Paul says Jesus is Jehovah

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#313 Sep 22, 2012
Gods Kingdom Rules wrote:
<quoted text> So far you have refuted nothing I have posted. Not a thing. You haven't used any scriptures all you have said is simply that you do not believe it or that I can't prove something without giving any proof of anything with any scriptures what so ever. This was easier than I thought it would be.
IHV DUDE posting scripture like you are doing avails ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.. most oare out of context and not dealing with what john is saying.. i am not going te chase downw easc one and try to show you its not on subject...

my time would be better spend chasing down your quotes and find them in the wt material.. to see if you are plagerizing their material
will
dee lightful

Piedmont, SC

#314 Sep 22, 2012
ResLight wrote:
<quoted text>
If the English word JEHOVAH or YAHWEH is considered to have been added to the scriptures, then so have the English words JESUS, JOSHUA, THE LORD, GOD, etc., been added to the scriptures. Indeed, every name and every word in any English translation of the Bible, to be consistent, should also be considered as having been added to the scriptures.
certainly never authorized anyone to change His Holy Name to "the LORD", forms of the Hebrew transliterated as ADON, or forms of the Greek transliterated as KURIOS, nor to HaShem, etc.
Exodus 3:14 God said to Moses, "I AM WHO I AM," [EHYEH ASHER EHYEH] and he said, "You shall tell the children of Israel this: "I AM [EHYEH] has sent me to you."
Exodus 3:15 God said moreover to Moses, "You shall tell the children of Israel this,'Yahweh, the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is my name forever, and this is my memorial to all generations.
The English forms EHYEH, JEHOVAH and YAHWEH are all English variations of the one Holy Name represented in the Hebrew, just as Jesus, Joshua, and Yehshua are all English variations of the Hebrew name that was given the Son of God.
See my study on this:
The Holy Name in the Original Hebrew/Greek
http://name.reslight.net/...
There is a difference between having a word to translate and having 4letters with no vowels. You cannot translate YHWH into anything unless you have vowels.
The WT itself said Jehovah is not correct so why are you sayig they are lying? You can get disf for disagreeing with the WTS....BUT then out of the other side of their mouth they said to use the wrong name because man is familiar with the wrong name
It seems it is more important to please man than God. What the heck, the WT is God in the eyes of the JW's as well as Jesus Christ because they say they are your salvation.
No one changed Gods name for the JEWS never spoke Gods name except the high priest spoke it once a year in temple. God gave his name to the Jews and no one else.
The WTS is the thief who wants to be all as they self appoint themselves to be Gods mouthpiece, with no scriptural bacing as they flip flop doctrines because they never got it from God in the first place. Then they say you must belong to their org for salvation in direct opposition to Jesus.Then they assume the inheritance of the JEWS by proclaiming themselves the 144,000. Such is the arrogance of the WTS and the bible tells us what will happen to these false prophets.
Not a good place to be come judgement day,"ResLight" as you fight for the lies of the erroneous men of the WTS/GB, the men of lawlessness.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#315 Sep 22, 2012
dee lightful wrote:
<quoted text> There is a difference between having a word to translate and having 4letters with no vowels. You cannot translate YHWH into anything unless you have vowels.
The WT itself said Jehovah is not correct so why are you sayig they are lying? You can get disf for disagreeing with the WTS....BUT then out of the other side of their mouth they said to use the wrong name because man is familiar with the wrong name
It seems it is more important to please man than God. What the heck, the WT is God in the eyes of the JW's as well as Jesus Christ because they say they are your salvation.
No one changed Gods name for the JEWS never spoke Gods name except the high priest spoke it once a year in temple. God gave his name to the Jews and no one else.
The WTS is the thief who wants to be all as they self appoint themselves to be Gods mouthpiece, with no scriptural bacing as they flip flop doctrines because they never got it from God in the first place. Then they say you must belong to their org for salvation in direct opposition to Jesus.Then they assume the inheritance of the JEWS by proclaiming themselves the 144,000. Such is the arrogance of the WTS and the bible tells us what will happen to these false prophets.
Hi Dee

I just thought I would let you know of some ”New Light” I have become aware of:

This is a web site article that supports "Jehovah" as the correct name.This site also supports the "King James Version(KJV)" of the Bible. The author is John Hinton PHD: Below I cite part of this article –-- you should read the whole article.

www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence_w...

....
Myth of No Vowels

First we must deal with the common myth and that is that there are no vowels expressed in the Hebrew text. This is a convenient line of nonsense for those who want to change the text to fit their own views, but it is a dishonest line.

.....

The Pointing of YHVH

Throughout the Hebrew text the name YHVH appears with two different forms of pointing. The first and most common is with the pointings, sheva, holem, and kamats,(e-o-a), and the second with the vowels E-o-i. I have used e to represent the short vowel that is similar to the English schwa (the Hebrew Sheva can also indicate a stop, but the short vowel sound is phonetically required here), while E is used for the long vowel. Notice that nowhere is there a stop and an E as in Yahweh, nor is there an A as in father in the first syllable. Clearly the y-e-h-o-v-ah spells out Yehovah.

There is vast historical evidence showing that the pronunciation of Jehova/Yehova goes back thousands of years. In the 18th century John Gill outlined examples of the Jehovah pronunciation going back before the time of Christ. The following examples of its use appear in Gill's work and are listed In Awe of Thy Word: "An occurrence from 277 B.C.(p. 249), Josephus in 70 A.D.(pp. 219, 221), the Zohar from 120 AD, A copy of Lamentations from 200 AD, Origen in Psalm 250 quotes Psalm 118:25 where Jehovah is mentioned three times, Jerome in 380 AD, and the grammarian Saadiah Gaon's book on Hebrew diacritics cited the vowels of Jehovah." [Gill, quoted in Riplinger, p.425]

.......

Y to J Issue

If these name cultists find the J so objectionable, why don't they refer to Elijah as Elaiyah, Jeramiah as Yeramaiyah, Jacob as Yakov, Jonathan as Yanatan, Jerusalem as Yerushaleem, and so forth. For that matter why don't they use the Hebrew pronunciation for all of the names in the Bible, such as Dahveed, Moshe (Moses), Shmu'el (Samuel), Sha'ul (Saul), Shlomo (Solomon), and so forth, if they consider the issue to be so important. Since those who call God by a name that is not even Hebrew at all, and since they do so without a scrap of evidence to override the very solid evidence to the contrary, why do they have any constraints at all about inventing whimsical pointings for other names in the Bible?

......

All the Best

Dave

Since: Mar 09

United States

#316 Sep 22, 2012
Paul knew who he was serving, the one ID'd at Psalm 83:18.

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#318 Sep 22, 2012
Nomi wrote:
Paul knew who he was serving, the one ID'd at Psalm 83:18.
ihv nomi is stuck with about 6 verses and ignores all the rest of the bible... thats what brainwashing does to you..
will

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#319 Sep 22, 2012
Rudi wrote:
Col 1:15,16
NWT 
He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all [other] things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All [other] things have been created through him and for him.
In the Kingdom Interlinear Translation (KIT), published by the WT in 1985 (which, according to the WT, is a literal 'word by word' translation of the Greek Scriptures), Col. 1:16, 17 reads this way: "16. because in him it was created the all (things) in the heavens and upon the earth, the (things) visible and the (things) invisible, whether thrones or lordships or governments or authorities; the all (things) through him and into him it has been created; 17. and he is before all (things) and the all (things) in him it has stood together,", which, if rendered correctly, in accordance with the Greek text, this would read: "Col. 1:16, 17 – 16. For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: 17. And he is before all things, and by him all things consist." (KJV)
To deny Jesus' deity the WT twisted the wording throughout the whole Bible. In the NWT Jesus Christ is not revealed as Jehovah or God but rather a created being, a god, which for me is a blasphemy.
......
Hi Rudi

You argue that the NWT added words to the Bible in Colossians, in particular, Colossians 1:15-17. You compared the NWT Interlinear with the NWT Translation.

You are, of course, are aware that not only the NWT but all Bible Translations add words when translating from Greek into English so that it makes sense in English.

Below is a number Count for several Bibles for Colossians Chapter One(1):
(a) Original Koine Greek has 551 words
(b) King James Version has 656 words
(c) New International Version has 673 words
(d) New World Translation has 766 words
(e) Good News Bible has 797 words

Below is the interlinear for Koine Greek from the Scripture4all web site:

www.scripture4all.org/onlineinterlinear/greek...

Colossians 1:16

The Interlinear Koine Greek word for word with alternate words for some in brackets(--).

THAT IN HIM IS-CREATED THE ALL THE IN THE HEAVENS AND THE ON THE LAND(earth) THE SEEN(visible) AND THE UN-SEEN(invisible) IF-BESIDES(whether) THRONES IF-BESIDES(or) MASTERDOMS(lordships) IF-BESIDES(or) ORIGINALS(soveignity) IF-BESIDES(or) AUTHORITIES THE ALL THRU(through) HIM AND INTO HIM HAS BEEN CREATED

And the how Scripture4org Translated Colossians 1:16 below:

KJV
For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and
that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

As one can see from the above Greek into English is not always translated word for word.

On the question of why the NWT translated this verse with [other] bracketed has been noted in other threads and the reason given is because (other) is implied. This quote from Dr. Jason BeDuhn in his book “Truth in Translation” at page 87 elaborates:

"Other" is implied in "all" and the NW simply makes what is implicit explicit. You can argue whether it is necessary or not to do this. But I think the objections that have been raised to it show that it is, in fact, necessary, because those who object want to negate the meaning of the phrase "firstborn of creation". If adding "other" prevents this misreading of the Biblical text, then it is useful to have it there."

All the Best

Dave

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#320 Sep 22, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Dee
I just thought I would let you know of some ”New Light” I have become aware of:
This is a web site article that supports "Jehovah" as the correct name.This site also supports the "King James Version(KJV)" of the Bible. The author is John Hinton PHD: Below I cite part of this article –-- you should read the whole article.
www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence_w...
....
Myth of No Vowels SNIP SNIP

Dave
ihv first what is this guy a phd of?? whats his expertise?

second hebrew does have vowel points.. EXCEPT FOR THE TETRAGRAM

what manu does he give that shows the tetra with vowel points.???
will

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#321 Sep 23, 2012
ihveit wrote:
<quoted text>
ihv first what is this guy a phd of?? whats his expertise?
second hebrew does have vowel points.. EXCEPT FOR THE TETRAGRAM
what manu does he give that shows the tetra with vowel points.???
will
Hi Ihveit

This is from John Hintons his web site KJV-Asia:

"My Credentials

I am a born-again, Independent Baptist and a strict, uncompromising, unapologetic, relentless, feisty and fierce defender of the King James Bible as the true, living and inerrant Word of God as it stands now, with no concessions having to do with nonexistent original autographs.

A scholar of Hebrew and Greek, who does not use his scholarship to "correct" the Bible, but only to defend it.

I am proficient in, knowledgeable of, or currently am currently studying, virtually every language relevant to early biblical translation (Aramaic, Syriac, Samaritan, Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, Gothic, Latin and Old English, as well as French, Italian, Spanish, German and I possess elementary knowledge of several other European languages.

A professional translator and desktop publisher of Arabic, Persian (Farsi), Hindi, Urdu and other languages for translation companies, attorneys and corporations.

A provider of Bible Seminars designed to teach how to defend the King James Bible.

An expert on comparative religion, including Hinduism, Islam and Judaism.

A former Ph.D. student in the Near Eastern Languages and Civilization Department of Harvard University.

A holder of an M.T.S. from Harvard Divinity School in Near Eastern and South Asian studies and a thorn in the side to the school's liberal radicals.

A holder of a B.A. in Arabic, Summa cum laude with Honors and Distinction, 2nd Major in South Asian Studies, Minor in Persian, International Studies Certificate from the Ohio State University.
I Completed a "Year in India Program" in Benaris, India, where I studied Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit and Arabic.

Completed the Summer Intensive program in Hindi and Urdu at the University of Wisconsin.

Completed a Summer Arabic program at Yarmouk University in Irbid, Jordan.

I traveled extensively in India, Nepal and many other countries.

I am a fast and proficient typist in several languages, including those of India and Arabic (well over 70 words per minute in English).

All the Best

Dave
Snorkler

Germiston, South Africa

#322 Sep 23, 2012
dr of religion wrote:
<quoted text> So how do you determine what day to go to work or meet somebody with out using the days of the week?
What ?
Snorkler

Germiston, South Africa

#323 Sep 23, 2012
ihveit wrote:
<quoted text>
ihv nomi is stuck with about 6 verses and ignores all the rest of the bible... thats what brainwashing does to you..
will
Hypocrit ...you have been complaining to KGR because he dares to post scripture .

“"Leave the dead horses alone"”

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#324 Sep 23, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
.......
On the question of why the NWT translated this verse with [other] bracketed has been noted in other threads and the reason given is because (other) is implied. This quote from Dr. Jason BeDuhn in his book “Truth in Translation” at page 87 elaborates:
"Other" is implied in "all" and the NW simply makes what is implicit explicit. You can argue whether it is necessary or not to do this. But I think the objections that have been raised to it show that it is, in fact, necessary, because those who object want to negate the meaning of the phrase "firstborn of creation". If adding "other" prevents this misreading of the Biblical text, then it is useful to have it there."
......
Hi Dave, As Jason BeDhun states in his book on pages 85 and 86

"So what exactly are objectors to "other" arguing for as the
meaning of the phrase "all things"? That Christ created himself (v. 16)? That Christ is before God and that God was made to exist by means of Christ (v. 17)? That Christ, too, needs to be reconciled to God (v.20)? When we spell out what is denied by the use of "other" we can see clearly how absurd the objection is..........It is ironic that the translation of Colossians 1: 15-20 that has
received the most criticism is the one where the "added words" are fully justified by what is implied in the Greek. And if we, under other conditions, might have said that making the implied "other" explicit is not altogether necessary, we now recognize by the gross distortion of the passage in other translations that what the NW translators have done is certainly necessary after all. If the NIV, NRSV, TEV, and LB translators are willing to "add words" in order to shift the meaning of the passage away from Christ's connection with creation and "all things," then it is clearly justifiable for the NW to cement that connection, explicitly expressed in the passage, by bringing to the foreground of translation those implied nuances which go along with the meaning of the passage as a whole. Since several major translation teams themselves have misunderstood
Colossians 1: 15-20, it seems this is a clear case where Nida and Taber's principle applies, and we are called upon to make the implicit explicit."

After you research the other translations that completely changed what the original Greek meant you begin to realize the specific bias that people have on these verses of Colossians 1.

I suggest people read the whole chapter of Jason BeDhuns book that covers this passage in the bible to realize how ridiculous peoples claims are in relation to this scriptural passage when speaking against the NWT.
Messianic Jew

Orlando, FL

#325 Sep 23, 2012
Snorkler wrote:
<quoted text>Hypocrit ...you have been complaining to KGR because he dares to post scripture .
Jehovah's Witnesses are the real hypocrites and false prophets.

Actually, anyone who takes the New Testament seriously and literally should undergo a psychiatric evaluation.
dr of religion

United States

#326 Sep 23, 2012
Snorkler wrote:
<quoted text> What ?
Where? When? Why? How? Hah? Well snorkelberry my point is that if you use the days of the week in your life you are involved in pagan traditions.You claim you dont celebrate holidays because they're pagan.Yet will havs pagan weddings,wedding rings,wedding anniverserys,and use the days of the week that are all named after pagan gods.So do you pick and choose your pagan use?
Messianic Jew

Orlando, FL

#327 Sep 23, 2012
What's wrong with pagan terms and holidays?

The entire Judaic structure is steeped in pagan customs. The word "Jehovah" is pagan. Anything to do with any totemic deity is pagan.

"Jehovah" is one of 40+ Egyptian deities that Moses could have chosen from.

You people do realize that Judaism is just an extension of Egyptian religious culture, right?
dee lightful

Piedmont, SC

#328 Sep 23, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Dee
I just thought I would let you know of some ”New Light” I have become aware of:
This is a web site article that supports "Jehovah" as the correct name.This site also supports the "King James Version(KJV)" of the Bible. The author is John Hinton PHD: Below I cite part of this article –-- you should read the whole article.
www.kjv-asia.com/authorized_version_defence_w...
....
Myth of No Vowels
First we must deal with the common myth and that is that there are no vowels expressed in the Hebrew text. This is a convenient line of nonsense for those who want to change the text to fit their own views, but it is a dishonest line.
.....
The Pointing of YHVH
Throughout the Hebrew text the name YHVH appears with two different forms of pointing. The first and most common is with the pointings, sheva, holem, and kamats,(e-o-a), and the second with the vowels E-o-i. I have used e to represent the short vowel that is similar to the English schwa (the Hebrew Sheva can also indicate a stop, but the short vowel sound is phonetically required here), while E is used for the long vowel. Notice that nowhere is there a stop and an E as in Yahweh, nor is there an A as in father in the first syllable. Clearly the y-e-h-o-v-ah spells out Yehovah.
There is vast historical evidence showing that the pronunciation of Jehova/Yehova goes back thousands of years. In the 18th century John Gill outlined examples of the Jehovah pronunciation going back before the time of Christ. The following examples of its use appear in Gill's work and are listed In Awe of Thy Word: "An occurrence from 277 B.C.(p. 249), Josephus in 70 A.D.(pp. 219, 221), the Zohar from 120 AD, A copy of Lamentations from 200 AD, Origen in Psalm 250 quotes Psalm 118:25 where Jehovah is mentioned three times, Jerome in 380 AD, and the grammarian Saadiah Gaon's book on Hebrew diacritics cited the vowels of Jehovah." [Gill, quoted in Riplinger, p.425]
.......
Y to J Issue
If these name cultists find the J so objectionable, why don't they refer to Elijah as Elaiyah, Jeramiah as Yeramaiyah, Jacob as Yakov, Jonathan as Yanatan, Jerusalem as Yerushaleem, and so forth. For that matter why don't they use the Hebrew pronunciation for all of the names in the Bible, such as Dahveed, Moshe (Moses), Shmu'el (Samuel), Sha'ul (Saul), Shlomo (Solomon), and so forth, if they consider the issue to be so important. Since those who call God by a name that is not even Hebrew at all, and since they do so without a scrap of evidence to override the very solid evidence to the contrary, why do they have any constraints at all about inventing whimsical pointings for other names in the Bible?
......
All the Best
Dave
i am sorry Dave, but i am not interested in the opinion of other men for there are other opinions who can show that opinion is wrong so just what is the point? Have you not get come to your own opinion based on scriptures rather than other men?
As far as the name Jehovah goes I will listen to what Gods own people say in the OT, and common sense that says you cannot translate YHWH if their are no vowels. The best that can be done is to guess as to the vowels and that in essence is what the WT itself has stated.... It is not accurate but use it because man is familiar with it. Sorry, but familiarity with man's made up name is still not fact, but an insult to God to care about the false name men have brought about instead of the truth.

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#329 Sep 23, 2012
Dave47 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Ihveit
This is from John Hintons his web site KJV-Asia:
"My Credentials
I am a born-again, Independent Baptist and a strict, uncompromising, unapologetic, relentless, feisty and fierce defender of the King James Bible as the true, living and inerrant Word of God as it stands now, with no concessions having to do with nonexistent original autographs.
A scholar of Hebrew and Greek, who does not use his scholarship to "correct" the Bible, but only to defend it.
I am proficient in, knowledgeable of, or currently am currently studying, virtually every language relevant to early biblical translation (Aramaic, Syriac, Samaritan, Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, Gothic, Latin and Old English, as well as French, Italian, Spanish, German and I possess elementary knowledge of several other European languages.
A professional translator and desktop publisher of Arabic, Persian (Farsi), Hindi, Urdu and other languages for translation companies, attorneys and corporations.
A provider of Bible Seminars designed to teach how to defend the King James Bible.
An expert on comparative religion, including Hinduism, Islam and Judaism.
A former Ph.D. student in the Near Eastern Languages and Civilization Department of Harvard University.
A holder of an M.T.S. from Harvard Divinity School in Near Eastern and South Asian studies and a thorn in the side to the school's liberal radicals.
A holder of a B.A. in Arabic, Summa cum laude with Honors and Distinction, 2nd Major in South Asian Studies, Minor in Persian, International Studies Certificate from the Ohio State University.
I Completed a "Year in India Program" in Benaris, India, where I studied Hindi, Urdu, Sanskrit and Arabic.
Completed the Summer Intensive program in Hindi and Urdu at the University of Wisconsin.
Completed a Summer Arabic program at Yarmouk University in Irbid, Jordan.
I traveled extensively in India, Nepal and many other countries.
I am a fast and proficient typist in several languages, including those of India and Arabic (well over 70 words per minute in English).
All the Best
Dave
ihv he certainly did enough bragging on him self huh? heck if i am not copying something i can type at least 100 words per minute.. with a few errors HA lolol
will

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#330 Sep 23, 2012
Gods Kingdom Rules wrote:
<quoted text> Hi Dave, As Jason BeDhun states in his book on pages 85 and 86
"So what exactly are objectors to "other" arguing for as the
meaning of the phrase "all things"? That Christ created himself (v. 16)? That Christ is before God and that God was made to exist by means of Christ (v. 17)? That Christ, too, needs to be reconciled to God (v.20)? When we spell out what is denied by the use of "other" we can see clearly how absurd the objection is..........It is ironic that the translation of Colossians 1: 15-20 that has
received the most criticism is the one where the "added words" are fully justified by what is implied in the Greek. And if we, under other conditions, might have said that making the implied "other" explicit is not altogether necessary, we now recognize by the gross distortion of the passage in other translations that what the NW translators have done is certainly necessary after all. If the NIV, NRSV, TEV, and LB translators are willing to "add words" in order to shift the meaning of the passage away from Christ's connection with creation and "all things," then it is clearly justifiable for the NW to cement that connection, explicitly expressed in the passage, by bringing to the foreground of translation those implied nuances which go along with the meaning of the passage as a whole. Since several major translation teams themselves have misunderstood
Colossians 1: 15-20, it seems this is a clear case where Nida and Taber's principle applies, and we are called upon to make the implicit explicit."
After you research the other translations that completely changed what the original Greek meant you begin to realize the specific bias that people have on these verses of Colossians 1.
I suggest people read the whole chapter of Jason BeDhuns book that covers this passage in the bible to realize how ridiculous peoples claims are in relation to this scriptural passage when speaking against the NWT.
ihv what i would suggest is to not waste your money.. instead go listen to the debates between this dude and robert bowman... you will certainly learn a lots more doing that and CHEAPER

ihv for those of you who have a copy of the book why not check out pp 169 of ""Truth in Translation"

suprise but he claims:
BeDuhn: Having concluded that the NWT is one of the most accurate English translations of the New Testament currently available, I would be remiss if I did not mention one peculiarity of this translation that by most conventions of translation would be considered an inaccuracy, however little this inaccuracy changes the meaning of most of the verses where it appears. I am referring to the use of "Jehovah" in the NWT New Testament. "Jehovah" (or "Yahweh" or some other reconstruction of the divine name consisting of the four consonants YHWH) is the personal name of God used more than six thousand times in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament. But the name never appears in any Greek manuscript of any book of the New Testament. So, to introduce the name "Jehovah" into the New Testament, as the NWT does two-hundred-thirty-seven times, is not accurate translation by the most basic principle of accuracy: adherence to the original Greek text.(p. 169)

read thst somewheres.. is it correct?
will

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#331 Sep 23, 2012
Snorkler wrote:
<quoted text>Hypocrit ...you have been complaining to KGR because he dares to post scripture .
ihv quoting scripture means little if its not on the context of the subject at hand... and since he is afraid to answer my questions honestly and directly his scriptu4e is worthless to me..

like a good typical jw they throw tons of scripture at you acting all intellingent and most of them or totally off subjce.

and there is your answer
will

“email at [email protected]

Since: Dec 07

central louisiana

#332 Sep 23, 2012
Snorkler wrote:
<quoted text>Hypocrit ...you have been complaining to KGR because he dares to post scripture .
ihv ohhh and you should really check out spelling.. IS IT KGR/ or are you speaking of someone else?/
will

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#333 Sep 23, 2012
ihveit wrote:
<quoted text>ihv he certainly did enough bragging on him self huh? heck if i am not copying something i can type at least 100 words per minute.. with a few errors HA lolol
will
Hi Ihveit

Yes, when I first read it I thought it was a job application -- a little slow on typing though. LOL

All the Best

Dave

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jehovah's Witness Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
JW women dare to wear pants to the kingdom halls! (Jun '14) 4 min masonbridals 201
What is the trinity? (Apr '13) 32 min BetheljudgmentDan... 24,029
Do you churchoids agree with IrishDumb & Dumboy? 38 min BetheljudgmentDan... 254
Jesus- Lesser God or Archangel? 39 min BetheljudgmentDan... 35
How Could God Essentially Turn an Angel Into God? 40 min BetheljudgmentDan... 460
John 1:1 1 hr imagoodboy 34
Loving the taste of wormwood. 1 hr BetheljudgmentDan... 211
Two-class System of JWs explained. 4 hr PrufSammy 257
News Sainsbury's cafe customer refused black pudding... 7 hr PrufSammy 115
More from around the web