Comments
32,961 - 32,980 of 38,446 Comments Last updated 2 hrs ago

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34382
May 13, 2013
 
Working for the Lord wrote:
Being gay causes more than just being a sin in God's eyes. God knows the problems it will cause on all people. First there's the fact that gay people are obviously not christians and this will have an impact on people in and of itself. It will destroy the structure of what real marriage is all about in our lives which has been since time began. Then you have psychiatric problems on people because of the sense that life isn't normal anymore, and it wont be. The behaviour of people will change for the worse,, because the fact that most people do not condone the gay lifestyle, and those who don't, unfortunately will become more irritable and retaliation of gay people will increase. More sinful acts will increase because of gay marriage, such as rape, abnormal sexual behaviours and on and on. You remember Sodom and Gomorrah how the gay lifestyle included including rape, gang rape,and sexual torture, living simply for pleasure instead of hope in Jesus. Medical issues, family problems that will be unique only because of gay marriage. Children having two men or two women as parents, which will cause undue stress on kids. Family traditions that you and I cherish will begin to be overtaken. Look at Ellen Degeneres on how her appearance has changed to the point that she looks like a man, compared to how she looked just 10 years ago. Determing in some gay marriages who becomes the mom or dad. Entire generations will be changed from this type of marriage. There will be problems of all sorts that many people aren't even aware of. Laws will have to be changed in the future in every city, state, and federal level to accomodate these people, and this will be a chaotic task to acheive.Again the problem is this lifestyle brings down God's way of life which he knows what we need more than we do. People becoming lawless and life for christians will be even more difficult, not to mention those who are lost but having to fight their way to find the truth in a world gone wrong. Mother and daughter relationships, son and dad relationships, things women do together, things men do together. Bonding with your son or daughter will become a thing that will cause emeotional problems for sure. Mothers day, Father's day, boy and girl scouting, in other words every single thing you and I have always cherished will be changed simply to allow gay people to live a life of sin. The beauty of a marriage in which a married couple start a family the way it was meant to be, gay people cant do this obviously. Adopting kids, and increase in young girls selling their babies for the gay couples and these kids growing up in a dysfunctional lifestyle isn't what they need. The crime rate for domestic abuse will be the same for gay people also. So yes there's more to it than just saying God says it's a sin, much much more.

Is this satire or the worst slippery slope fallacy ever?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34383
May 13, 2013
 
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
As a disciple (Student) Jesus gave us instruction. Like in How vital it is to gain accurate knowledge of what the resurrection is and what it means for mankind! Also essential is knowledge of God and Christ, for in prayer Jesus said:“This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ.”(John 17:3)
First, they were to search out those who were “deserving.” But how were the disciples to treat those who did not receive them favorably?
Jesus told them to ‘shake the dust off their feet’ and go on their way. This means that they would get on with their work of declaring the “good news” and not waste time in angry disputes that would only irritate the householder and rob the disciple of his peace and joy.(Matt. 10:13; Acts 13:50-52)

Too bad members of the watchtower cult distort what Jesus actually taught.

Matt 23:13.

You will go to Sheol.

Luke 16:24
2 Peter 2:4
Matthew 10:28
Revelation 14:11
Revelation 19:20
Revelation 20:10
2 Thessalonians 1:5-9

You can run away from the reality the bible teaches but you will be judged by it.

Will God accept, "Oh Yahweh (you will know his true name at this time) I believe the false doctrine of the JW cult without critically examining it. Will you let me go to heaven anyway?

I think not.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34384
May 13, 2013
 
Student wrote:
Jesus Christ—God’s Beloved Son
“Also, there was a voice from the heavens that said:‘This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.’”—MATTHEW 3:17.
JESUS CHRIST was baptized at the age of 30 by being immersed in water. When he came up out of the water, a voice from heaven said:“This is my Son, the beloved, whom I have approved.”(Matthew 3:17) That voice was God’s voice. On another occasion, in prayer to God, Jesus said:“Father, glorify your name.” And when Jesus had said that, God’s “voice came out of heaven:‘I both glorified it and will glorify it again.’”—John 12:28.
From these accounts, even a child can understand that the relationship between almighty God and Jesus Christ was that of a father and his beloved son, two different individuals. Yet, this simple Bible truth is denied by the religions of Christendom.
They insist that Jesus Christ is God Almighty himself, the second person of a Trinity, the third person being the holy spirit.
That teaching has caused great confusion among the people of Christendom’s religions, which is one reason why the New Catholic Encyclopedia calls the Trinity a mystery.
Indeed, it causes confusion even among the clergy, for that encyclopedia also says:“There are few teachers of Trinitarian theology in Roman Catholic seminaries who have not been badgered at one time or another by the question,‘But how does one preach the Trinity?’ And if the question is symptomatic of confusion on the part of the students, perhaps it is no less symptomatic of similar confusion on the part of their professors.”
That confusing doctrine is the central belief of Catholic and Protestant religions. The Catholic Encyclopedia states:“The Trinity is the term employed to signify the central doctrine of the Christian religion . . . Thus, in the words of the Athanasian Creed:‘the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, and yet there are not three Gods but one God.’”
Similarly, in a court case involving Jehovah’s Witnesses in Greece, the Greek Orthodox Church said:“The fundamental doctrine of Christianity, in which all Christians confess belief . . . regardless of sect or dogma, is . . . the Trinity, that God is One in three persons.” The Greek Orthodox Church also stated:“Christians are those who accept Christ as God.” It said that those who do not accept the Trinity are not Christians but heretics.
However, if this “fundamental” Trinity teaching of Christendom is not true, if it is a lie, then the opposite would be the case. True Christians would reject it. Those who have apostatized from Christianity would cling to it. With what consequences for the latter group?
In the last book of the Bible,“a revelation by Jesus Christ, which God gave him,” we read concerning those who are disqualified from eternal life in God’s Kingdom:“Outside are the dogs and those who practice spiritism and the fornicators and the murderers and the idolaters and everyone liking and carrying on a lie.”—Revelation 1:1; 22:15.
Because of its importance, we should be informed as to where this Trinity concept originated and why it originated. Who is really behind it? What does modern Bible scholarship have to say about it? But before discussing these matters, let us examine further what God’s own inspired Word says.—2 Timothy 3:16, 17.

Even when Cults speak correctly they are still cults and lack critical understanding.

You cult is guilty of murder, destroying lives, leading people away from God, creating cynicism, and generally growing rotten fruit.

In their ignorance they create lies that suit them and call it the "Holy Bible".

What does a REAL translation of the bible say about such people and what will be their end?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34385
May 13, 2013
 
Working for the Lord wrote:
<quoted text> Finally, something that I agree with 100%. I urge you to go to the nearest Church of Christ and get right with God by becoming a christian, take care.

I used to be a member of the Church of Christ and one of my best friend is a CoC minister. They are not perfect.

Sure, they are a lot closer than the JW cult, but who isn't?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34386
May 13, 2013
 
Student wrote:
Jesus mentioned God’s superiority when the mother of two of the disciples asked that her sons sit one at the right and the other at the left of Jesus when he came into his Kingdom.
He answered:“This sitting down at my right hand and at my left is not mine to give.”(Matthew 20:23)
If Jesus had been almighty God, it would have been his to give. But it was not. It was his Father’s to give.
Similarly, when relating his prophecy about the end of this system of things, Jesus stated:“Concerning that day or the hour nobody knows, neither the angels in heaven nor the Son, but the Father.”(Mark 13:32) Had Jesus been God Almighty, he would have known that day and the hour. But he did not know because he was not the All-knowing God. He was God’s Son and did not know everything that his Father knew.
When Jesus was about to die, he showed subjection to his Father in praying:“Father, if you wish, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, let, not my will, but yours take place.”(Luke 22:42)
To whom was Jesus praying?
To himself? No, he was praying to his Father in heaven. This is clearly shown by his saying:“Let, not my will, but yours take place.” And then, at his death, Jesus cried out:“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”(Mark 15:34)
To whom was Jesus crying out?
To himself? No, he was crying out to his Father who was in heaven.
After Jesus died, he was in the tomb for about three days.
Who resurrected him?
Since he was dead, he could not resurrect himself. And if he was not really dead, then he could not have paid the ransom for Adam’s sin. But he did die, and was nonexistent for about three days.
The apostle Peter tells us who resurrected Jesus:“God resurrected him by loosing the pangs of death.”(Acts 2:24) The superior, God Almighty, raised the lesser one, his beloved Son, Jesus, from the dead.
To illustrate: When Jesus resurrected Lazarus from the dead, who was superior?
Jesus was superior, since he could bring Lazarus back from the dead.(John 11:41-44) It was the same when God resurrected Jesus. God was superior, since he could bring Jesus back from the dead.
Jesus could not possibly be God himself, for Jesus was created by God.
Note how Benjamin Wilson’s Emphatic Diaglott renders Apocalypse (Revelation) chapter 3, verse 14:“These things says the Amen, the faithful and true witness [Jesus], the beginning of the creation of God.”
Similarly, Colossians 1:15, 16 says of Jesus:“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 ... All other things have been created through him and for him.”
So in heaven almighty God directly created his Son and then “by means of him,” or “through him,” created other things, much as a skilled workman might have a trained employee do work for him.
Those things created “by means of him” did not include Jesus himself, for God had already created him. Thus, he is called the “firstborn,” the “only-begotten.” When a child is the firstborn, the only-begotten, it never means that the child is the same as the father. It always means that there are two different personalities involved, father and child.

You go on for multiple posts stating obvious stuff that theologians have known for hundreds of years.

Don't pretend this doctrine is unique to the Watchtower cult. They simply stole other peoples work.

They are EVIL and speak with the authority of the authority of the author of lies.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34387
May 13, 2013
 
Student wrote:
Restoration of the divine name in translation.
Recognizing that this must have been the case, some translators have included the name Jehovah in their renderings of the Christian Greek Scriptures.
The Emphatic Diaglott, a 19th-century translation by Benjamin Wilson, contains the name Jehovah a number of times, particularly where the Christian writers quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures.
But as far back as the 14th century the Tetragrammaton had already begun to be used in translations of the Christian Scriptures into Hebrew, beginning with the translation of Matthew into Hebrew that was incorporated in the work &#700;E&#8242;ven bochan by Shem-Tob ben Isaac Ibn Shaprut. Wherever Matthew quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures, this translation used the Tetragrammaton in each case of its occurrence.
Many other Hebrew translations have since followed the same practice.
As to the properness of this course, note the following acknowledgment by R. B. Girdlestone, late principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford. The statement was made before manuscript evidence came to light showing that the Greek Septuagint originally contained the name Jehovah. He said:“If that [Septuagint] version had retained the word [Jehovah], or had even used one Greek word for Jehovah and another for Adonai, such usage would doubtless have been retained in the discourses and arguments of the N. T. Thus our Lord, in quoting the 110th Psalm, instead of saying,‘The Lord said unto my Lord,’ might have said,‘Jehovah said unto Adoni.’”
Proceeding on this same basis (which evidence now shows to have been actual fact) he adds:“Supposing a Christian scholar were engaged in translating the Greek Testament into Hebrew, he would have to consider, each time the word &#922;&#973;&#961; &#953;&#959;&#962; occurred, whether there was anything in the context to indicate its true Hebrew representative; and this is the difficulty which would arise in translating the N. T. into all languages if the title Jehovah had been allowed to stand in the [Septuagint translation of the] O. T. The Hebrew Scriptures would be a guide in many passages: thus, wherever the expression ‘the angel of the Lord’ occurs, we know that the word Lord represents Jehovah; a similar conclusion as to the expression ‘the word of the Lord’ would be arrived at, if the precedent set by the O. T. were followed; so also in the case of the title ‘the Lord of Hosts.’ Wherever, on the contrary, the expression ‘My Lord’ or ‘Our Lord’ occurs, we should know that the word Jehovah would be inadmissible, and Adonai or Adoni would have to be used.”(Synonyms of the Old Testament, 1897, p. 43)
It is on such a basis that translations of the Greek Scriptures (mentioned earlier) containing the name Jehovah have proceeded.
Outstanding, however, in this regard is the New World Translation, used throughout this work, in which the divine name in the form “Jehovah” appears 237 times in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
As has been shown, there is sound basis for this.(it-2 Jehovah pp. 9-10)

I have told you and SHOWN you REPEATEDLY that 'Jehovah' is a LIE.

It WAS an honest mistake.

Today, since we know better, it is a LIE.

Satan LAUGHS and smiles whenever the blasphemous name "Jehovah" is used and Yahweh, the true name of God is SUPPRESSED.

You are living a lie and are too STUPID to understand it.

READ A REAL BOOK written by REAL scholars of the bible.

If you consume crap you will become crap.

God does not accept ignorance as an excuse when the truth is readily available to you.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34388
May 13, 2013
 
Student wrote:
God's name Jehovah was used by Jesus and his disciples.


FALSE!

YOU KNOW this is a LIE.

You KNOW that the word 'Jehovah' was made up in the 11th century.

You KNOW that the word did NOT exist prior to that.

By propagating lies YOU HAVE BECOME AN AGENT OF SATAN.

What will Yahweh do with you?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34389
May 13, 2013
 
Text: Isaiah 8:19-22
I. Members of the Jehovah’s Witnesses have become excited in recent times. An author with a Ph.D. after his name has written a book saying the New World Translation and the New American Bible (a Catholic translation) are the most accurate translations.
A. He compared nine translations:
1. King James Version
2. New Revised Standard Version
3. New International Version
4. New American Bible
5. New American Standard Bible
6. Amplified Bible
7. Living Bible
8. Today's English Version
9. New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures
B. He claims that because he teaches at a state university and claims no religious preference that he can minimize bias in his judgement.
C. He makes the determination on the following:
1. Bowing to Bias: Which is more accurate "bow" or "worship" in Matthew 28:9 and related verses?
2. Grasping at Accuracy: Did Jesus not "exploit" his equality with God or did he not "grasp" for equality with God at Philippians 2:6?
3. When is a Man Not a Man?: This chapter deals with gender bias issues.
4. Probing the Implicit Meaning: Should words be added to translated text of Colossians 1:15-20 to clarify the Greek meaning?
5. Words Together and Apart: Should Titus 2:13 be translated to read that Jesus and God are the same or should they be differentiated?
6. An Uncertain Throne: Which is the least biased translation of Hebrews 1:8. "Your throne O God" or "God is your throne"?
7. Tampering with Tenses: What is the correct tense to use in the English translation of John 8:58.
8. And the Word Was ... What?: Should the English translation of John 1:1 say (essentially) that Jesus is "God" or "divine"?
9. The Spirit Writ Large: When should the Greek word for "spirit" (such as used in "holy spirit") be capitalized?
D. For people familiar with Jehovah’s Witnesses doctrine, alarm bells ring because most of those issues are ones central to Jehovah’s Witnesses. This is not a theologically neutral list.
E. The plot thickens when you learn that Dr. Beduhn uses the Kingdom Interlinear Translation for his Greek classes at Northern Arizona State University – an interlinear text following Westcott - Hort’s Greek text (not one of the better texts), published by ... the Jehovah’s Witnesses.
F. Oh, and Jason BeDuhn received his Master of Arts in Theological Studies from Harvard Divinity School. He received a PhD from the University of Indiana in Comparative Religious Studies. While he teaches Greek at the university, his degree is not in Koine Greek, he is not a known Greek scholar, nor a Bible translator.
G. In other words, there is justified concern that his claims are biased.
II. Perhaps you don’t know this, but the Jehovah’s Witnesses do not claim that the translation was done by translators who knew Hebrew and Greek.
A.“A translation committee of experienced anointed Christians was organized to produce the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures in English.”[Watchtower, October 15, 1997,“How the Bible Came to Us, p. 11-12.]
1.“Experienced” means they had been a part of the Jehovah’s Witnesses for a long time.
2.“Anointed” means they were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
B. During a court trial in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1954, Fred Franz, head of the Jehovah’s Witnesses publicity department, was asked to explain how the translation and interpretation of the Bible was made. Mr. Franz replied, they emanated from God,“passed to the Holy Spirit who, invisible, communicates with Jehovah’s Witnesses – and the publicity department.”
C.“Fred Franz however, was the only one with sufficient knowledge of the Bible languages to attempt translation of this kind. He had studied Greek for two years in the University of Cincinnati but was only self-taught in Hebrew.”[Crisis of Conscience, Raymond Franz, page 50].
1. When asked in the courtroom if he could translate Genesis 2:4 into Hebrew, Mr. Fanz replied that he could not.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34390
May 13, 2013
 
Look and read carefully and you will see why the JH's are a false doctrine by what, Mr. Fred Franz head of the their own publicity dept. says,, During a court trial in Glasgow, Scotland, in 1954, Fred Franz, head of the Jehovah’s Witnesses publicity department, was asked to explain how the translation and interpretation of the Bible was made. Mr. Franz replied, they emanated from God,“passed to the Holy Spirit who, invisible, communicates with Jehovah’s Witnesses – and the publicity department.”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34391
May 13, 2013
 
Student, if you will, would you explain to all of us on why so many failed attempts at predicting the figurative armageddon. Over ten. Specific dates where given in 1875, 1914, 1915, 1918, 1920, 1925, 1941, and 1975. Of course prior to the 1930's they were known as Bible Students. So technically Jehovah's Witnesses only did in 1941 and 1975. However JW's do accept the Bible Students as being the same organization.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34393
May 14, 2013
 
yon wrote:
<quoted text>
Yahweh has not changed his mind about what is suitable for food and what isn't. His instructions were for Israel and those who would attach themselves by learning his decrees. Only man has decided to keep the way of pagans. BTW - Shavuot is this week.
"The Importance of Eating Clean"
http://www.eliyah.com/mp3/broadcast/04132013s ...
As evidence that the food regulations were abolished, the book of Acts includes an account in which the apostle Peter saw a heavenly vision of unclean animals being lowered from heaven. A voice from heaven said to Peter,“Rise, Peter, kill, and eat”(Acts 10:13). Peter responded that he did not eat unclean animals. The heavenly voice countered by saying,“What God has cleansed you must not call common”(10:15). In the immediate context, the vision was designed for Peter to understand that God was arranging for the Gospel to be preached to the Gentiles. But the interchange also manifests the fact that the regulations for clean and unclean animals had been altered so that animals that once were unclean to the Jew were now fit to eat.

In a passage that has a direct application to the eating of pork, Paul wrote to Timothy:


Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer (1 Timothy 4:1-5, emp. added).

Under the New Law of Christ, it is no longer wrong to eat animals such as pigs or catfish, since such regulations have been removed. Those who want to be accepted by God no longer have to offer up physical animal sacrifices, since Christ offered Himself on the cross as the ultimate, permanent sacrifice for sins (Hebrews 9:28).

When Christ died on the cross, His New Law went into effect (Hebrews 9:16-22). While it is true that some of the things in the Old Law, such as the prohibition to murder or lie, are repeated in the New Law, many regulations were not carried over. The only way to know what God expects of individuals under the New Law is to study the 27 books in the New Testament that contain this law. Ultimately, all people who have lived after Christ’s death on the cross until His Second Coming will be judged by this New Law (see John 12:48).
athiest

Aughton, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34396
May 14, 2013
 
WATCHTOWER wrote:
ya,and only 700 get to heaven
the remnant goto heaven 700 is not accurate 144,000 more like
Remnant

East Brunswick, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34397
May 14, 2013
 
athiest wrote:
the remnant goto heaven 700 is not accurate 144,000 more like

The 144,000 is a symbolic passage for spiritual Israel

12 tribes x 12,000
144,000

Has nothing to do with the physical tribes of Israel or Jews as many believe today.

If you are going to be retarded learn to spell it.
athiest

Aughton, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34398
May 14, 2013
 
Remnant wrote:
<quoted text>
The 144,000 is a symbolic passage for spiritual Israel
12 tribes x 12,000
144,000
Has nothing to do with the physical tribes of Israel or Jews as many believe today.
If you are going to be retarded learn to spell it.
wow wota nasty way to speak why bring in retarded for a spelling mistake eh why the aggresive attitude why are u online hating ppl

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34399
May 14, 2013
 
Who are the 144,000?

The Watchtower Society teaches this is a literal number of those who will go to heaven. Revelation is written in figurative language (Rev. 1:1). If the number 144,000 is literal, its composition must also be literal, which means the number is composed of 12,000 Jews from each tribe mentioned, and none from Dan (Rev. 7:1-8). The number was sealed, probably indicating God’s protection of all His people on earth; the great multitude had white robes, probably indicating victorious saints in the keeping of God (Rev. 7:4,9). John identified the great multitude as in heaven (Rev. 19:1). This is figurative language, but the Bible plainly teaches that there is ultimately one hope (Eph. 4:4); that hope is reserved in heaven for the faithful (1 Pet. 1:3-5). The Bible knows nothing of an earth class and a heaven class in eternity.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34402
May 14, 2013
 
yon wrote:
I don't suppose anybody has a clue as to what Shavuot is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shavuot
Student

Oregon City, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34403
May 14, 2013
 
yon wrote:
So do you eat pork? Do jw's eat pork? I'd say you have the same anti-semetic church fathers
Under the Mosaic Law, pork was not an acceptable food.(Romans 14:2; Leviticus 11:7)

That Law was and is no longer binding after Jesus died.(Ephesians 2:15)

Three and a half years after Jesus’ death, an angel told the apostle Peter that from God’s standpoint no food should be viewed as defiled.(Acts 11:7-12)

With these factors in mind, some Jewish Christians may have felt that they could eat pork—or enjoy some other food that had been prohibited under the Mosaic Law.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34404
May 14, 2013
 
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Under the Mosaic Law, pork was not an acceptable food.(Romans 14:2; Leviticus 11:7)
That Law was and is no longer binding after Jesus died.(Ephesians 2:15)
Three and a half years after Jesus’ death, an angel told the apostle Peter that from God’s standpoint no food should be viewed as defiled.(Acts 11:7-12)
With these factors in mind, some Jewish Christians may have felt that they could eat pork—or enjoy some other food that had been prohibited under the Mosaic Law.

You are hallucinating if you think Acts 11:7-12 says anything of the sort.

And you have a misunderstanding of Eph. 2. Maybe you should get a Bible and read the chapter for yourself.

Read this:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...

What is the point of the chapter?

You cultists are always taking things out of context.

Such misunderstandings keep you in your cell where Satan wants you.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34405
May 14, 2013
 
Student wrote:
<quoted text>
Under the Mosaic Law, pork was not an acceptable food.(Romans 14:2; Leviticus 11:7)
That Law was and is no longer binding after Jesus died.(Ephesians 2:15)
Three and a half years after Jesus’ death, an angel told the apostle Peter that from God’s standpoint no food should be viewed as defiled.(Acts 11:7-12)
With these factors in mind, some Jewish Christians may have felt that they could eat pork—or enjoy some other food that had been prohibited under the Mosaic Law.
Very well said my friend, hope you're having a great day.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34406
May 14, 2013
 
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
You are hallucinating if you think Acts 11:7-12 says anything of the sort.
And you have a misunderstanding of Eph. 2. Maybe you should get a Bible and read the chapter for yourself.
Read this:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...
What is the point of the chapter?
You cultists are always taking things out of context.
Such misunderstandings keep you in your cell where Satan wants you.
When God told the people of the old testament not to eat such things as pork and other foods it was because these animals were scavengers so to speak , and if not cleaned proplerly could cause many to become sick and or die, so it's more than God just saying not to eat of these foods, as he does so with a very good reason.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

745 Users are viewing the Top Stories Forum right now

Search the Top Stories Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 4 min dirty white boy- 720,471
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 6 min Charlie Sheen 256,487
Play "end of the word" (Jan '11) 9 min andet1987 3,954
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 10 min Chess 532,712
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 12 min meman 115,062
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 14 min Aura Mytha 224,164
Why was the cities of sodom and gomorrah burnt ... 20 min andet1987 12
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 1 hr Lost In Transition 172,364
Sims 4 Key Generator (Oct '13) 2 hr bRB 74
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••