Evacuated

16 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

not one JW has EVER been able to PROVE who removed it and when

No need.

JWs role is to testify that it has been removed, restore it where possible, and leave the indictment, trial, judging, and execution of sanctions  to the Judge of all the earth and the man that he has appointed.

23 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God."

Probably most of us would have exclaimed similarly if in Thomas's position, but maybe not just for the reason you have cited , more in the spirit of 1Cor.13:4! John's account would not present contradictory material when he stated the purpose of his writing at John 20:31.

23 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

and God was the Word

Same argument as that which applies to Acts 28:6

23 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

Jesus would NOT say "for a spirit has not flesh and bones, as you see me have.". The resurrected Jesus DID have a body of flesh and bones.

A curious conclusion drawn here, but at odds with Hebrews 13:2.

23 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

"But unto the Son he saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: "

Presumably Heb 1:7 which quotes from Ps.45:6. This Psalm is extolling the virtues of a king ruling with the favour of God, thus "God hath blessed thee forever" v 2.

The rather clumsy rendition of Ps.45:6 has been discussed at length for decades, not least due to the difficulties in addressing a king ruling with God's approval as God Himself. The matter is simply resolved when comparing scriptural passages relating to the throne of God-appointed kingship. Solomon for example, was said to be seated on  "Jehovah's throne"  1Chr.29:23. With Jehovah designated as the "King of Eternity" at Revelation 15:3, His throne alone certainly lasts for ever and ever. Gods sovereignty then provides authorisation for any ruler representing this sovereignty and is the only foundation for successful rule of any duration, such duration in the hands of Solomon being only temporary, but nevertheless successful when based firmly on the throne of Jehovah.

Let your argument be with the scholars who have suggested  suitable renditions of the verse in indicating that the success of the king in question is due to his throne being supported by God:

Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever.--This is the rendering of the LXX., Vulg., and of the versions generally. But whether they supposed the words to be addressed to the Divine Being, or that the theocratic king is thus styled, is uncertain. The Christian use of the verse as applied to the Messiah (Hebrews 1:8, Note, New Testament Commentary) does not help us to explain how the monarch, who is the poet's theme here, could be addressed as God. The use of Elohim in Psalm 82:6; Psalm 97:7, Exodus 22:28, hardly offers a satisfactory parallel, and even 1Samuel 28:13 (where we should render, "I saw a god, &c) hardly prepares us to find such an emphatic ascription to an earthly king, especially in an Elohistic psalm. Two alternative renderings present themselves--(1) Thy throne of God is for ever . . . i.e., thy divine throne. (Comp. Psalm 31:2, "thy refuge of strength.") (2) Thy throne is of God for ever, which is grammatically preferable, and with which may be compared 1Chronicles 29:23, "the throne of the Lord." Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

 “The LXX. admits of two renderings: [ho the·osʹ] can be taken as a vocative in both cases (Thy throne, O God, . . . therefore, O God, Thy God . . . ) or it can be taken as the subject (or the predicate) in the first case (God is Thy throne, or Thy throne is God . . . ), and in apposition to [ho the·osʹ sou] in the second case (Therefore God, even Thy God . . . ). . . . It is scarcely possible that [’Elo·himʹ] in the original can be addressed to the king. The presumption therefore is against the belief that [ho the·osʹ] is a vocative in the LXX. Thus on the whole it seems best to adopt in the first clause the rendering: God is Thy throne (or, Thy throne is God), that is ‘Thy kingdom is founded upon God, the immovable Rock.’”—The Epistle to the Hebrews (London, 1889), pp. 25, 26. B.F.Westcott.

The NWT has rendered these verses accordingly:

• "God is your throne forever and ever" Ps 45:6
• "But about the Son, he says: “God is your throne forever and ever," Heb 1:8

Some other translators appear to agree as far as the Psalm is concerned:

Ps 45:6:

Good News Translation
"The kingdom that God has given you will last forever and ever."

JPS Tanakh 1917
"Thy throne given of God is for ever and ever;"

Interestingly, how do you harmonise your view with 1Cor.15:28?

7 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

In other words, the watchtower has NO IDEA.

You have just been listing and criticising the MANY IDEAS the WT has had!!!!???? I am having a bit of difficulty with the logic here?

7 hours ago, Cos said:

When Christ died, He did not cease existing.

This is either a grave mistake or  a denial of Christ's ransom sacrifice. This is dangerous ground in either respect but, respectfully, I will leave the determination of which to someone better qualified.

I am departing from this particular discussion.

?

On 7/8/2018 at 3:29 AM, Cos said:

Frankly I have no problem with using the divine name in Scripture, but this is all about adding what does not have manuscript support.

But presumably adding what does have manuscript support is acceptable? The omission of God's name from the Hebrew Scriptures is a travesty not a translation. The pusilanimous argument that it was not contained in the Ist Century Greek Scriptures has no merit. There were some attempts to justify this by suggesting it's ommission from the Septuagint meant that even quotes made by Jesus or other Scripture writers from this translation would not include the Divine Name. But this pathetic justification falls at the first hurdle in that manuscript support for Ist Century inclusion of the Tetragrammaton is clearly extant.

Nash papyrus.1st Cent BCE (Septuagint) De. 18:16 includes Tetragrammaton

Codea Alexandrinus 5th Century CE (Septuagint) De. 18:16 Clear substitution of KY (Abbreviation for kyrios - Lord)

Modern Interlinear with Strongs References. (Septuagint) De. 18:16  Clearly follows late substitution of kyrios, Lord.

So the Divine name was Scripturally available in the Ist Century to Jesus and Christian Greek Scripture writers. It is unthinkable that they would follow Jewish superstition and tradition in ommitting it's use, at least in their specific quotations from the Septaugint translation. It is even more improbable that Jehovah, by means of Holy Spirt, would somehow "forget" or ommit to include His own glorous name in His own inspired writings.

Frankly I have no problem with using the divine name in Scripture, or in restoring it to it's proper place in the Greek Scriptures, with manuscript support as far as possible, trusting in Jehovah's guidance where there is not, yet. (Compare the Dead Sea Scroll impact on the saga regarding the restoring of  God's Name to the Hebrew Scriptures). And this despite the determined and resolute attempts of apostate religionists to obliterate God's own name from His own message of salvation to mankind.

Why would true Christians expect fair treatment? 

“Happy are you when people reproach you and persecute you and lyingly say every sort of wicked thing against you for my sake." Matt.5:11

This doesn't appear to be a problem? I don't let people take my details without permission so ........Good ? What else can you say?

On 7/9/2018 at 2:36 AM, Jesus.defender said:

First this "faithful and discreet slave" was russel himself.  ( The Watchtower, May 1, 1922, page 132. )

But then it was CHANGED to the watchtower organisation itself! ( Watch Tower, 1927, as referenced by Jehovah's Witnesses - Proclaimers of God's Kingdom, Watchtower Society, 1993, page 626.)

So it was! And now, it's changed again!!! Yippee!!

On 7/9/2018 at 2:55 AM, Jesus.defender said:

1922 "The date 1925 is even more distinctly indicated by the Scriptures than 1914," (Watchtower, Sept. 1, 1922, p. 262).

You must realise by now that Jehovah's Witnesses today don't actually care about stuff like this? People like you cannot actually provide anything positively alternative to that which you constantlly attack. Just the same old rehashed griping. Can't you play a different tune? Or isn't there one?

@JackRyan get real man! (I think?)

Surely this is how you view everyone? You posted it!

3 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

Swedish POLICE launch preliminary INVESTIGATION in Jehovah's Witnesses anti-LGBT video from 2018 Regional Convention

It just isn't possible to understand the Bible's code of conduct unless you accept it as of divine origin and obligatory. With that as a basis, then personal difficulties with it's requirements remain in that context, as a problem for the individual to resolve, not a problem with the requirement.

It just isn't possible to compromise the Bible's view on specific LBGT behavioural issues, despite the attempts of various religionists. So there will always be conflict between those who reject the Bible standard for sexual behaviour and those who adhere to and promote it. This conflict extends into the legal arena as the conflict has been blended with a human rights issue which basically excludes a consideration of God's will on the matter.

The Bible does not always give the reasons for why a course of conduct is right or wrong in God's eyes. That determination is left to the individual and may either be deduced by logic or by observation, over time. (Why circumcision on the 8th day? Also, see the book "None of These Diseases").

The basic, ubiquitous reason given for keeping God's requirements is the rather generally stated: "That it may go well for you" but this is just not enough of a reason for many. In fact, no reason is sufficient for those who just do not want to live by the Bible's code of conduct. What is most puzzling however is the fact that those who "do not" seek to impose by force an acceptance of that preference on those who "do". This takes the conflict into the thorny area of state control v freedom of religious expression.

Nevertheless, this conflict will continue. The fact remains that Jehovah's Witnesses do not discriminate against those who describe themselves in the terms of the LBGT movement. However they do discriminate, vigorously, against the sexual practices that identify such ones, and that will never change.

There's nothing new about rejection of the standards of the God of the Bible, and there's nothing new about the attempts on one group or another to introduce a reversal of those standards, even to the point of asserting that the practice once abhorred is now promoted by God. It follows the pattern of behaviour prevalent at the time of the prophet Isaiah and expressed at Isaiah 5:20:

"Woe to those who say that good is bad and bad is good,those who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness,those who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!"

Specular rather than diffuse reflection due to smooth rather than rough surface

15 hours ago, Jesus.defender said:

did you read the post?

Did you?

On 7/6/2018 at 2:15 AM, Noble Berean said:

Isn't it odd that only an exclusive group have access to this divine insight?

Is it really odd? Why? Noah appears to have been informed about God's intentions in his day. Moses was particularly enlightened by Jehovah in order to communicate with many people (through Aaron at times). All the prophets were also. Peter had special privileges in opening doors of opportunity to Jews, Samaritans and Gentiles (depite Paul's apostleship, although I didn't hear him gripe about Peter  having the key.) Even Jesus as the Word has a special role in this regard.

So there is nothing "odd" about a group, or an individual for that matter, having divine insight in spiritual matters and sharing it with others, or rather that Jehovah, through whatever means He chooses, makes information available to others. It is quite a "usual" practice actually.

The issue is more about what that group or individual does with the information they have been provided with, and of course how they feel about the privilege they have been granted: Compare Rev.19:9-10.

I mean let's face it, should I feel jealous of the secretary who called me to let me know I had been successful at a job interview ?

5 hours ago, Queen Esther said:

what  will be  the  true  reward  for  the  144,000  in  Heaven  -

and  why  they're  more  powerful  as  ALL  Angels ?

Their true reward is  Jehovah and Christ's approval and trust as shown in the bestowal of incorruptibility; immortality; positions as kings and priests with Christ; enabled to follow the Christ wherever he goes, and a decisive and executive share in the restoration of all things and any future arrangements Jehovah has in store in the outworking of his eternal purpose.

Their power will enable them to share in the destruction of Satan's earthly system and the abyssing of Satan and his demons, the resurrecting, judging, and restoring of all mankind and planet earth throughout the millenium,  the eventual destruction of all rebellion against Jehovah in the sprit and physical realms. Their example of humble acceptance of the sovereignty of Jehovah, despite their position and power, will serve as an everlasting example to all of creation to Jehovah's glory and praise.

5 hours ago, Nicole said:

common for JW

Not sure how large the lunch would be, but there are some quite basic reasons in the case of a reception hosted by bereaved Jehovah's Witnesses ion the occasion of a funeral of a loved one who has served Jehovah faithfully.

"A good name is better than good oil, and the day of death is better than the day of birth." Ecc7:1. The remembrance of a live well-lived in faithfulness is entirely appropriate.

"Moreover, brothers, we do not want you to be ignorant about those who are sleeping in death, so that you may not sorrow as the rest do who have no hope." 1Thess. 4:13. It is a time to comfort one another with the wonderful resurrection hope and forms part of the healing of the sting death causes.

"But sanctify the Christ as Lord in your hearts, always ready to make a defense before everyone who demands of you a reason for the hope you have, but doing so with a mild temper and deep respect." 1Pet.3:15. It is an opportunity to share discreetly the hope of the deceased with unbeleiving friends and relatives of the deceased, where tasteful and appropriate. On occasion, this is an express wish of the deceased.

"Follow the course of hospitality". Rom12:13. Funerals are lengthy and stressful affairs for a variety of reasons. People travel considerable distances to attend at short notice as death does not come by appointment. The provision of hospitality is virtually incumbent.

At the very least, hospitality arrangements that follow the principle expressed by Jesus at Luke 10:42: "A few things, though, are needed, or just one" are quite appropriate in connection with Jehovah's Witness funerals, regardless of the status of the deceased

2 hours ago, Noble Berean said:

We're just supposed to "take it at their word" in 3 different ways. That's a lot of faith with no evidence to back it up. How can we know their info is correct? 

I suppose it really is a "take it or leave it" scenario as you suggest. Whatever one's opinion of the "communication conduit" or "media channel", it remains that a large group of people have a peception, based on the Bible, that there is a strong possibility of surviving a world cataclysm to life on a cleansed earth. And they have learned about this from a rather smaller group of people who are convinced of themselves having a rather more immediate destiny in the heavens as rulers with Christ.

Now they didn't make it all up themselves. Clarity on the idea and detail on it's connection with Bible teachings and prophecy was shared with them to a greater or lesser degree. Some, like myself, were able to discern the bare bones of a concept of people living on earth forever, by resurrection or survival, from the Bible,  and certainly rejected the notion of "all good people go to heaven" long before associating with Jehovah's Witnesses. It was refreshing to come across an organised approach to sharing this Bible based view with other people, and to get a lot more detail on the whole concept of it.

Granted, there is a measure of human imagination thrown in as is always the case in matters of understanding God's Word. But, fanciful ideas  have a way of being skimmed off in time, whilst the genuine core concepts remain. There are plenty of critics and criticisms around, exhibiting varying degrees of emotion toward both groups amongst the Witnesses, ranging from a sort of benign and patronising disbelief through to plain vitriolic hatred. Rather like the "intellectual" Greeks at the Areopagus (Acts 17:32) and the hate-driven Jewish leaders at  Jerusalem (John 11:53)., and all manner of in-between shades.

Really, it is simply a case of "take it or leave it". You either believe or don't believe, accept ot don't accept. It is presented as an invitation in Scripture, so there is no compulsion, other than it's appeal, which has persuasive power, but not to everyone to the same degree. It seems, judging from the forum comments, there are even those who have a better understanding intellectually of the beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses on this matter than do some Witnesses themselves. Yet to them, this only spurs an active disbelief and rejection.

But notwithstanding, the invitation to both groups remains and there is still a response to it. It seems that Jesus's words in connection with the kingdom invitation at the time of his preaching still have a very real application in the current period of time.

"From the days of John the Baptist until now, the Kingdom of the heavens is the goal toward which men press, and those pressing forward are seizing it."  John 11:12

On 7/6/2018 at 6:31 AM, Jesus.defender said:

‘The Lord (Jehovah) said to my Lord (Adonai) sit thou

Are you sugessting that ‘The Lord (Jehovah) said to my Lord (Jehovah) sit thou....'

On 7/7/2018 at 11:45 PM, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

decrease

Everything else is cutting back......why such alarm?

I just misread this topic to say Do Demons Live in Las Vegas !!!

I'll have to go to Specsavers!.......... or maybe just to bed....earlier!

On 7/6/2018 at 2:15 AM, Noble Berean said:

"correct identity" of the great crowd?

What's the issue here? A group of Christians go to heaven? No issue. A large group of Christians are going to live on earth? No issue.

"an exclusive group have access to this divine insight?" It's in the Bible. Who's this exclusive group? You just reccounted it yourself didn't you?

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

"My decision to pioneer helped me sidestep frustration, straight into manic depression, and have existed there for the past 15 years, and will most likely remain there untiL I die. Not unless I commit suicide to get out the the absolute hell hole ive been in all this time - I can see no way out of.

I gave up my youth, my education, my family, my career goals to pioneer, to stand now beside a cart.

If i could talk to myself again, I would tell myself to run...run and never look back.

If i could tell the young ones reading this article, one thing to learn from my experience.....

Run, run and never look back. You have time, i dont."

THE END

I knew it was you who had that experience. That's what gives it such credibilaty! I mean, credability! Or do I mean, credibilalitie! (I wish I had stayed at college and not gone on that cart!!)

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

the Bible (which is obviously perfectly accurate)

There is still hope for the hopeless!  ?

3 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

The amount of dedication, hard work and time it would take to even qualify for the Olympics would have already taken her away from “the more important things”

Probaly best not to judge this achievement by personal lack of talent.

3 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

The Winter Olympics? The ******* Winter Olympics.

I'm not quoting the expletives.  Use of these appears  to either express contempt for convention, which still considers this particular choice of wording as an unacceptable expression in normal speech, or it serves as an expression of frustration at a situation which exceeds  personal boundaries of acceptance along with  an exhaustion of resource to understand or even combat the issue that is faced. Probably is all of that. 

Well, I have some sympathy here, it's never good to see someone at the end of their tether, but "twisted knicker syndrome" is all I can offer by way of commiseration.

2 hours ago, Jack Ryan said:

How do they explain Serena & Venus Williams, Prince, all the Wayans brothers, Selena, and model Coco Rocha? All famous and/or rich.

• Serena and Venus Williams?  What's to explain? They are not Jehovah's Witnesses are they? 
• Prince? What's to explain? What is the relevant comparison to the euphamistic Mirjana?
• Wayans Brothers? Damon, I'm not sure but what is the point? Keneen and Shawn, are they Jehovah's Witnesses? I don't really know what the rest of the family do.
• Selena? Is this the singer that was murdered by a criminal employee, Selena Quintanilla-Pérez. What did she do? Not a Jehovah's Witnesses was she?
• Coca Rocha? Now she is interesting. What has she done wrong? She is famous and rich I agree. Wait a minute, is that what's wrong with her? Surely we  are not looking at jealousy here? Maybe a desire  to be famous and rich but someone getting in the way could root some people's criticism here?

1 hour ago, Jack Ryan said:

Watchtower is lead by maliciously intelligent leaders,

OOOOOOH! (cue Jaws music......)

1 hour ago, Jack Ryan said:

Sport is defined as containing competition. Therefore sport is dangerous to spiritual health.

Oh dear! "Knickers in a twist" (google that) syndrome!

Don't worry. "sport" has a range of interpretations, including this one: "a person who behaves in a good or specified way in response to teasing, defeat, or a similarly trying situation." So that would probably be something critics could try with benefit?

Anyway, just to calm things down a bit.

"physical training" : the systematic use of exercises to promote bodily fitness and strength.

Now , this seems to be the lure that gets many into joining a "sports" club. And as our scantily detailed (not "clad" before the rumour mill kicks in...) experience regarding "Christophe" indicates, this seems to be the path he took. The Bible principles around "bad associates" (1Cor.15:33) seem to be integral to the outcome he experienced. Who knows what type of "sport" was at the core of their club? It could have been cage-fighting training. Who knows how much of the detail he revealed to his chosen advisor? Anyway, he got some further advice on the principles based on his experience, and, presumably, withdrew. So, what does a sane mind conclude? The club was a bit of an issue. The environment in the fitness centre needed a bit of safe navigation technique. Is it wrong to engage in physical training to ehance health and fitness? Not even mentioned.

So, sane message? Don't join clubs* (*club: an association dedicated to a particular interest or activity.) run by worldly people without fullly investigating it's interest or activity. Or, don't violate 1Cor.15:33 and save the hassle. Other sane message? Discuss secular plans with spiritually older friends for any advice they may think is relevant, any time. (Humility evidence).

Insane message: No comment. Enough said in first four postings.