14 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonshipWhat "kind" of ignorance is that you think I have?
We stand shoulder to shoulder against your kind of ignorance.
Is it the same kind of ignorance the JWs think I have when I disagree with them? Is it the same kind of ignorance that is best dealt with through religious intolerance?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
14 Sep 14
Originally posted by RJHindsNot at all. Stop lying.
You seem to stand against everybody who does not accept the authority of Witness Lee, a.k.a. pinyin Li Changshou, and brand them as ignorant because they do not praise his every word.
I do stand up to false accusations.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
14 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by divegeesterThe " ignorance " comment was suppose to be directed to RJHinds and mistakenly you got it.
What "kind" of ignorance is that you think I have?
Is it the same kind of ignorance the JWs think I have when I disagree with them? Is it the same kind of ignorance that is best dealt with through religious intolerance?
What I mistakenly wrote to you was intended for RJHinds.
My apologies to you.
Somehow you got it.
For the record I can bear difference of opinions.
As in your case simply difference of opinion.
False accusations prompted a stronger reaction to the accusing ignoramous.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
14 Sep 14
6 edits
Originally posted by RJHindsFor two brothers in Christ to agree is to be like two JWs ? You really seem to be sick.
He seems to come in when sonship needs help to change the subject or something. They help each other like the two JWs.
So for two to defend one servant of the Lord is to expect everyone to worship every word he said ? You really have a sickness here in thought.
I think you are getting worse rather tragically.
SO when you and I happen to agree on a number of Christian themes and I have written things which supported you, IE. eternal perdition, God the Creator, Christ the Lord and Savior, is for you and I to act like JWs ?
?!?
No RJHinds, Kevin and I called you out on false accisations.
Agreement on that is not at all to be like JWs.
Maybe your stubborn false accusation of "cult" leader is more like JW's hatred for Christianity. Maybe that's your parallel.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
14 Sep 14
2 edits
Divegeester, I would remind you that you and I came to a place of utter one accord. Did we not?
I wrote something about the real issue is Christ being a Person. You said you agreed. I said I agreed with you. And that was the happy end to it.
It may have been the best two agreeing posts of the whole year.
I would say that it outwighed any number of lesser issues, Did we not find utter common ground in respecting that "the way and the truth and the life" was Living Person ?
So we held fast the Head. And on lesser issues I do not demand every Christian think exactly like me. I could be wrong about many things.
And Witnes Lee changed his view on a thing or two over the years. But he always led us to hold fast the Head, Christ as a Living One, for the building up of the Body. And on that point we both (you and I) also agreed.
14 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonshipFor me it ok to disagree, to argue. I hold no grudges or bad feeling, even with the JWs. None. Much of the arguing with them is a about related issues such as posting etiquette and honesty. I do not think you are dishonest, we just disagree on a few things. I have been blessed by those of Nee's books which I gave read by the way, although not read any for many years,
[b]Divegeester, I would remind you that you and I came to a place of utter one accord. Did we not?
I wrote something about the real issue is Christ being a Person. You said you agreed. I said I agreed with you. And that was the happy end to it.
It may have been the best two agreeing posts of the whole year.
I would say that it outwighed an ...[text shortened]... Living One, for the building up of the Body. And on that point we both (you and I) also agreed.[/b]
14 Sep 14
Originally posted by divegeesterSo here we have a really small number of Christians but at each other's throats despite supposedly loving Jesus and following his way.
For me it ok to disagree, to argue. I hold no grudges or bad feeling, even with the JWs. None. Much of the arguing with them is a about related issues such as posting etiquette and honesty. I do not think you are dishonest, we just disagree on a few things. I have been blessed by those of Nee's books which I gave read by the way, although not read any for many years,
And no response, no corrections, from your so-called god.
The more people there are in this kind of debate, the more divergence in the viewpoints, all pointing to a human religion, not one started by a god.
For instance, why didn't your god, who allegedly is interested in the spiritual advancement of mankind, not give this same message to the Aborigines in Australia, who were undoubtedly there at the same time as the tribes in Israel. Or the Chinese, or the Ainu in Japan or the Japanese or the Koreans, all those folks were there at the time of the tribes but not a peep to THEM from your god.
Doesn't that give you some TINY pause in your faith?
14 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonhouseHere is what Moses wrote about why the Lord God chose the children of Israel over all the other peoples.
So here we have a really small number of Christians but at each other's throats despite supposedly loving Jesus and following his way.
And no response, no corrections, from your so-called god.
The more people there are in this kind of debate, the more divergence in the viewpoints, all pointing to a human religion, not one started by a god.
For inst ...[text shortened]... es but not a peep to THEM from your god.
Doesn't that give you some TINY pause in your faith?
For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you out of all the peoples on the face of the earth to be his people, his treasured possession.
The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the Lord loved you and kept the oath he swore to your ancestors that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery, from the power of Pharaoh king of Egypt. Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commandments.
(Deuteronomy 7:6-9 New International Version (NIV)
14 Sep 14
Originally posted by sonshipThe Two JWs say they are in agreement with each other 100% on scripture. So tell me, what scripture do you and Kevin disagree on?
For two brothers in Christ to agree is to be like two JWs ? You really seem to be sick.
So for two to defend one servant of the Lord is to expect everyone to worship every word he said ? You really have a sickness here in thought.
I think you are getting worse rather tragically.
SO when you and I happen to agree on a number of Christian themes ...[text shortened]... cusation of "cult" leader is more like JW's hatred for Christianity. Maybe that's your parallel.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
14 Sep 14
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsI doubt that there are any two Christians that agree on every single thing.
The Two JWs say they are in agreement with each other 100% on scripture. So tell me, what scripture do you and Kevin disagree on?
That is a really stupid thing you said there.
Anyway, the principle of an antichrist is to deny any aspect of the total revelation in the Bible of what Christ is. Especially if one is fighting against that revelation.
To be unaware is not that bad.
To fight against the teaching of the Scripture is much worse.
"Now the Lord is the Spirit" (2 Cor. 3:17)
"The last Adam became a life giving Spirit." (1 Cor. 15:45)
"To us ... a son is given ... and his name shall be called ... Eternal Father ..." (Isiah 9:6)
15 Sep 14
2 edits
Originally posted by sonshipI was not referring to every single thing. I was referring only to scipture, if you have eyes to read. The JWs did not say they agreed 100% on everything, only scipture, as I clearly wrote. Open your eyes, if you have any. I suppose they must mean the NWT scripture. In your case I suppose it is the Recovery Version.
I doubt that there are any two Christians that agree on every single thing.
That is a really stupid thing you said there.
Anyway, the principle of an antichrist is to deny any aspect of the total revelation in the Bible of what Christ is. Especially if one is fighting against that revelation.
To be unaware is not that bad.
To fight against the t ...[text shortened]... us ... a son is given ... and his name shall be called ... Eternal Father ..." (Isiah 9:6) [/b]
Are you accusing me of fighting against the teaching of the Scripture?
Is that worse than an antichrist?
What is one that adds to Scripture by teaching concepts that are not taught in Scripture?
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
15 Sep 14
3 edits
Originally posted by RJHinds
I was not referring to every single thing. I was referring only to scipture, if you have eyes to read. The JWs did not say they agreed 100% on everything, only scipture,
OKAY then. I don't think there are two Christians who agree on everything in Scripture either.
That is what I meant to begin with.
You see you desperately need to erect a strawman to throw stones at.
You must have for yourself a caricature of us meeting in local churches.
Someday you'll find that what is in your IMAGINATION is not always what is actually true. You just have a persistent and stubborn IMAGINATION.
as I clearly wrote. Open your eyes, if you have any. I suppose they must mean the NWT scripture. In your case I suppose it is the Recovery Version.
Here again is your caricature, your strawman of your imagination.
Sonship is SO hungup on the Recovery Version that he cannot use any OTHER English translation.
The Recovery Version has been REVIZED. That means the editorial staff looked at it and said "We can do better here and there." This of course means that it is not an infallible object of worship as God Himself.
The translation is very good. And I can demonstrate WHY I think on this or that passage it is superior to many others. Having said that I acknowledge that there are OTHER good English translations of course.
And you have witnessed me use them.
The value of the RcV is the extensive study notes and footnotes.
And the spiritual experience of the one who wrote them.
Deeper experience often leads to deeper understanding of passages.
www.recoveryversion.org
Are you accusing me of fighting against the teaching of the Scripture?
Is that worse than an antichrist?
I wrote that you or me or anyone can fall into the PRINCIPLE of antichrist.
When it says "The Lord is the Spirit" and you say the Lord is not the Spirit, then I have no choice but to point out that you are contradicting the New Testament.
The same would the case with Isaiah 9:6.
Often it is not a matter of interpretation with you. Rather it is flat out denial of what is plainly written.
That I would say is "fighting against Scripture".
I do not think all disagreement with some footnote in the splendid RcV is necessarily fighting against Scripture.
If you can call other people as being in a cult then you should be able to take someone saying you occasionally are fighting against Scripture.
What is one that adds to Scripture by teaching concepts that are not taught in Scripture?
You've identified no concepts I have discussed here as NOT taught in Scripture.
The Son is to be called Eternal Father. That is taught in Scripture in Isaiah 9:6.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
15 Sep 14
If it has not been clear let me make it clear about this topic.
I wrote that RJHinds or me or anyone can fall into the PRINCIPLE of antichrist.
I am not interested in name calling. I am interested in exposing what is really happening if we, like the ancient Gnostics, deny SOME aspect of the total revelation of Who Jesus Christ is.