02 Mar 10
Originally posted by Rajk999Don't confuse him with facts: his mind was already made up before Chuckie made any of his multiple changes.
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Abraham must have had some kind of consciousness for him to see the arrival of Christ. Lets hear you do like Robbie and argue with Christ. Thats the surest road to damnation ... go ahead ... use your JW teaching to ridicule the words of Christ.
02 Mar 10
1 edit
Originally posted by Rajk999i never argued with Christ, or did you not understand the reference, while you were ignoring the grammar?
John 8:56 Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad.
Abraham must have had some kind of consciousness for him to see the arrival of Christ. Lets hear you do like Robbie and argue with Christ. Thats the surest road to damnation ... go ahead ... use your JW teaching to ridicule the words of Christ.
Abraham while alive looked forward to the coming of the messianic Kingdom, for it was promised to him, by God, that by means of his eed all nations would bless themselves. Its really preposterous that you are trying to assert that he was dead when he did this, as the reference that i gave you clearly shows otherwise. Why it should be claimed that we are arguing with Christ simply because of your lack of understanding about sums up your arguments.
02 Mar 10
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYeah .. I think its part of the JW pledge of loyalty they have to make at baptism. To a JW, loyalty to the organisation is more important than the doctrine taught by Christ. Thats why they are a cult and not a religious sect.
Don't confuse him with facts: his mind was already made up before Chuckie made any of his multiple changes.
02 Mar 10
Originally posted by Rajk999And what pledge would this be? Would it be one you've heard and know word for word?
Yeah .. I think its part of the JW pledge of loyalty they have to make at baptism. To a JW, loyalty to the organisation is more important than the doctrine taught by Christ. Thats why they are a cult and not a religious sect.
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
02 Mar 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIn this case, you have not taken the quote out of context; you have simply failed to understand it. The quote addresses only St Augustine's teaching on the soul and suggests that this was shaped by Neo-Platonic thought. In fact, St Augustine's teachings on the soul have always been considered suspect. He at times suggests a trucidarian view of the soul (that the soul is formed from the soul of the parents). Even so, St Augustine affirmed in his final works that he was only speculating, not putting forward a dogma.
yes yes, and i have significant problems with the assertion of mere opinion masquerading as truth, fess up Conrau my man, is the idea pre Christian and of essentially pagan origin or not. Was it unkown to Judaism as has been proposed and essentially been adopted through Hellenistic culture.
I deliberately stuck a little titbit from the New cath ...[text shortened]... life itself, or the living being.”—New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967), Vol. XIII, pp. 449, 450.
I suggest you read Tertullian's De Anima, written in the second century. In this work he repudiates all pagan philosophy and insists that only Christ can give an authoritative teaching. His arguments are purely Scriptural:
http://newadvent.org/fathers/0310.htm
02 Mar 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSee. This is what I mean about blinkered.
your questions amount to, let me see, Robbie Carrobie and Glavo, you are,
clowns,
blinkered,
laughable,
refuted,
stupid
archaic
living in the past,
devoid of reality
and so forth,
would you for one minute stay in the company of someone who thus described you as such, i wouldn't, no yappy dogs and no antagonists.
i have given ...[text shortened]... ree to discuss any other context with anyone who cares for it. It is a public forum after all.
clowns-you have both been accused of that,however I revoked the tag from G75 2 posts later. And if you dont deserve that title-then there are no such things as clowns in the known universe.
blinkered-yes. I would add to that we are all blinkered,myself included. The difference is intelligent people can admit it.
laughable-I said your reasoning skills are laughable,although you must admit, you are pretty funny.
refuted-I'm guessing this is the nerve-toucher. Imo your arguements were refuted by the other posters.
stupid-I dont recall that one , please point it out to me.
archaic- 'as above'
living in the past- I dont think I ever said that either,please point that one out too while you are reeling from trying to get back some of your credibility.
devoid of reality- No. I never said that about you or G75
Dont make me out to be a name caller. I offer many views. I also tell you ,point blank, why you dont come across as convincing.
I am tempted to call you a liar and slanderer😉
It is true you do refer a lot to scrpiture-not all the time, though. If responding to posts is 'interested' then you are interested in a great deal more than statements within a 'purely scriptural context'.
02 Mar 10
2 edits
Originally posted by Conrau Kok, so hes suspect, the encyclopaedia and not i claimed he was influenced by neoplatonic thought. An interesting observation never the less.
In this case, you have not taken the quote out of context; you have simply failed to understand it. The quote addresses only St Augustine's teaching on the soul and suggests that this was shaped by Neo-Platonic thought. In fact, St Augustine's teachings on the soul have always been considered suspect. He at times suggests a trucidarian view of the so ative teaching. His arguments are purely Scriptural:
http://newadvent.org/fathers/0310.htm
02 Mar 10
Originally posted by karoly aczelno, not really, for me scripture is where its at, all the other stuff, experience etc cannot be corroborated nor disproved and is purely subjective and often its merit hinges on nothing but personal testimony. Its useful, but proves nothing.
See. This is what I mean about blinkered.
clowns-you have both been accused of that,however I revoked the tag from G75 2 posts later. And if you dont deserve that title-then there are no such things as clowns in the known universe.
blinkered-yes. I would add to that we are all blinkered,myself included. The difference is intelligent people can admit ...[text shortened]... are interested in a great deal more than statements within a 'purely scriptural context'.
03 Mar 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHat's off to you and Galvo, you're both on fire at them moment. Pure genius.
no, not really, for me scripture is where its at, all the other stuff, experience etc cannot be corroborated nor disproved and is purely subjective and often its merit hinges on nothing but personal testimony. Its useful, but proves nothing.
03 Mar 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobThankyou my dear friend, its really refreshing to hear such words of encouragement in the face of much adversity.
Hat's off to you and Galvo, you're both on fire at them moment. Pure genius.
(Acts 13:15) “Men, brothers, if there is any word of encouragement for the people that you have, tell it.”
🙂
03 Mar 10
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobieOr no real answer RC!! OK G75 give it a go? Jesus said to the thief today you shall be with me in Paradise. Was Christ lying to the thief?
Sorry no comment, that has also been answered by Galvo a zillion times, fess up, immortality of the soul and thus the idea that something transcends death is originally Babylonian and was absorbed into so called 'Christianity', through essentially Hellenistic pagan philosophical influences. Read it and weep. Its just like an enemy of truth to treat such scholarly works as 'mumbo jumbo'.
42And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!"
43And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."
Not you will be asleep but you will be with me.
Defend your sleep doctrine but this one scripture fells your whole sleep doctrine.
Manny
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
03 Mar 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSt Augustine did however admit that he was only offering a provisional teaching on the soul. Whatever error he committed, he was willing to acknowledge it. And anyway, as I have shown, the Church Fathers were quite reluctant to endorse any pagan ideas. Tertullian's proof of the immortality of the soul is purely Scriptural.
ok, so hes suspect, the encyclopaedia and not i claimed he was influenced by neoplatonic thought. An interesting observation never the less.
03 Mar 10
1 edit
Originally posted by menace71First do you not notice Jesus said "paradise", not heaven. Has the paradise been restored to earth as in the days of Adam yet?
Or no real answer RC!! OK G75 give it a go? Jesus said to the thief today you shall be with me in Paradise. Was Christ lying to the thief?
42And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!"
43And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."
Not you will be asleep but you will be with me. ...[text shortened]... sleep doctrine but this one scripture fells your whole sleep doctrine.
Manny
Do you not know that the word presence that is used in the Bible in the context that is refered to with Jesus means he is present by his affect on humans? Can not someone have an affect on others in many ways but not actually be there in person?
Obviously the thief died that day correct?
When Jesus died we know he was in the grave for 3 days. Correct?
When Jesus was resurrected he was still here on earth for 40 days. Correct?
So Manny....did that scripture mean he was going to be with Jesus as you say in that "same day" they died?
Come on Manny..your too smart for this. Do the math..........