You apparently don't understand the meaning of righteousness versus wicked. Apparently you will have to "endure the day of his coming" (Malachi 3:2), when the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasant to the LORD (Malachi 3:4), then "you will again distinguish between the righteous and the wicked. (Malachi 3:18).
-
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!
The Value of Obedience
- Thread starter Deeje
- Start date
You apparently don't understand the meaning of righteousness versus wicked. Apparently you will have to "endure the day of his coming" (Malachi 3:2), when the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasant to the LORD (Malachi 3:4), then "you will again distinguish between the righteous and the wicked. (Malachi 3:18).
That is all your personal interpretation. How do I know that what you say is true. Quoting scripture and putting your own spin on it is stretching things a bit far don't you think? Who said that your interpretation is right? Who else believes what you believe? You keep ignoring that question. If you have no identifiable brotherhood, then you do not have Christ. Your words are just empty rhetoric.
If the Apostles accepted Paul as a brother apostle, who are you to say he wasn't? You are treading dangerous ground IMO.
I am prepared to wait....what about you? Does Jesus figure in your scenario at all? You seem obsessed with OT scripture. Most of what we know about Jesus is in the NT.
Yeshua nor his disciple ever quoted from the non existent NT. His source was the OT. Yeshua was fulfilling the "Law and the prophets" (Matthew 5:17), not the ramblings/babel of the false prophet Paul and his associates. Yeshua was providing a light and way to understand the OT. You either follow the example of Yeshua, and judge with righteous judgment, or you trip over the stumbling blocks of Paul's appointed shepherds/pastors (Ezekiel 34:1-3), or the stumbling block of Peter and his heir the pope.(Isaiah 22:15-25) & (Matthew 16:23).
The tares, thinking that they will be "twinkled", or raptured, will be the "first" to be gathered out to be burned (Matthew 13:30). Their waiting simply gets them "first" in line. Even Jacob, Ephraim and Judah, will suffer "Jacob's distress", the just chastening, but at least he will be "saved from it", and will worship God and David their king (Jeremiah 30:7-9).
The only source for your proclamation is Paul, his associates, and the unknown writer of 2 Peter who calls Paul a brother, not a brother apostle. Self witnessing is "not true" (John 5:31) & Dt 19:15. If you will look to Revelation 2:2, at least the failing church of Ephesus, were Paul taught he was an apostle (Ephesians 1:1) outed those the called themselves apostles.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Actually no one knows for certain how it "exactly" should be rendered, but most theologians that I have read that have chimed in feel it's like "I am that which I am".
As i have explained over and over again to you they didn't as it was said verbally at the Temple every Yom Kippur by the priest. Why is this so difficult for you to understand as this is I believe at least the third time I've had to repeat it?
Unlike the JW's, we don't operate on a Gestapo-like paradigm where everyone must "march" together. In Catholicism, the Church has the obligation to teach what it believes is correct, and we as Catholics should learn the Church's teachings, but from that point on we retain the right to formulate our own opinions and beliefs. When I officially converted back a few months ago, I told the priest I will always have questions because that's just my nature, but I can make the commitment to do my best to help others both within and outside the Church. He then gave me his blessing and told me I can resume taking the sacraments after my 25 year abstention.You mean to tell me that you can be a "Catholic" and reject the trinity?!!! This is their baby and you don't believe it?
What else in Catholic teaching do you reject? How can you subscribe to a religion if you reject their foundation doctrine?
The Church is sorta like the Roman traffic cop who waves his arms to direct traffic, whereas some obey him, some don't, and some are in-between. However, if something goes wrong, the cop (Church) is there to sort things out.
An excellent book that covers this from the Catholic perspective is "Let Your (Informed) Conscience Be Your Guide".
I don't believe everything I read, and that includes all that's in the Bible since I'm not a believer in Biblical inerrancy. I can explain my position more thoroughly if you wish on why the attack on Jews was more likely a by-product of conflict but also why there are numerous other verses in Torah and Tanakh that say that the Covenant and the Law are "forever' and "perpetual".Oh good grief metis!When I refer to the Jews who were "disobedient hypocrites", I was echoing the words of Jesus Christ in condemning the religious leaders of his day. Read Matthew 23 if you doubt what he said. Are you calling Jesus anti-Semitic
Do you believe what's written in the OT, Deeje? If so, then there are "issues" that you appear to be unaware of.
Your JW masters don't want you making "choices", which is why they forbid you to attend services anywhere else or even read their literature. They indoctrinate their flock and then deny any significant dissension from what they've brainwashed their flock to believe. I know this from multiple sources, including one set of my neighbors who abandoned the JW's as they eventually realized they'd been "played".
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
It is not the Church's "foundation doctrine" as belief in God and Jesus and their teachings and then doing them is. Some just talk-the-talk, but Catholicism demands we also walk-the-walk.
The formation of the Trinitarian concept was difficult and contentious with no guarantee that it hit a home run, which is why in Catholicism it's all so often referred to as "the Mystery of Trinity". Unlike your JW's, we admit that we don't know all the answers. But believing you know all the answers doesn't mean you actually know all the answers.
By this you appear to claim that you know more than God. You are suggesting that the author of all scripture has no power or influence over who wrote portions of his own word. That means that he is deliberately misleading the world by allowing false prophets to write scripture. Were there any false prophets who wrote OT scripture?
Does God need you exclusively to warn the world about the imposters....? I think your interpretation of scripture is deluded personally, but you are free to believe whatever you wish.
Jesus said that what you do to his "brothers" you do to him. I believe that Paul and Peter are certainly among Christ's brothers (those who will rule with him in his kingdom) and that you have slandered and discredited them. I assume that you see yourself as one of the chosen ones, but I never see you identify your brethren. We will all find out soon enough I guess. I can see that you have conviction, but so do all those who put their own spin on scripture. What make you right, and others who believe that they have 'special' knowledge, wrong?
I have no desire to continue this discussion because there is obviously no point.
Last edited:
No need to listen to me, try listening to Yeshua and the prophets. Matthew 7:15," beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing". As for Peter, Zechariah points out Peter to be the "worthless shepherd" (Zechariah 11:17) whom the LORD would take to "pasture" the "flock doomed to slaughter". (Zechariah 11:7) As for the tare seed, the message of lawlessness. from Paul, that would be cast right next to the good seed, the message of the kingdom, in the same field. As for the OT, the scribes made the Law into a lie (Jeremiah 8:8). But this would be targeted at the Talmud, which refers to the interpretations of the OT.
Oeste
Well-Known Member
God didn't tell the Jews to simply utter his Name, He told them make His Name known.
I think you're confusing "known" with "utter". Making one's name known involves a lot more than a simple sound bite.
I can shout "DeeJe", "DeeJe" all the day long. Have I made your name known to my friends or neighbors?
Hardly
The same for God's Name. Uttering "Jehovah" every third sentence does not make His Name known. In fact, some folks have done their level best to associate "Jehovah" more with false prophesy than they have with anything else. Making God's Name known is not about how many times you can pronounce it or write it down. Mouthing "Jehovah" doesn't give you keys to the Kingdom anymore than mouthing "Open Sesame" gives you access to Ali Baba's golden treasure.
God's Name is known through His attributes. Israel was to be a light to the nations, and by mirroring God's attributes they would make His Name known.
Oeste
Well-Known Member
If our bible was never stripped of God's Name then what on earth is the Watchtower talking about?
Well that seems pretty easy to change. A simply check of extant New Testament manuscripts for the Tetragrammaton should put this whole thing to rest.
It doesn't matter if the Tetragrammaton appears in these verses. What does matter is if it appears in any extant New Testament manuscript. If God protects His word, as you have already argues to 2ndPillar He has, then there is no problem. The text reads and is God breathed EXACTLY as God wanted it breathed...unless you now argue that God was powerless to protect His word.
You need to make up your mind on this Deeje. Either the New Testament is God breathed or Satan corrupted. Claiming the New Testament is God breathed and God protected in one breath while claiming it was Satan-corrupted and demonically demolished in the other is NOT an option.
So which is it??
You do realize that both the Old and New Testament are inspired, don't you? Or do you now claim differently?
Obviously if the New Testament is corrupted then 2ndPillar's argument is back in and your argument that God can protect His word is out.
I would love nothing better than to pursue this line of "reasoning" with you, but I need you to stay focused. Let's save the Trinity for later. It'll be fun...something we can both look forward to.
Aaah...So you open the door wide open for 2ndPillar and his argument that Paul was an apostate. He was tacked into the canon around the 3rd or 4th century because of the "foretold apostasy"? How about any scripture attesting to Paul's authenticity? Were they tacked on as well because "...there was nothing to stop it." ??
Why is the WT so intent on undermining the New Testament's veracity? Why are you joining in on their endeavor?
I see nothing in these verses that tells us God would allow us to remain dirty, blackened and unrefined until the time of the end.
If I did we could surely distribute literature showing our members cheerfully singing, their faces lifted upwards, as Kingdom Halls slowly burn in the background during the coming wrath. As it is, we have to work on our own eye before we can help others.
Good point!
Certainly something to remember the next time someone knocks a door complaining about "Christendom".
Glass house?
No...we're not the ones with their fingers steadily pointing at some church across the street.
Oeste
Well-Known Member
The Tetragrammaton and the New Testament.
I'm referring to the NT.