[deist]

You're all wrong. Jesus was neither God nor a divine being. He was just a man & now he's dead.

[Clough]

You're all wrong. Jesus was neither God nor a divine being. He was just a man & now he's dead.

Thank you for sharing your faith!

In my faith, Jesus Christ is my personal Savior, is risen from the dead, and He is alive!

[silentrascal]

* sigh - we just went through that cycle. Did you not read my response? WE are not going to get anywhere if you choose to mjust repeat your last message and not address my response. If you have no answer, just say so. Accept the possibiligty that you are wrong. *

Sorry, sport. Your responses were addressed. Just because you don't care for my response doesn't mean they weren't. Obviously you're the one without the answer. I accept the fact that YOU are in the wrong. Can you accept that now?

* Again, if you have not dealt with the issue. You are replacing dealing with what scripture says with your opinion and that just doesn't cut it. *

But those are the exact kinds of responses you give. Why be a hypocrite and give those to begin with and then turn around and say mine don't "cut it" when I do the same? It just doesn't work that way.

* Read what the passage of scripture actually says. Again refusing to deal with it does not make it go away. *

Right back at you, Mr. Hypocrite. Refusing to acknowledge what the scripture actually says and then turning it around to fit an errant view... it doesn't help your argument one bit, and it doesn't change the facts.

* I challenge you to name a single member of the NWT translation team who had the qualifications necessary to translate either Greek or Hebrew texts. If you claim that they were, I will bring forward the details regarding the translation team, and I suspect that you know what the evidence shows. *

You can keep your challenge. The translating committee for the New World Translation has stayed anonymous. Nobody is seeking recognition for their hard work and dedication to making the most accurately rendered Bible translation possible. And, even if I were inclined to do so, you've demonstrated repeatedly so far that your only response would be "nope, that's wrong". You can also keep your "details" and "evidence", as nothing from you is deemed the least bit credible by me. Your admitted bias is the cause of that.

* Oh come on now - you are going to lie about what I said? Where did I say that I was biased? Why won'ty you deal with the material before us? Have you no answers now? *

Your own comments prove your bias. Now you're going to lie about that? Let's refresh your obviously failing memory with your own words revealing your bias:

"A quick check shows that it is the NWT, and there were no qualified translators on the translation committee for the NWT, so let's stick to more credible translations."

"You should get your doctrine from somewhere other than the Watchtower Society. "

Now, I suppose you're going to give us another bold-faced lie and deny you said those things? Have you no answers now? I didn't think so.

* Then you are denying scripture which says that Jesus humbled Himself and prior to creation had the glory of God. By what authority are you denying scripture? I noticed that you have no rebuttal to Micah 5:2 which tells us that Jesus is from everlasting. I notice that you have no response to 1 Tim 3:16 which says that Jesus is God manifest in the flesh. *

There is no denial. The Bible is very open and candid when it explains that Jesus was the firstborn of all creation, the very beginning of God's creations. What it doesn't state is the length of time from Jesus' creation to the creation of the physical universe, the other myraids of angelic creatures, or the creation of the earth itself. In all likelihood, after Jesus' creation, he spent countless eons of time alongside his Father and his God in heaven. That's a very logical assumption based upon the Scriptural fact that Jesus was created; that Jesus had a beginning. No twisting of scripture on your part of such clear-cut Bible texts like Colossians 1:15 and Revelation 3:14 will change that one iota.

The question back to you would be: by what authority do YOU deny scripture? And by what authority do you use a clearly errant version of the Bible to twist clear scriptural teachings?

What Micah 5:2 actually states is "And you, O Bethlehem Ephrathah, the one too little to get to be among the thousands of Judah, from you there will come out to me the one who is to become ruler in Israel, whose origin is from early times, from the days of time indifinite." - All that scripture does is 2 things: (1) It prophecies the specific town of Bethlehem from which the Messiah would come (given that there were two Bethlehem-named towns of the time) and (2) It acknowledges Jesus' prehuman existence. You can twist and contort it any way you want, however your viewpoint is countered by countless other Bible verses.

* Scripture is abundantly clear. Why are you unwilling to accept what scripture says? *

I place that question back to you. Why are YOU unwilling to accept the Bible's teachings, and why do you insist on a viewpoint that not only is NOT supported by the Bible, but, in fact, dishonors both God and Christ?

[Tj3]

Well, silentrascal, I see that you have no further answers and have resorted to one-liners and ad hominems. That speaks volumes.

[silentrascal]

Well, silentrascal, I see that you have no further answers and have resorted to one-liners and ad hominems. That speaks volumes.

Right back at you, kid. Glad to know you don't refute your own bigotry and bias in how you've responded. That in itself tells a great deal.

[NeedKarma]

Ah, more loving, tolerant christians. This thread is a good example.

[silentrascal]

Ah, more loving, tolerant christians. This thread is a good example.

Oh yes, and I suppose that comment went a long way in answering the original question, didn't it?

[NeedKarma]

Oh yes, and I suppose that comment went a long way in answering the original question, didn't it?

Don't have time at the present, I'm off to the Red Cross to donate blood to save a fellow man. See, I'm a nice guy!

[silentrascal]

Don't have time at the present, I'm off to the Red Cross to donate blood to save a fellow man. See, I'm a nice guy!

And I'm obedient to God who says that we're to abstain from blood, in the book of Acts. I don't take in blood and I don't give blood for others to take in, either (thus their breaking God's law).

[firmbeliever]

And I'm obedient to God who says that we're to abstain from blood, in the book of Acts. I don't take in blood and I don't give blood for others to take in, either (thus their breaking God's law).

Does this mean that it is forbidden to donate blood?Or have blood transfusions?

[silentrascal]

Does this mean that it is forbidden to donate blood?Or have blood transfusions?

Yes, it would mean that. Christians are to "abstain from.....blood" as Acts 15 brings out. Now the naysayers will spew out the standard line about "helping my fellow man" by giving blood, but therein lies the problem... they'll put what they view as helping their fellowman out over their obedience to God. Let's see... on one hand there's breaking God's law and accepting blood, with only the slight chance of the person surviving and living a few years longer in this Satan-controlled system, or there's upholding God's law and refusing blood although it may mean the loss of your life. But you have to believe that God, who granted us life to begin with, is certainly more than capable of giving us life again, especially if we lost it in the process of being obedient to him.

[NeedKarma]

... few years longer in this Satan-controlled system...

This world isn't controlled by an imaginary devil; individuals make bad decisions based on their circumstances. Take responsibility for your actions and stop saying 'the devil made me do it'.

[silentrascal]

This world isn't controlled by an imaginary devil; individuals make bad decisions based on their circumstances. Take responsibilty for your actions and stop saying 'the devil made me do it'.

I take responsibility for what I do. The world IS controlled by Satan. The Bible makes it very clear that Satan is the "god of this system of things" and that "the whole world is lying in the power of the wicked one". Satanic influence abounds, there's no question about that, and Satan cannot be the scapegoat for all of our wrongs, most of which is our own doing.

[firmbeliever]

Yes, it would mean that. Christians are to "abstain from.....blood" as Acts 15 brings out. Now the naysayers will spew out the standard line about "helping my fellow man" by giving blood, but therein lies the problem......they'll put what they view as helping their fellowman out over their obedience to God. Let's see....on one hand there's breaking God's law and accepting blood, with only the slight chance of the person surviving and living a few years longer in this Satan-controlled system, or there's upholding God's law and refusing blood although it may mean the loss of your life. But you have to believe that God, who granted us life to begin with, is certainly more than capable of giving us life again, especially if we lost it in the process of being obedient to him.

Is this really true?
I mean I cannot believe that the Almighty will ask us not to give blood or have blood transfusion when it is medicallyy advised.

I can understand not taking money for blood donation as I believe in that.

[silentrascal]

Is this really true?
I mean I cannot believe that the Almighty will ask us not to give blood or have blood transfusion when it is medicallyy advised.

I can understand not taking money for blood donation as I believe in that.

God views blood as precious, as sacred, and as a representation of life itself. As the Creator, he has every right to place such a prohibition upon us. Being "medically advised" doesn't necessarily mean it's the best course of action. Abstaining from blood can safeguard us from a number of easily transmitted diseases and other illnesses, so there is value in heeding God's counsel to us in that respect. The other respect would be as was mentioned earlier, that if you get to the point in which your life may be at risk, is it worth it to try and live a little longer in this system, or, should you die, would you rather experience the reality of the hope that the Bible tells us about, that of a resurrection back to life in the New World promised by God? The prohibition against blood can be found in both the Hebrew (aka "old testament") Scriptures as well as the Christian-Greek (aka "new testament") Scriptures, so it is something that God has not permitted for his people in the past and does not permit for his people today.

[NeedKarma]

I would rather mu daughter receive a pint of blood and live 50 years longer than do it your way and let her die. I rather enjoy her company.

[firmbeliever]

I would rather mu daughter receive a pint of blood and live 50 years longer than do it your way and let her die. I rather enjoy her company.

On this I have to agree with you and I would donate blood when I can, no second thoughts about it.

As you said I would want the same thing for my daughter when and if she needs blood, because life and death is not in our hands.
It is up to us to use the medical help available to cure and help those who are suffering get a better life until they face their deaths.

silentrascal,
Just for information sake I am not a Christian.I had never heard of this not giving or receiving blood , which is why I asked about it.Not to argue.

[silentrascal]

I would rather mu daughter receive a pint of blood and live 50 years longer than do it your way and let her die. I rather enjoy her company.

And I'd rather my daughter die faithful to God with the prospect of eternal life in paradise, than to live a temporary further 50 years (if even that much time is left) in this Satan-controlled world. I'd rather enjoy her company as well, permanently. But then again that's just me... I'd be concerned over my daughter's eternal welfare, not selfishly thinking shortsightedly.

[deist]

And I'd rather my daughter die faithful to God with the prospect of eternal life in paradise, than to live a temporary further 50 years (if even that much time is left) in this Satan-controlled world. I'd rather enjoy her company as well, permanently. But then again that's just me.....I'd be concerned over my daughter's eternal welfare, not selfishly thinking shortsightedly.

Man you are brainwashed. No wonder there are no doctors who are Jehovah's Witnesses.

[silentrascal]

Man you are brainwashed. No wonder there are no doctors who are Jehovah's Witnesses.

Must be a very sad life you lead, to be so cynical and out-of-touch.