49 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
You should keep some literature on hand for them...
There's some brochures here if you need them
Mouseover tells me the site is
"venganza.org". I know a little Spanish; isn't that "vengeance"?
My bible has this, on that: 'No se venguen ustedes mismos, amados, sino c
Translated from Spanish to English = Revenge
Translated, English to Spanish = Vengaza.
I guess its about the same thing.
I use the pamphlets to start the fireplace. They come 1-2x times a yr. then offer the word and I give the word, "out". Thanks, but no thanks. No, I don't yell or bemoan their calling but please... -----Willy
Willy, Willy ...
"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the killer of the prophets and stoner of those sent forth to her,-how often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks together under her wings! But YOU people did not want it. Look! YOUR house is abandoned to YOU. For I say to YOU, YOU will by no means see me from henceforth until YOU say, 'Blessed is he that comes in Jehovah's name!'"
Spoken to the mainstream religion of the day.
As I've noted before, Jesus NEVER, EVER used the
word Jehovah. That word was coined about the time the King James version of the Bible was translated. What Jesus actually said was Lord;
Matt 23:39 "For I say to you, from now on you will not see Me until you say, 'BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!'"
The Greek actually uses the word 'Kur
Isn't it great
that people were following him around and recorded every exact word that was spoken.
Even today, with all the electronic gear, people are still misquoted.
Just remember JP...
... the Bible is the exact word of God. There is no interpretation going on, there is no discrepancy that any man could have made while writing the words down. God would not allow that to happen, or so my fundamentalist neighbor tells me. Thus the Bible is the literal word of God.
That's why y'all need to get a Book of Mormon on your book shelves. It is the word of God to the people of North America.
Interesting to note that the Reorganized LDS (now known as the Community of Christ) recognize "perception of truth is always qualified by human nature and experience". Consequently, while it recognizes scripture as the revelation of God, its members would not typically suggest that scriptures constitute the literal "words of God.
Actually, if you read it, you can find the place where
the Bible itself says that, to paraphrase a bit, "Holy Men wrote as they were moved by God". That, in the view of the historic Christian church, means that the Bible, as originally written, IS the exact word of God. You can choose whether you believe that or not, but that is what it says. DR Pruner certainly believes that.
Aside from that, the question at hand is what the original written text says. Scholars have a high degree of confidence that we know what was originally written. The existing copies of the original text of the Gospels are VERY old. So, discussing the words used in the text does not involve any interpretation whatsoever. In addition, the meaning of the Greek words used does not involve any interpretation whatsoever. That's the substance of my comment to DR Pruner.
These subjects are a combination of history, scholarship, and theology. It helps to know something about these subjects before attempting to comment. It has nothing whatsoever to do with fundamentalism, Mormonism, the FLDS, the Reorganized LDS, or any of the items currently in the news.
BTW, I do have a Book of Mormon on my book shelves. Do you? How about the Bible itself? That was intended for all the people of the world.
he Bible itself says that, to paraphrase a bit, "Holy Men wrote as they were moved by God". That, in the view of the historic Christian church, means that the Bible, as originally written, IS the exact word of God.
Seems to me it sounds more like the writer was inspired ("moved") by God -- not exactly the same thing.
Here's a site that lists dates for various Manuscripts of
the New Testament, in parts first, and a second table of whole or nearly whole Gospels. I am unsure of the site's actual leanings, but certainly any of the Q'umran manuscripts (Dead Sea Scrolls) are pre 70 AC. It also includes references to those who were taught by Disciples or disciples of Disciples.
My own concerns are more in the area of the selection process that whittled a much larger mass of material down to the accepted Canon, i.e the Apocrypha. This was a committee decision in the last instance, though Athanasius listed the New Testament plus 4 or 5 other non-canonical Books in 367 AC though there were earlier efforts by Origen and Eusebius in the Second Century (i.e. 100+ AC).
There are the Gnostic Gospels or the Nag Hammadi Library, found in 1945 in jars in the Egyptian desert and which has the Apocrypha and more, and date to the 3rd or 4th Centuries (200 and something or 300 and something). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library
Let's face it. There are so many choices that one places one's faith where one thinks best, and leaves others to their beliefs or lack thereof. Unfortunately this leads to the (currently unappetizing) need to respect others' scriptures like the Q'ran. Just as there are almost as many interpreters of the New Testament as there are preachers, there are as many interpreters of the Q'ran as there are imams, some of whom have rather repellent views.
This is an exceptionally difficult question, and everyone needs to be respectful of others' views.
What is the link for
the dates you mentioned? What is the connection to the Dead Sea Scrolls? Those scrolls were all OT documents and errata.
Why, that means there are correct spoken versions of all the names in the bible! I've always wondered how Malachi and Moloch were differentiated. Are they on the web? Send us a link and we'll mp3 it!
And the sarcasm wasn't directed at you. :-)
I haven't seen them since I
went to the door with my hair messed up in my underware. I was sleeping and I answered the door.
Wasn't a pretty sight!
Ugh! "PudgyOne" in his underwear.
Thank you for sharing.
Depending on the state of the deshabille the local elders might have put a note by your address as a 'Stay away; possible bad guy.' Could work for others, too, but cave: The "indecent exposure" laws tend to be read as "child molestation" by increasingly zealous prosectuors.
They don't come by here anymore
I love talking to them but they always seem to have a meeting they have to go to.
"Talking to them"?
or 'Listening and responding, bible in hand'?
Mt 10:11,14 may have been applied to your house. (There's an additional statement at v.15, but I can't repeat it on a moderated forum.)
Say, ... I wonder if Jesus would be allowed to use it here? ...
Actually questioning with Bible in hand
Good. A natural segu
is Ps 37:29. What do you think of that? I've found that most reject the idea. Must be something bad about it; perhaps a difference in translation.
Anyway, if it came to pass, wouldn't that solve the problem we discussed elswhere of abortion-as-collateral-damage?
what he means
Matthew chapter 10
10 Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves: for the workman is worthy of his meat.
14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.
15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
verse 10 = You didn't give them any money
verse 14 = You ain't worth dirt
verse 15 = You're gonna git it now!
Well, it's still here, so I guess
Lee does allow Jesus to rag on people who don't 'receive his words'.
A blow for free speech and Forums glasnost !
You've probably been assigned reprobate status. It's even funnier when they'd stop by my step mother's house and she told them she was an ex Jehovah Witness. You'd think they'd just seen Satan and make a quick exit.
Good. They were just following orders:
1 John 2:19; 2 John 10,11; 1 Cor 5:11-13; Titus 3:10,11; Heb 12:11-16
They did sound like nice kids.
Ad I'm glad you were nice to them.
One can be polite while not listening to their messages.
The people who angered me were those who started out with statements like" Ae you sure you know the Lord Jesus Christ?" with the implication that I did not, which drew my reply, "What is there about me that implies that I do not?"
It's been about a dozen years since we've had any group come door to door. I think it could be because we have many denominations in the immediate area.
"Are you sure you know the Lord Jesus Christ?"
Doesn't sound like us; we might have said "Jehovah".
Usually we try to get on common ground via the Dave and Debbie approach, above. (They were only following orders. )
As to the "dozen years", I suspect that, in our case, it's for other reasons I mentioned elsewhere.
"One can be polite while not listening to their messages."
Why bother? Just say, "I'm not interested." It was common enough in bible times. 2 Pet 3:5-7; Mt 24:39.
Instead of "Dave and Debbie", suppose it was a bearded Abdul, in a robe with a suspiciously large bulge over the chest. He asks, "What do you think of Holy Q'uran's sentence on Infidels?" What would be your responses?
Rhetorical; the true answer is in the ever-increasing thickness of U.S. Homeland Security's manuals.
"Also, there will be signs ... and on the earth anguish of nations, not knowing the way out ... while men become faint out of fear and expectation of the things coming upon the inhabited earth; ..."
(That should have gone under the original post.)
I'm interested to know dr...
... what is the sentence on infidels? It has been almost 20 years since I read the koran so you might want to refresh my memory.
The fellows reaction may also be different if he was a shia and I was a sunni (or vise versa).
There is a multitude of misunderstandings when it comes to religion. Many of those misunderstandings are propagated by the religions very own followers.
For all those biblical scholars out there. What does the Bible have to say about unbelievers eg infidels?
"the [Q'uran's] sentence on infidels"
Death on sight to apostates, AFAIK. (Like the bible, it treats lapsed ones more severely than the merely ignorant. Just ask Mr Rushdie.) The rest will be dealt with by Allah at their "end time", if not sooner by conquest. We have a publication, Mankind's Search for God, that covers all religions. It was written pre-9/11 and has the best info I know on Islam. (And I read their take on it in the Middle East.)
It wasn't "the fellows" reaction I had in mind. It was Dubya's, passed down to his followers. Knee-jerk fear and irrational response. Prophesied, as I noted.
"What does the Bible have to say about unbelievers eg infidels?"
Some of it I posted elsewhere on this thread. Also, Revelation and Ezekiel have some juicier stuff. And it isn't a matter of "sholarship", just reading. As in, "What does the math book have to say about 2 + 2?"
"Well, on page 12 it says it equals 4."
That's why they came to your door, so you would know. I hope you can arrange that afternoon meeting.
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)