esmith
Veteran Member
You still have not answered my question.....Who was at the trial to report what was said or not said.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Christians believers only
- Thread starter free spirit
- Start date
You still have not answered my question.....Who was at the trial to report what was said or not said.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Jesus was at the trial. And at the day of Pentecost His glorified spirit was given to whomever would believe, this same spirit is guiding the believers in all of the truth for we read in ACTS 2:32-33, "This Jesus God raised up again, to which we are all witnesses. Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you see and hear."
There is no person more qualified than our Lord to tell the story.
esmith
Veteran Member
Who did he tell his story about the trial to and when did he supposedly tell it? All you have supplied is religious rhetoric.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
The story about the trial is in the four gospels and when a faithful person read those narratives the Holy Spirit in that person acts as witness that it is correct, or that is not correct, that is how I know what is truth and what is not. You may ask then, show me the Holy Spirit, which brings the story to an end, because the Holy Spirit will only make himsef known to you through faith, I do not mean to have faith on faith, but he actually revil himself to you with things that you know are not from you, faith acts as a conductor, no conductor no connection.
esmith
Veteran Member
Then what you are telling me is that if it is written in the Bible that it is indisputable.
Let me ask you a question. Are you familiar with the story of the adulteress in John 8:1-xx? Did you know that it was not in any of the ancient manuscripts? It was added around the 12th century. That Mark 16:9-xx is not in the ancient manuscripts, that they were added at a latter date. And you ask me to take what is written in the NT as the Total Truth? There are also issues in the Tanakh/Old Testament. It is commonly understood that the first 11 Chapters of Genesis are basically myths/stories. That some of the stories have been embellished to make events seem more heroic than they were.
Paul the person who is credited with spreading the Christian sect transformed the religion of Jesus into a religion about Jesus.
I do believe in God, but not in the same way you do. I have no problems with your beliefs, but I ask you to open your mind to possibilities.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Yes there is a lot of possibilities, but if you are looking for gold and if you find it why look somewere else
Last edited:
free spirit
Well-Known Member
I use the "NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE" 1960 to 1977 version By THE LOCKMAN FOUNDATION. I believe that the updated edition by Zondervan is not as good.
I have selected this Bible because of its modern, clear, and grammatically correct English expression.
I totally agree on the fact that because of speculation and for selfish reasons there are versions of the bible that have had words changed. For example, god's name Jehovah was removed from many Bibles and replaced with "Lord" as it was believed to be too sacred for people to pronounce.
The Bible is a very deep book and needs to be studied and not only read. Things to be taken into consideration are the context, what a specific word meant in other contexts in the original language, references from other books of the Bible that link with the one we are reading and so on.
The Bible is a very deep book and needs to be studied and not only read. Things to be taken into consideration are the context, what a specific word meant in other contexts in the original language, references from other books of the Bible that link with the one we are reading and so on.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Yes Your denomination with the insertion of a single vowel has changed the true meaning of a phase, like "and the word was A God" which raises the question how many gods are there?
But if God has given you understanding of his word He is able to guide you through those stambling blocks, the present bible has had true words taken away, false words inserted I believe the following scriptures makes more sense with my inserted Italics words, what you think?
In Galatians 5:1-6 we read
It was for freedom from the law that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery. Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you. And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision that he is under obligation to keep the whole law. You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; youhave fallen from grace.For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love. Consequently, we should gratefully accept to live in that freedom, and comprehend fully that freedom from the law does not mean to live lawlessly, but it means to live within the holy character of Jesus Christ.
I see your point, let me explain why this is so:
Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 higlights, not the identity, but a quality of "the Word". One Bible translator (William Barclay) said: "Because the apostle John has no definite article in front of THEOS it becomes a description. John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God." Another Scholar (Jason David BeDuhn) said: "In Greek, if you leave off the article from THEOS in a sentence like in John 1:1c, then your readers will assume you mean 'a god'. Its absence makes THEOS quite different than the definite HO THEOS, as different as 'a god' is from 'God' in English". He also adds: "In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being." Or to put it in the words of Joseph Henry Thayer, a scholar who worked on the American Standard Version: "The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself"
Does the identity of God have to be "a very profound mystery"? It did not seem to Jesus. In his prayer to his Father, Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father when he said in John 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent" (This verse comes from the American Standard Version, the one you use).
If we believe Jesus and understand the plain teaching of the Bible, we will respect him as the divine Son of God that he is.
Many Greek scholars and Bible translators acknowledge that John 1:1 higlights, not the identity, but a quality of "the Word". One Bible translator (William Barclay) said: "Because the apostle John has no definite article in front of THEOS it becomes a description. John is not here identifying the Word with God. To put it very simply, he does not say that Jesus was God." Another Scholar (Jason David BeDuhn) said: "In Greek, if you leave off the article from THEOS in a sentence like in John 1:1c, then your readers will assume you mean 'a god'. Its absence makes THEOS quite different than the definite HO THEOS, as different as 'a god' is from 'God' in English". He also adds: "In John 1:1, the Word is not the one-and-only God, but is a god, or divine being." Or to put it in the words of Joseph Henry Thayer, a scholar who worked on the American Standard Version: "The Logos [or, Word] was divine, not the divine Being himself"
Does the identity of God have to be "a very profound mystery"? It did not seem to Jesus. In his prayer to his Father, Jesus made a clear distinction between him and his Father when he said in John 17:3: "This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent" (This verse comes from the American Standard Version, the one you use).
If we believe Jesus and understand the plain teaching of the Bible, we will respect him as the divine Son of God that he is.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Your answer is very convincing but it is still the opinion of only learned men whom wisdom and knowlege of God is limited. I am not a learned man but I am a pupil of the Holy Spirit, the one that inspired the sacret writing in the first place. As you know He was sent to us to teach us and guide us into all the truth. Therefore if a believer has the gift of the holy Spirit, and is in toone with Him that is all he needs to understand the mistery of our heavenly father. Let me see if I can explain the relationship of God and His word.
We read in John 1:1-4, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being by him, and apart from him nothing came into being that has come into being.
4 In him was life, and the life was the light of men.
"In the beginning was the word" It does not say in the beginning was God
"And the word was with God" therefore they are togeter they form one identity.
"and the Word was God" God and His word are one and the same.
"He was in the beginning with God" God and his word came into be at the same instant if there ever was a beginning.
"All things came into being by him, and apart from him nothing came into being that has come into being." Everything was created by God's word, so if they were two distinct identity God would have no part in creation.
"In him was life, and the life was the light of men."
If in the word was life, we can allmost say that the word is God's life, because, why it did not say "in God was life"
"and the life was the light of men."
As you know we were made in the image of God, therefore we can also look at ourselves to understand how God is.
without the gift of the word we would not be living, we would be alive but not living, can you immagin youself to have lost your ability of speach and the ability of thinking, you will have no life at all and no light of understanding that makes you aware of youself.
So our word is what make us what we are, without the word we are nothing but a lifeless object, and so it is in haven.
If you understand the above explanetion you will be able to understand also the roll and place of Jesus the man, or the word that became flesh.
But that is another story.
Last edited:
First of all let me say that I am really impressed by your love for God. Not many feel like you.
It is an interesting discussion we are having here.
These people were learned men, true, but they are not telling us anything about God because thet's not their job. But they do explain how the Bible in the original language was written and what grammar rules there are in Greek (just as a French teacher might teach us the right translation from French-to-English). It has nothing to do with faith but simply grammar. Therefore if Greek Experts say that "the word was God" is an incorrect translation, that is simply a fact to be accepted.
I agree with you. You are a person who loves God and believes strongly in the Holy Spirit and I commend you for that. As I see it the same way.
Jesus was called "The Word" translated from Greek "Logos". This title identifies the function that he performed since other intelligent creatures came into existance. Jehovah God used his Son to deliver His message to humans on earth. The fact that Jesus is the Word, or God's Spokesman, is highlighted in what Christ said to his Jewish listeners: "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality." (John 7:16, 17) Jesus continues to bear the title "The Word of God" even after his return to heavenly glory. - Revelation 19:11, 13, 16.
So as you can read from your own Bible, Jesus always directs attention to his father rather than to himself.
If you then say that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one person, then I will have to say that this is a teaching not supported from the Bible and is incorrect. and there are scriptures that confirm this very clearly.
It is an interesting discussion we are having here.
These people were learned men, true, but they are not telling us anything about God because thet's not their job. But they do explain how the Bible in the original language was written and what grammar rules there are in Greek (just as a French teacher might teach us the right translation from French-to-English). It has nothing to do with faith but simply grammar. Therefore if Greek Experts say that "the word was God" is an incorrect translation, that is simply a fact to be accepted.
I agree with you. You are a person who loves God and believes strongly in the Holy Spirit and I commend you for that. As I see it the same way.
Jesus was called "The Word" translated from Greek "Logos". This title identifies the function that he performed since other intelligent creatures came into existance. Jehovah God used his Son to deliver His message to humans on earth. The fact that Jesus is the Word, or God's Spokesman, is highlighted in what Christ said to his Jewish listeners: "What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me. If anyone desires to do His will, he will know concerning the teaching whether it is from God or I speak of my own originality." (John 7:16, 17) Jesus continues to bear the title "The Word of God" even after his return to heavenly glory. - Revelation 19:11, 13, 16.
So as you can read from your own Bible, Jesus always directs attention to his father rather than to himself.
If you then say that God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit are one person, then I will have to say that this is a teaching not supported from the Bible and is incorrect. and there are scriptures that confirm this very clearly.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
As i said on my last post Jesus, the word become flesh is another story. Because Jesus while he was in the flesh was not God, he was a man subject to temptation, He had the soul of a man, he was human plain and simple, with a big difference, He was the begotten son of God filled with the Holy Spirit, His mission was to die sinless thus fulfill the law, in doing that he created the first human soul worthy to inherit God and those who receive the Holy Spirit are joint heir with Christ.
Dear brother everything is about understanding the truth, for no one can truly believe unless he understands. there are many interpretations and understandings but only one is correct. The following is an article that I included in may book "The way God told It" I hope you read it and if you do not agree, prove me wrong.
(IV) And in Galatians 3:13 I have found other lies about my Lord and about His accomplished works, for it reads: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us, for it is written: Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree.
It is ludicrous to say that He redeemed us from the curse of the law by allowing Himself to become a curse for us, just by dying while hanging on a tree.
Before we go any further it is important for us to understand that the tree is only a tool to administer death to a condemned man. We must surely know that it is the sins that the man has committed that makes him accursed and not the way he dies. That is why the law became a curse for us, because we could not keep it and consequently we merited death because of our transgressions, not because the law in itself was bad. (So death is not a curse, but its the consequence of sin). He came to fulfil the law for us and by fulfilling the law He absorbed the law in Himself. Therefore He became a blessing for us, because He freed us from the curse of the law written on tablets of stone, having replaced them with the law of the spirit of Himself (the Holy Spirit). I am fully convinced that it is correct for the above verse of Galatians 3:13 to read: Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having fulfilled the law for us.
We all know that our Lord became flesh for us and consequently He was made sin, because the flesh and sin are one and the same. Also our Lord (who is a type of Adam) took those of us who are faithful in Himself on the cross. He also took the sin of the whole world on the cross for the justification of all humanity as He fulfilled the law by being obedient even to death. But none of the above is a curse in itself. However, the law became a curse to us because we could not keep it. By doing all of the above He became a blessing for all those who believe and obey Him.
We would certainly and clearly see the error if we read Deuteronomy 21:23 in context with verse 22. We will then discover that part of verse 23 doesnt apply to our Lord, for we read in Deuteronomy 21: 22-23: And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance. We can all sorely see that the above underlined scripture of verse 23 doesnt apply to our Lord because our Lord was not guilty of having committed a sin worthy of death, required in the previous verse. In fact He was sinless, regardless of how He appeared to those who witnessed, or condemned Him to death. (Yes, He was made sin but never committed sin. Isnt that something that we should rejoice about? For by doing that, Jesus stripped sin of the power of the law.)
Furthermore the testimony of 1Corinthians 12:3 reinforces that He didnt become accursed for it is written: That no one speaking by the spirit of God says, Jesus is accursed. With those undisputable proofs in hand we should only come to one obvious conclusion: that the Scriptures suggesting that our blessed Lord become a curse for us is nothing but a blasphemous diversion working against the knowledge of the accomplished works of our Lord.
If you are not yet convinced, I would suggest that you insert the corrected verse in Galatians 3:13 and judge it in context and you will see that the whole chapter, and indeed all of Galatians, is explaining to us how the curse of the law has been replaced by having faith in the grace of Christ, who paid the price for us by enduring the brutal sufferings of the cross and yet died sinless. He thus fulfilled the law for us, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith in Him. Read 1Corinthians 15:55-57 and you will see that death and sin are defeated by the fulfilment of the law and not by Christs dying hanging on a tree. Read Romans 5:17-21 and you will also see that through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men; even so, the total obedience to the law of one Man resulted in justification of life to all men.
It is vital that all believers understand the book of Galatians, which explains faith in the grace of Christ in contrast to the works of the law. Satan knows that and so he uses all means in order to defend the written ambiguity, which clearly denigrates the character of our God, the accomplished works of our Lord, and the character and epistles of His apostles.
I don't need to prove you wrong because most of what you said correct. We see it as you.
As JW we believe that going from house to house is the responsibility of every Christian as Matthew 24:14 says.
However as for the issue of Holy Spirit, some scriptures might seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit is a person when they say that it "teaches", "beares witness", "speaks" and "hears". But other scriptures say that people were "filled" with Holi Spirit, that some were "baptised" with it or "anointed" with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38). These latter references definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these text must be considered. What is the reasonableconclusion? That the first text cited here employ a figure of speach personifying God's holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood.
Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw "Jesus standing at God's right hand." But he made no mention of seeing the holi spirit. (other scriptures: Rev 7:10; 22:1,3).
Understanding the context and the Bible as a whole will not make you greave the holy spirit. You greave the holy spirit if you work against it and you bring only praise to God if you search for the truth. 2 Corinthians 13:5 exorts us to do this.
As JW we believe that going from house to house is the responsibility of every Christian as Matthew 24:14 says.
However as for the issue of Holy Spirit, some scriptures might seem to indicate that the Holy Spirit is a person when they say that it "teaches", "beares witness", "speaks" and "hears". But other scriptures say that people were "filled" with Holi Spirit, that some were "baptised" with it or "anointed" with it. (Luke 1:41; Matt. 3:11; Acts 10:38). These latter references definitely do not fit a person. To understand what the Bible as a whole teaches, all these text must be considered. What is the reasonableconclusion? That the first text cited here employ a figure of speach personifying God's holy spirit, his active force, as the Bible also personifies wisdom, sin, death, water, and blood.
Acts 7:55, 56 reports that Stephen was given a vision of heaven in which he saw "Jesus standing at God's right hand." But he made no mention of seeing the holi spirit. (other scriptures: Rev 7:10; 22:1,3).
Understanding the context and the Bible as a whole will not make you greave the holy spirit. You greave the holy spirit if you work against it and you bring only praise to God if you search for the truth. 2 Corinthians 13:5 exorts us to do this.
free spirit
Well-Known Member
You do not know How the Holy Spirit works in correcting us from sin and from the untrue, He makes you feel how He feels about a matter And you definitely know that it is not from you own self.
The gospel is all about the character of God, and Jesus is the exact representation of His father, so that we may know Him.
The printed word is not God that we should analyse the meaning of avery word for if we do that it will lead to our destruction. 2 Timothy 2;14, "I remind you of these things, and solemnly charge you in the presence of God not to wrangle about words, which is useless, and leads to the ruin of the hearers."
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Last edited:
free spirit
Well-Known Member
Part two
Other Bibles’ translations of the above three verses are a little different. In some Bibles even the inserted italics are different; but it is obvious to me that in them the ambiguities also still remain in place. Furthermore, any reasonable person is able to see that the English expressions of those three verses are confusing to say the least. These verses are openly in opposition to the women’s individual freedom, for we all know that fathers have control of their daughter’s lives only for a short time. It would be reasonable to think from reading the above scriptures that the father is offering the daughter’s celibacy as a sacrifice for his own perceived benefit.
Needless to say, for that obvious reason alone, the sacrifice is unacceptable to God.
What’s more, in my research I have found that the Pagan Roman religion did have virgin females (vestali), which were pledged to celibacy until thirty years of age, and were under penalty of death if they strayed. They were offered (maybe by their fathers) and dedicated for service to the state, for keeping burning the perennial fire of the temple and were entrusted to safeguard important government documents and records, like the last will and testament of the head of State, and to maintain and or assist him in the temple’s ceremonial function, for the head of the Roman State was also head of religion. (Pontifex Maximus)
It stands to reason that for these verses of 1Corinthians 7:36-38 to make any sense in the life of the faithful, they should be read in context with the preceding four verses as they are presented above. Only then the subject matter is exposed and becomes relevant to the lives of the believers, thus those faithful who are able can freely and confidently choose celibacy as a spiritual sacrifice of worship to our God.
Nevertheless, if any one, after committing to the “devotional sacrifice,” realise that the sacrifice of celibacy is too difficult for him to honestly fulfil, in such a case he can stop trying and get married with God’s blessing. It is apparent that Satan’s elaborate scheme is to prevent us from knowing God’s will and truth, for he knows that if we gain that knowledge he has only a little time left.
I am well aware of the difficulty believers will have in fully accepting what I have written in the above seven examples. Nevertheless I believe that these seven examples are only some of the stumbling blocks that Jesus warned us about because they thwart our understanding of God and have the capacity to lead us into the uncharted waters of imagination and speculation in which we all can easily get lost.
Search your heart. I am sure the Holy Spirit will want you to investigate all of the above restorations, for those restorations are supported by Scriptures and glorify our Lord and cancel any form of speculation and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God. But if you do not investigate or agree, and the disagreement is only on the basis that the written word is inviolable, you have become a casualty of today’s most widespread error, which considers that the worship of God is inseparable with the worship of the Bible. The Bible is a book that sincere believers openly and humbly confess not to fully understand and yet some will be unwilling to concede to the compelling evidence presented to them here. In such case it has happened to them as it is written in Acts 28:25-28.
In conclusion, you can rest assured that it is not I, or my writing, that will convince you of the correctness of the restorations of the Scriptures, but it will be the Lord working through your own sincere investigation of the matter.
There is a possibility that you simply do not agree. However, if you find any part of the restorations offensive, or you consider my action a sacrilege, please read the concluding article “What is Truth” at the end of this book and peace will return to you.
I do not seek to be followed, nor do I ask any one to change their faith, but I long to share the knowledge of understanding with those who seek the Lord so that they may also gain a deep and steadfast insight into God’s word and will.
Glory to God
Other Bibles’ translations of the above three verses are a little different. In some Bibles even the inserted italics are different; but it is obvious to me that in them the ambiguities also still remain in place. Furthermore, any reasonable person is able to see that the English expressions of those three verses are confusing to say the least. These verses are openly in opposition to the women’s individual freedom, for we all know that fathers have control of their daughter’s lives only for a short time. It would be reasonable to think from reading the above scriptures that the father is offering the daughter’s celibacy as a sacrifice for his own perceived benefit.
Needless to say, for that obvious reason alone, the sacrifice is unacceptable to God.
What’s more, in my research I have found that the Pagan Roman religion did have virgin females (vestali), which were pledged to celibacy until thirty years of age, and were under penalty of death if they strayed. They were offered (maybe by their fathers) and dedicated for service to the state, for keeping burning the perennial fire of the temple and were entrusted to safeguard important government documents and records, like the last will and testament of the head of State, and to maintain and or assist him in the temple’s ceremonial function, for the head of the Roman State was also head of religion. (Pontifex Maximus)
It stands to reason that for these verses of 1Corinthians 7:36-38 to make any sense in the life of the faithful, they should be read in context with the preceding four verses as they are presented above. Only then the subject matter is exposed and becomes relevant to the lives of the believers, thus those faithful who are able can freely and confidently choose celibacy as a spiritual sacrifice of worship to our God.
Nevertheless, if any one, after committing to the “devotional sacrifice,” realise that the sacrifice of celibacy is too difficult for him to honestly fulfil, in such a case he can stop trying and get married with God’s blessing. It is apparent that Satan’s elaborate scheme is to prevent us from knowing God’s will and truth, for he knows that if we gain that knowledge he has only a little time left.
I am well aware of the difficulty believers will have in fully accepting what I have written in the above seven examples. Nevertheless I believe that these seven examples are only some of the stumbling blocks that Jesus warned us about because they thwart our understanding of God and have the capacity to lead us into the uncharted waters of imagination and speculation in which we all can easily get lost.
Search your heart. I am sure the Holy Spirit will want you to investigate all of the above restorations, for those restorations are supported by Scriptures and glorify our Lord and cancel any form of speculation and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God. But if you do not investigate or agree, and the disagreement is only on the basis that the written word is inviolable, you have become a casualty of today’s most widespread error, which considers that the worship of God is inseparable with the worship of the Bible. The Bible is a book that sincere believers openly and humbly confess not to fully understand and yet some will be unwilling to concede to the compelling evidence presented to them here. In such case it has happened to them as it is written in Acts 28:25-28.
In conclusion, you can rest assured that it is not I, or my writing, that will convince you of the correctness of the restorations of the Scriptures, but it will be the Lord working through your own sincere investigation of the matter.
There is a possibility that you simply do not agree. However, if you find any part of the restorations offensive, or you consider my action a sacrilege, please read the concluding article “What is Truth” at the end of this book and peace will return to you.
I do not seek to be followed, nor do I ask any one to change their faith, but I long to share the knowledge of understanding with those who seek the Lord so that they may also gain a deep and steadfast insight into God’s word and will.
Glory to God
I see your point very clearly. I agree that if a man or woman have a desire to dedicate themselves to full time service with no limitations, they should do it. However if they, one day, reach a point in life where they feel certain desires are becoming stronger and desire to get married, then they should. And this is something we believe in too.
I am married but I am happy to have found a wife who has the same desire as I do of serving God full time.
We JW often use other translation of the Bible as the American Standard Version, King James, New Jerusalem, etc; and we show people that even if the words are slightly different
(i.e: Genesis 1:2= "And the earth was without form" -King James Version and Genesis 1:2= "The earth was formless" -New American Standard Version) the message is the same and there is no mystery.
By the way both my wife and I lived in Italy for over 10 years. The majority of Italians are Roman Catholics.
What do you think about celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church?
A few months ago the news reported there was a scandal about priests vaiolating young children and the Church was covering for them. Personaly this is no news to us because we lived there and it had been going on for years. What is your opinion? If they had sexual desires why did they not get married as God teaches?
I am married but I am happy to have found a wife who has the same desire as I do of serving God full time.
We JW often use other translation of the Bible as the American Standard Version, King James, New Jerusalem, etc; and we show people that even if the words are slightly different
(i.e: Genesis 1:2= "And the earth was without form" -King James Version and Genesis 1:2= "The earth was formless" -New American Standard Version) the message is the same and there is no mystery.
By the way both my wife and I lived in Italy for over 10 years. The majority of Italians are Roman Catholics.
What do you think about celibacy in the Roman Catholic Church?
A few months ago the news reported there was a scandal about priests vaiolating young children and the Church was covering for them. Personaly this is no news to us because we lived there and it had been going on for years. What is your opinion? If they had sexual desires why did they not get married as God teaches?
free spirit
Well-Known Member
I have been living in Australia for 48 years and now I am 67, 5 children, ten grand children, I have visited Italy several times, I still have brothers and sisters there.
Yes the Roman church has been my tutor, I believed, but I was not a particular religious person. At the age of 36 the Lord found me faithfull and He blessed me with his presence.
I have read some literature of the JW about the RC, and I found them quite stingy.
The RC Church has evolved and comprises three religions, which are: paganism, Judaism and Christianity.
The RC priests took a vow of celibacy but I do not believe it is based on bible teaching.
The church administration can be corrupt like any other administration because it is made up of men, like any governament can be good and can be bad. but in the end it is the individual that will bear the anger of God for been bad. Therefore, because of fleshly man there is no perfect church in the world.
If you look closerly the three religions above are present in all denominations, some have more of one religion than the other, nevertheless A litle leaven leavens the all lump.
Please read the following
(VI) The following example will clearly demonstrate to you that sequential confusion of Scripture has also been introduced in some epistles. In John 20-23 we read: “If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
This commission that the Lord has given to the disciples is exercised by the Catholic, the Orthodox Church and a few others denominations, but most of them do not do that. Maybe these denominations do not forgive sins because of the lack of demonstrating examples in the epistles? We all know that we have to forgive those who sin against us: the Lord’s Prayer is very clear on the matter. But who forgives those who sin against their own conscience and the body of Christ?
I am certain that in 2Corinthians between Chapter 1:16 and Chapter 2:11 there is a hidden example of the administration of this important sacrament, ministered by Paul to the Corinthians. The problem in recognising it as such lays in the undeniable fact that part of the explanation of this sacrament has been moved from its original place so that its significant content would appear to be addressing something else. I pray you therefore follow me with patience and I am certain you will see.
If we read 2Corinthians 1:16 followed by verse 23, we realise that those verses are united by the line of thought of the subject (the visit) that Paul is clarifying to them. This line of thought continues, slowly changing into another subject, but it is uninterrupted until Chapter 2:11. If we then go back to chapter 1:17 and read until verse 22 we find that the line of thought of Paul and the new subject (forgiven sin) also continues uninterrupted and Paul’s ministry becomes clear as well. Arranging and reading these scriptures in that order, the truth will become obvious, for these last six verses (17-22) are not united to the promise of Paul to visit them, but they are united to the promise of God to forgive sins through the anointed disciples.
The verses in question have been written below in the explained above order.
We read in 2Corinthians 1:16: “That is to pass your way into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea.
(1:23.) But I call God as witness to my soul, that to spare you I come no more to Corinth. Not that we lord it over your faith, but are workers with you for your joy; for in your faith you are standing firm. But I determine this for my own sake that I would not come to you in sorrow again. For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful? And this is the very thing I wrote you, lest, when I come, I should have sorrow from those who ought to make me rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy would be the joy of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears; not that you should be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you. But if any has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree in order not to say too much to all of you. Sufficient for such a one is this punishment, which was inflicted by the majority, so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, lest somehow such a one be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. For to this end also I wrote that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things. But whom you forgive anything, I forgive also; for indeed what I have forgiven, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx I did it for your sakes in the presence of Christ, in order that no advantage be taken of us by Satan; for we are not ignorant of his schemes.
(1:17.) Therefore, I was not vacillating when I intended to do this, was I? Or that which I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me there should be yes, yes and no, no at the same time? But as God is faithful, our word to you is not yes and no. For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us, by me and Silvanus and Timothy, was not yes and no, but is yes in Him. For as many as may be the promises of God, in Him they are yes; wherefore also by Him is our Amen to the glory of God through us. Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.”
As you can see, these last six verses are too deep in significance to be addressing a simple promise of Paul to visit them. But, in these last six verses Paul is declaring to them that his forgiveness is solid, because it is not according to the flesh, but the yes resided on the promise of God, and like all other promises the yes is in Christ. Paul’s authority is a gift of an anointing from God.
Last edited: