovah Warriors, KJV-Onlyist and Trinitarians, etc who primarily use the verse to "prove" Jesus is God - hence the crusade of core Christianity, in this sense.

John 1:1 is literally the center piece in the Trinitarian vs Non-Trinitarian battle, likewise to those in Royal's Park Hyde Park, London where a good chuck of this verse is often debated. Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος, καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος. This verse is commonly used by some to prove Jesus is God, at times ignoring context and references to adhere to their own exegesis, but the facts show us, if read and understood, the entirety of John's Introduction chapter, disproves the claim that Jesus is God. So in short, the Word of John 1:1(c) is the Word proclaimed through Jesus in his ministry and the Word he proclaimed was the proclamation of God the Father Himself, the Word was God. He who had seen Jesus had seen the Father in terms of the things Jesus did. God is Life and Jesus fully expressed that Life in the words he spoke and the works he did. God is Truth and Jesus fully expressed that Truth by everything he said and did. God is Light and Jesus fully expressed the Light of the Father in all the words he spoke and works he did in the name of his God. God is Love and the flesh named Jesus fully expressed the Father's Love; dead flesh crucified for the sins of mankind. The Word of God was something the man named Jesus always kept. The Word became flesh, that is, God the Father was manifested in flesh, that flesh named Jesus. Jesus came so that we might know the Father and Jesus fully expressed the Father in all the things he did because he always kept His Father's Word. Jesus' words and works were not his own but the Father's. For the Word of which Jesus speaks is God's Spoken Word.

If I were you, I'd be smart to not make claims I cannot cash at the bank, JB. You brought that claim several times, yet no one seeks perfection here. All men are imperfect, and the price for imperfection can result in sin for some. This same quote has been mentioned to you time and time again. You yourself at times fail to realize how imperfect all people are. The facts are not different to different people, opinions (even unproven ones) are. A fact is a statement that can be proven true or false. An opinion is an expression of a person’s feelings that cannot be proven. Opinions can be based on facts or emotions and sometimes they are meant to deliberately mislead others...; and that quote in of itself was puled from BOROUGH OF MANHATTAN COMMUNITY COLLEGE, other sources state nearly the identical. Although it if author based, it still applies to various discussions and or talks as well. I have mention a disdain for falsehood and conspiracy theories, so much so I am easily identified as a Truther or part of the community itself, in fact, you were even told what a Truther is and how they operate, they do not like misinformation, in turn, they do a lot of research in order to find truth, i.e. when you asked about Q Anon, it was both truthful and factual, not based on opinion. More so, the fact I know enough about the UN and even the Superpowers themselves. It is only different if based on an opinion piece, not facts. You are getting both terms mixed. The problem is not about quoting the JWs, the problem is mixing in what they are saying with your own opinion piece, often times taking things out of context, i.e. you not realizing Bible concordances and quick to call judgement on a word or passage. I believe I made myself clear on the fact I study Religions (which correlates with being a Truther) mainly due to the fact as to why and how all the denominations came into existence in the first place, other than the Bible's history. It is also the very reason as to why I speak strongly against Trinitarianism and Interfaith other than call out misinformation concerning core Christianity. Again with adding on an exegesis to deviate from the focus. Like I said, opinions are based on claims, even unproven, you claimed 3 times I was part of an interfaith when you know I am against it, and in return, I offered, facts. Several times you bring up some things that are based on your own opinion, and often times lack some clarity and or information, even if you interject Jehovah's Witnesses, in the examples below, their own Bible, you had no idea of what the Concordances are. You were given ample facts on the matter, as I made it clear to the latter, even with truth, you reject facts. Example 1 Example 2 Even here you did the same thing in the pervious pages. So what stopped you from agreeing in the provided examples? When facts are presented, you automatically reject it. There were times I used your own quotes, which you didn't even realize it and you reject it unless it was said by the latter, you do not reject it. You still miss the point. The biggest question is when it comes to facts, why not do the research? This isn't the first time. As a side note, granted the original post began talking about Noah's Day, and how things would be in the present day that mirrors it. It was on a neutral footing, no mention of any faiths. If anything JW related is said by someone, you interject, or if you say it, they interject. Going to page one, you were the one who started such. Not the wisest of examples considering what is mentioned. Then you'd have to prove such instead of going on to opinions. It is 100% fact Restorations who maintain their viewpoint after the Great Awakening do not adhere to Traditions of Men, hence why they put themselves on a restoration path to strive to be like the first church, but even during their inception, they do not add traditions of men, you brought this up a while back, as pointed out in Example 2. It is evident on the fact they broke away from pagan based festivities, such as Christmas, Thanksgiving, etc. But just like you and I, all of them are imperfect, as is every single living soul on this green earth. Therefore, my comment [people who do not have the facts will eventually go forth with bad assumptions and decisions] the sad part here is Witness' own link to the reddit, which shows the excerpt can be used against you here - no one has all the facts when it comes to certain things because they do not do the research to come to a reasonable conclusion, and in turn, they jump to conclusions or come up with opinions based on misinformation. That being said, it is evident, even fact, if this thread began solely about the Bible and onward, for some it would be problematic because there were several examples before. Also I do not think he is Billy for Billy was always akin to Alan. This is due to both mannerism and the fact of the subtle font used by him.

Wouldn't the Jehovah's Witnesses have that information and or some brief info in connection on their website? If not, probably some people may have posted something equating to that of which you are seeking; mainly if you look up The ["Liaison Committee"] with the quotations.

Essentially it defeats the purpose to the claim coined - I don't follow or need approval any man. People often hide behind this statement in order to shield themselves from what they are really doing. People need to get all the facts regarding a subject before jumping to a conclusion, which some fail time and time again ironically for years here. Even for a man of God, not doing so can lead to a dangerous path, thus making the Christian in question blind. Most information such follow is often a repeat over and over again at times, and yet, unlike what I said about Rook, they do nothing to bring some sort of resolution to the matter, even at times, they make assumptions of many things, or going as far as to accept even a false teaching, with New Ageism, even from Atheists because it justifies their clouded judgement. This is why before, I realized how frustrated Kosonen was when some claim to be chosen on here which in turn discouraged him, and he himself was very neutral; can hold a middle ground with some people here. The only good thing out of this, the common onlooker who has no experience in the Bible or in Faiths, they themselves have the common sense to understand and have reason, despite agreeing and disagreeing with some folks, they can also see the root of misinformation, and being all knowing that misinformation can spread through groups, institutions, and organizations because of a disgruntled few - this is strongly evident even now during the pandemic, mainly for the fact early on God's name and Jesus name raised a few eye brows on vandalized property throughout the US. Before this train derailed, Rando in the beginning didn't speak of groups, just the Bible only in the beginning of this thread. Just like in the days of Noah, in relation to some people around the globe, you can proclaim the message to them and there will be a subnet of folks interested and some who are not, likewise with today, same outcome, but during this time misinformation can prove to be problematic, but it should not deter someone from spreading the gospel, one of the very reasons why Matthew 24:37-39 is applies today, even with the notion of the United Nations and Babylon the Great. That being said, people who do not have the facts will eventually go forth with bad assumptions and decisions, thus opening a door to bad assumptions (Proverbs 19:2). The funny thing about this is much misinformation was even posted on this forums at times by those who didn't have all the facts, so I guess I will start to quote more often.

I told you before, you even mentioning me, it will only yield a response. Rubbish as in how? If you are going to make a claim, provide evidence - to that I will wait. I find that as a bold claim because everything I post is always Bible related or to the subject matter, even secondary subjects, and at times I quote and or paraphrase people if need be. In fact, half the information I pulled were some of the things you said actually in the past. That is the irony here, you were the one asking these things, and it didn't take long for you to repeat yourself. The subject matter was solely about Noah's day, and how today equates to that, however, you simply brought up the similar narratives. But you do follow certain things to cloud your judgment, hence your reaction in regards to the same people, even when correct, you react, even when a minor joke, you react, the very reason you were always, and will be linked with JB because the reaction and responses are always identical, in this case when it comes to Greek Grammar of not realizing religious office within a church, even of the first century. But you have not changed, expect the fact by name only, which I discovered recently until now after quoting you; only one person refers to me as "S M" with a space. And this is the problem, it is already known that you stand alone by me and of God and Christ, but you still fall victim to many things, even misinformation. You can disagree with some notations, which no one takes issue with, but it is added information that equates to nothing at times, which results in you dealing with, what I can assume are rivals and even now, after return I still see that has not changed, this show proves me case. Yes, no man needs approve from any man, but even a man knows they can be checked and or counseled at times. Since Paul is mentioned time and time here, Paul himself publicly rebuked Peter regarding public sin, which caused Paul to speak to him, both men of God and of Christ, and one is giving the other one counsel regarding his mishap - keep that in mind. That being said, in regards to the Steward comment, it was 100% correct. No violation to the Greek text, therefore, it does not go around what is written (Deut. 4:2) - that command, by no means, is rubbish.

@PudgyDogecoin is considered a meme, however, misinformation can lead to people avoiding it. Doge and it's community has done some pretty nice things. It was pushed by Elon Musk and whales have been holding it a while. The Media has been pressuring people with FUD to sell out, and manage to cause people to sell, but to those who believe in the coin, hodl. Doge also has some similar coins such as Shiba Coin, Baby Doge, etc. However believers hold on to the original. Despite the media calling it a joke, there is a high expectation, even a probability that Doge will go up in a few years. That being said, the prime focus in the market of crypto seems to be Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Cardano, to some extent, Ethereum Classic, the original over Ethereum. The value of the dollar currency is depreciating over time. So Crypto and Gold/Silver are being bought out.

But not even here most people accept fact. Many examples presented, even solutions, of which was ignored for even the most sensitive topics, as is with claims at times made without merit, especially towards others. On the other side of the spectrum, those who ultimately fall victim to a left vs right paradigm. So people need to check out everything, turn all stones, and not to just accept something just like that. This even stems outside of rumors, but misinformation about the Scriptures itself.

This was due to Lawlessness among the Christian Church. TL;DR version - Mishearing something or speaking about something differently can open a door to misinterpretation and misinformation, as well lead into one succumbing to rebellion, and or apostasy, i.e. you can say, for example, a non-religious one, Brando checks Rook's car and tells him he isn't going to take a look at the car and a professional needs to check it out. Pudgy, seeing this, assumes Brando worked on Rook's car, the next day Rook gets into an accident and Pudgy thinks Brando was out to get Rook. Pudgy - I think Brando did something bad to Rook's car, and Rook is almost got into an accident. Srecko, hearing this, calls the police on Brando, making an assumption without having all the facts. Brando opens the door to see police, being confused on as to why they are here - *Surprise Pikachu Face* Jesus put in place those to take charge in the church by means of God's Structure, overseers, servants, etc. Capable figures in the church who can maintain peace, some of which who had no education, for all rich and poor were welcomed into the church. This brings us to Paul. Apostle Paul associated the coming God's Day with the presence of the Christ as we know in his letters. But the situation with Thessalonians was among unique situations Paul dealt with. Regarding of what can be read in 2 Thess. chap. 2 about disobedient ones, and eventually to chap. 3 regarding a warning to such persons. Paul spoke of, as is foretold, man of lawlessness who would eventually develop the mentality of an apostate, thus falling into apostasy. Apostle Paul was able to discern lawless folks due to the fact they spoke of God's Day - This situation is noted as The Great Revolt (Great Rebellion), something of which can easily split the Congregation. Which brings us to the formation of the rebellion. For Apostle Paul due to the fact he had the spirit on him, as did others, prevented apostasy from then becoming a problematic thing inside the church for a time. So essentially, Paul having the spirit was like that of a shield, using it as a defense for the congregation from incoming attacks. However, the shield cannot be maintained. When Paul, as with the other Apostles having died out, apostasy was able to thrive, to grow. That being said, into our century, this still happens. Someone would speak of a different ideology in the church thus coming into apostasy, even using misinformation, or misheard what was spoken, thus coming to their own conclusion, i.e. should someone speak of God's day in such a matter "The Time is Now" could be utter, and someone can mistake that for it happening at that very movement and thus spread the word, hence misinformation is spread. There is no question God's Day is near, but to mistake people's words can often be problematic, at times, people also use such misinformation against the latter to demonize them, a sad tactic used by most today, even outside of religion. Groups are very aware of what is taking place in most cases, however, at times, people in this regard can receive, like that of Paul, letters or electronic information, this is the case with rumors and misinformation, this excludes genuine true letters with concerns, and or suggestions. That being said, Apostasy can be very dangerous. At times, those who call out others to some degree, are usually the ones consume by apostasy - for misinformation has lead to death and injury, even if said information is a glitch. A wise person would: Read the information carefully. Gather all the facts, figure out the why, when, and reason. Come to a conclusion Thus should the topic is coined, speak of such reasonably. FACTS is always KEY.

They won't change. I even challenged one in particular in this regard - and the fact I return here, months later, the person did nothing - ironically. At least at the time, Rook, himself actually did something about a sensitive topic mentioned time and time again here, and I commemorate him for that, and the community of which I was invited to and helping in the time of absence included his input with what was gathered originally. The problem is, those who are so boiled in their emotions cannot truly be reasoned with. At times they will mix and or use events thus becoming one sided at times and can never hear both sides, or even try to come to a common ground and or conclusion; hence similar topics over the years. They come to assumptions, even from stupid things, only to shy away like church mice when they cannot prove something, and if proven incorrect, they wipe their evidence by deleting their threads and or posts. They rejoice over something, and do not realize a problem that they didn't see coming, and should you ask them about it, they say nothing. It is one of those issues that even the one who calls himself chosen took issue with here. That being said, because of all this, intertwined with the pandemic, as I, Rook, and the one who claims to be chosen were correct - Their numbers who be reduced because they make up that branch of folks spoken of in Mainstream Christendom, as is with former members; all reduced. Edit - as you can see, the latter even laughs at what he speaks out against - a sensitive topic. @TrueTomHarley Perhaps more hate than Darth Vader himself. When one succumbs to hate, they are beyond reason.

Apostle Paul did more than just write letters, and had done many things for Christians. Again, it is unfortunate you do not grab the context of Acts 15, so I understand why you laugh about it because it is unfounded by you - a shame. The irony here was I used your own words, JB. So to that I laugh with you.

Unfortunately people do not understand the "why" as to which terms derive from, elders, pastors, deacons, servants, etc.. Not only the passage from Acts 15, but the history itself. It is also the body of apostles in the first century of which many debates take place concerning Christianity today, mainly in the Trinitarian vs Anti-Trinitarian arena, even about Paul, as is with those who try to dismantle God's Structure with some teachings not met for the church when the Bible tells you exactly of how the Church is structured and by what in terms of God's Order. That being said, the New Age teachings has been quite the thorn to those who

By word, no, by root and or expression, yes. If there was no root then it would have been a violation. The Apostles and a few older men are one of the governing bodies in the church hierarchy, can also be referred to as a Council. It is most likely based on Acts 15 and all references concerning such, primarily verses 2, 4 and 6 within the passage itself whereas a group of older men who lead the Christian Church Congregation as is with settling matters, as well as give council, hence by some they are referred to as a Council or a council of men. It is rooted with the terms that does not violate the Greek text, mainly towards those who hold religious office within a Church Structure. They can also refer to those who are servants, otherwise known as servants. Stewards are those who are taking the lead, examples being the apostles and other Christian teachers, elders (Presbyteros) and bishops/overseers (Episkopos), as is with servants/ministers/deacons (Diakonous) of whom either holds office and or make up the body. There is also the terms a freeman or a trusted slave/servant. An example of this would be Abraham to Eliezer of Damascus, for Eliezer is the steward of Abraham, and or his servant/slave. (Titus 1:7 and 1 Corinthians 4:1, 2, as well as connected verses) Abraham and Eliezer - see (Genesis 13:2, 14:14,15:2, 23:17-20, Acts 7:4, 5) In Peter's case (1 Peter 4:10), he points out that Christians, Overseers and others are all stewards of God's undeserved kindness, which is expressed in a variety of ways - being in God's arrangement in which faithful servitude and or stewardship is carried out. Peter points out to all Christians, overseers and others, that they are stewards of God’s undeserved kindness expressed in various ways, and he shows that each has a sphere, or a place, in God’s arrangement in which he can carry out a faithful stewardship. So in short, the word itself does have a connection to the Greek expressions noted above, and such terms in various translations do not violate said terms. The remark "True Anointed" however, it never utter even by expression for both those words are never joined together. Aleipho is often found by itself, be it if translated as Chosen, Anointed, etc. There is never a word tagged along with it that who violates the Greek grammar itself. Alas, another person who knows about the Constitution on this forums: Other then that, the principle itself is pretty much adopted by most in Law concerning judicial actions and or groups in the committee who take action based on decisions, i.e. Chair, Ranking members, vice chair, etc. The only difference compared to Abrahamic Religious and or early Christianity is that it is only men who hold such office in the church, this is all in accordance with God's Structure of things. One thing for certain, going back on an old example I used, imperfect men differ from one another, so decisions can vary in some instances, so mistakes can be made, in some cases, mainly if the person within these committees are unequipped to handle certain situations.

@Arauna Yes, Genesis 3:15, the original prophecy, the Edenic Promise, first Promise of God. The Fallen One's act in Eden did not know about God's contingency, a hope for mankind by means of this promise, for this Fallen One is to be crushed by the offspring of the woman (Revelations 12:1), as a minor note, some people seem to forget Galatians 4:4, which is in connection to that, let alone Isaiah 7:14. For some they confuse the woman with being literally Sarah or Mary, which is false, when in reality, it is Heavenly Jerusalem in this sense; and to Apostle Paul's credit for using Sarah as figuratively in his allegorical statement. The Christian Congregation itself, as a group (The Church), is also spoken of as woman, the one of whom you speak since the Promised Seed was mentioned. Moreover, just by John 3:16 alone, it is very evident to whom God sent to crush the Fallen One, The Devil and how it will be done (Revelations 20:1-3, 10, 15). For during Jesus' preaching of the gospel, Jesus himself identified the serpent/snake from Genesis 3:15 as Satan and his seed to be that of his ill influenced followers (Matthew 23:33; John 8:44). When all this comes to fruition, in turn, this will give mankind itself hope, and what is to come, for our early parents have lost such - of which everyone here seems to be in agreement upon, living forever by means of eternal life. Some other points would be, which I do not think anyone brushed up on was although Jesus was with his Father, the fact that God himself caused his only begotten Son to be born through Mary, a descendant of David, hence Galatians 4:4/Isaiah 7:14. Mary was an imperfect young woman, however, Jesus, did not inherit imperfection from Mary, for he was God’s Son. For at this point, Jesus was noted as The Son of Man, an expression used in Scripture for several, including, Jesus Christ due to being born in the flesh, becoming human. The term also indicates that Jesus would fulfill the prophecy found in Daniel 7:13, 14. From there, which was mentioned, God giving the spirit to Jesus during his baptism - which in turn, the verses in question, points directly to Galatians 3:16 regarding the Promised Seed, as is with what the sacred secret is in connection to, hence 2 Timothy 1:10. Now what I find a bit of a half truth said by some here is that in regards to the Kingdom itself in regards to Luke 17:21 (one of those verses people get duped by via textual violations), which was already mentioned in the other thread, but here concerning hearts, this condition stems not from within (for they are touched by God's Kingdom for the heart) Christians themselves, but God’s Kingdom as shown in Scripture is shown to have a true location - Matthew 4:17 - From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” So the latter was incorrect in the remark towards you, hence textual violation of is in view. As we can see, in the Bible, it identifies it has having a location, even going as far as to refer to it as by calling it the kingdom of heaven. And it is known that God's Kingdom in of itself is an established form of government that operates it's ruling authority from heaven and that with any kingdom, it has its people who serve God (Psalms 2:4-6;Daniel 7:13, 14; Isaiah 9:7). More so, Jesus himself is the one to begin the preaching of the gospel concerning the Kingdom itself, not to mention the fact that the kingdom itself will indeed have enemies that wants to destroy it as we read in Psalms 2:1-9; and 110:1, as well as in 2; 1 Corinthians 15:25, 26, plus references. In addition to that, concerning the kingdom, Jesus declared that in Luke 22:28-30, Jesus the Apostles that they will soon join him in the Kingdom of heaven and to be seated on thrones, so those that speaks of it being just only a in our hearts fail to see the bigger notation of what God's Kingdom truly is, to mankind even, such ones also misuse said verses in Luke and Revelations as well, thus going upon their own exegesis. As you can see how those who mentioned such via textual error of the verse in question results in the latter response. Now, another factor I am seeing is everyone already agrees on the fact Jesus pre-existed, hence him being around when God himself created everything, mainly through him (which KJV has butchered by adding words unrelated to the Strong's). At this point, we can see that Jesus had not been born in the flesh yet. He was still with his Father, our God.

Meaning alone or the way the verse is worded in their NWT? Because the wording itself there is no violation in regards to the Greek text.

If one does not change, they remain the same, and eventually they start to complain.