God...why would he not show his face or an miracle to save millions!

Frank Apisa said:

Quote:

But since Jesus said he was not on Earth to change the law...not one word...not one letter...not one stroke of one letter...
...any change at all would prompt my question.
Now...try actually answering it rather than beating around the bush

The central core of The Law were the 10 Commandments and he had no beef with them at all (Mark 10:19)
There were over 600 other petty "laws" but he never wasted his time going through them demanding certain pages be ripped out of the old books, he simply left it to people's free will and commonsense to decide whether they still wanted to burn witches etc, it's not rocket science.
"We serve in the new way of the spirit, not in the old way of the written code" (Romans 7:6)

Same with the new guy in The Hurt Locker who was drafted in when the previous guy was killed, he said "I'm not trying to step into his shoes", and just got on with the job doing things his own way without going round tearing up the old rule books.. Smile

1 Reply

Neologist said to me:

Quote:

If you truly equate the recent (apparent) subjugation of Iraq to the fall of Babylon the Great as defined in Revelation, you are sadly deficient in your understanding

Wise up mate, many ancient prophecies are "recyclable" and can equally apply to our time, and others have yet to be fulfilled.
And when you say I'm deficient in understanding, you leave yourself wide open to a sucker punch, here it comes-
You said in another thread- "When I'm wrong, I fess up to it"- (Neologist 21 Sep 013)
"I'm no genius..One of my main reasons for posting here is to sharpen my understanding"- (Neologist 21 Sep 013)

so depite you being over 70 years old and a lifelong Jehovah's Witness fundy, you admit you still know jack ****!

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/way-madmaxRomeo_zps01ae368c.gif~original

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

I wrote:

If you truly equate the recent (apparent) subjugation of Iraq to the fall of Babylon the Great as defined in Revelation, you are sadly deficient in your understanding

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Wise up mate, many ancient prophecies are "recyclable" and can equally apply to our time, and others have yet to be fulfilled.
And when you say I'm deficient in understanding, you leave yourself wide open to a sucker punch, here it comes-
You said in another thread- "When I'm wrong, I fess up to it"- (Neologist 21 Sep 013)
"I'm no genius..One of my main reasons for posting here is to sharpen my understanding"- (Neologist 21 Sep 013)

so depite you being over 70 years old and a lifelong Jehovah's Witness fundy, you admit you still know jack ****!

However, when you are wrong, you evade it. Although our mortality is clear from the scriptures (and from observation) you continue to cling to the allegation first mentioned in Genesis 3:4 "And the serpent said unto the woman, You shall not surely die:"

Though you have been shown that earth is to be inhabited by the many, you have such little regard for this grand gift that you arrogantly aspire to the heavenly life promised to only a few. Your ignorance of the role assigned to the heavenly class is a testimony to your disqualification.

0 Replies

Neologist wrote:

However, when you are wrong, you evade it. Although our mortality is clear from the scriptures (and from observation) you continue to cling to the allegation first mentioned in Genesis 3:4 "And the serpent said unto the woman, You shall not surely die:"

Your exegesis of the fairy book is pretty biased. You only use the parts that fit you agenda.

When the serpent said "you shall not surely die" it meant that she would have a posterity and would live in her descendants (you know, this DNA thing..)

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Frank Apisa said:

Quote:
But since Jesus said he was not on Earth to change the law...not one word...not one letter...not one stroke of one letter...
...any change at all would prompt my question.
Now...try actually answering it rather than beating around the bush

The central core of The Law were the 10 Commandments and he had no beef with them at all (Mark 10:19)
There were over 600 other petty "laws" but he never wasted his time going through them demanding certain pages be ripped out of the old books, he simply left it to people's free will and commonsense to decide whether they still wanted to burn witches etc, it's not rocket science.
"We serve in the new way of the spirit, not in the old way of the written code" (Romans 7:6)

Same with the new guy in The Hurt Locker who was drafted in when the previous guy was killed, he said "I'm not trying to step into his shoes", and just got on with the job doing things his own way without going round tearing up the old rule books..

Romeo..."the law"...was the law.

Do not for one second think that Jesus thought some to be petty...and not worth his while.

0 Replies

Neologist pouted:

Quote:

However, when you are wrong, you evade it...

Yawn... so according to you, I'm wrong, Frank Apisa's wrong, and everybody else who's not a JW like you is wrong-
"If you try to study the Bible without our help,you go into darkness" (JW Watchtower 15 Sep 1910,page 298 )
Also JW's are absolutely forbidden to question JW teachings, and are ordered to accept them unquestioningly, so as a result they go through life with brains like mush because they've never used them.
I mean, just look at some typical JW stuff- they let their kids die instead of having blood transfusions, they think Jesus was crucified on a stake, and they don't celebrate birthdays and christmas.
Do yourself a favour mate and get out of the clutches of the JW's.. Wink

1 Reply

@timur,

Neologist wrote:

However, when you are wrong, you evade it. Although our mortality is clear from the scriptures (and from observation) you continue to cling to the allegation first mentioned in Genesis 3:4 "And the serpent said unto the woman, You shall not surely die:"

timur wrote:

Your exegesis of the fairy book is pretty biased. You only use the parts that fit you agenda.

When the serpent said "you shall not surely die" it meant that she would have a posterity and would live in her descendants (you know, this DNA thing..

OK, genius. What would it mean if she did not eat of the fruit?

0 Replies

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Yawn... so according to you, I'm wrong, Frank Apisa's wrong, and everybody else who's not a JW like you is wrong-

So you are saying Frank is right?

Frank! Pay attention here!

0 Replies

Frank Apisa said:

Quote:

Romeo..."the law"...was the law.
Do not for one second think that Jesus thought some to be petty...and not worth his while

Jesus never bothered mentioning the old laws of killing gays, witches and adulteresses, does that mean he supported those laws?

1 Reply

Neologist said

Quote:

So you are saying Frank is right?
Frank! Pay attention here!

Well I'm sure he wouldn't let his kids die for want of a transfusion, and he probably doesn't think Jesus was crucified on a stake, and he probably celebrates birthdays and christmas with his family, so yeah he's certainly right to scorn all that JW junk.. Smile

PS- I'm not just singling out JW's in A2K for a bashing, I'd be only too happy to give other oddball cultists a good kicking too such as Mormons, Scientologists, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Fairy Worshippers etc, but they seem to be pretty thin on the ground in A2K.. Smile

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Frank Apisa said:

Quote:
Romeo..."the law"...was the law.
Do not for one second think that Jesus thought some to be petty...and not worth his while

Jesus never bothered mentioning the old laws of killing gays, witches and adulteresses, does that mean he supported those laws?

More than likely he did.

Do you have any citation where he said that the things that offended the god he worshiped...no longer offended the god?

Do you have any citation where Jesus said that any of the LAWS were no longer valid?

Do you have any citation where Jesus said that people no longer had to pay any attention to the dictates of the god he worshiped?

C'mon.

0 Replies

Gad! I hope you boys are having fun and a grand old time!
(Haven't seen so much horse manure in one place since visiting the Suffolk Downs stables back in the 1960s.)

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

I wrote:

So you are saying Frank is right?
Frank! Pay attention here!

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Well I'm sure he wouldn't let his kids die for want of a transfusion, and he probably doesn't think Jesus was crucified on a stake, and he probably celebrates birthdays and christmas with his family, so yeah he's certainly right to scorn all that JW junk..

PS- I'm not just singling out JW's in A2K for a bashing, I'd be only too happy to give other oddball cultists a good kicking too such as Mormons, Scientologists, Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Fairy Worshippers etc, but they seem to be pretty thin on the ground in A2K

Well, yeah, I seem to be amongst a minority in willing to face the scorn of unbelievers. One main difference between you me is I actually treat other members with respect. .

0 Replies

Romeo pointed out:

Quote:

Jesus never bothered mentioning the old laws of killing gays, witches and adulteresses, does that mean he supported those laws?

Frank Apisa claimed:

Quote:

More than likely he did

Ha ha and there i was thinking atheists and agnostics didn't have a sense of humour.. Smile

You'll be telling us next that Mary Poppins supports bashing gays, Nanny McPhee supports bashing witches, and Elvis supported bashing naughty girls., right Elv?

"Uh-huh"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/elvis1.jpg

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

As long as you come clean, Andy.

1 Reply

@neologist,

It's next to godliness, so they tell me. Smile

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

I at least wash up once in a while. Not sure about Romeo, however.

1 Reply

@neologist,

I take a shower once a week, whether I need to or not. Unless I forget to.

1 Reply

@Romeo Fabulini,

Romeo Fabulini wrote:

Romeo pointed out:

Quote:
Jesus never bothered mentioning the old laws of killing gays, witches and adulteresses, does that mean he supported those laws?

Frank Apisa claimed:

Quote:
More than likely he did

Ha ha and there i was thinking atheists and agnostics didn't have a sense of humour..
You'll be telling us next that Mary Poppins supports bashing gays, Nanny McPhee supports bashing witches, and Elvis supported bashing naughty girls., right Elv?

"Uh-huh"

Romeo...if you can point out the verses where Jesus said it was okay to disregard the disgust of the god he worshiped...point them out.

Otherwise...I think my comment that "more than likely he did" is appropriate.

Jesus, according to the Bible, went out of his way to INSIST that he was not on Earth to change any of the law.

Get with it, Romeo.

0 Replies

Frank Apisa insisted:

Quote:

Romeo...if you can point out the verses where Jesus said it was okay to disregard the disgust of the god he worshiped...point them out.
Otherwise...I think my comment that "more than likely he did" is appropriate

Mate, you remind me of a golfer stuck in a bunker, desperately swinging his club time and again but missing the ball and sending up fountains of sand.. Smile

There were a thousand things Jesus said and a thousand things he didn't say, so just because he never said a word about gays/witches doesn't mean he wanted us to go out and hassle them!
Think of him as a card player who played this winning card to trump EVERYTHING else.. Smile

-
"Love one another, feed the hungry, house the homeless, clothe the destitute, tend the sick, visit the prisoners, look after the poor"- Jesus of Nazareth (Mark 12:30, John 13:34, Matt 25: 37-40)
Right Kid?

"Right!"

http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g64/PoorOldSpike/ExIS/cinc.jpg

1 Reply

God...why would he not show his face or an miracle to save millions!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know