Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Using logic in violent versus non-violent situations

Aug 17, 2017 6:09AM PDT

If someone is coming at you with a hammer, would it not be a help to pick up a larger hammer?
If someone is coming at you with a mouthful of hate, does it help to combat them with a bigger mouthful of hate?

Why do we use the same logic in either situation? It was written in the news that some counter-protesters went to Charlottesville because they wanted to end hate. If true, I'd say their choice of weapons was no better, if not worse, then what they went to fight against. Just my opinion.

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
Your doctrine about Christ is "anti", doctrine of Devil
Aug 23, 2017 10:00AM PDT

Remember to always punish children, those like in the kingdom of heaven, if they see something better than you do. Also don't forget to ostracize them in front of classmates, to whip them into line through peer pressure. What an winning approach for a teacher.

1 John 2:18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

1 John 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

1 John 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

1 John 2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father:

1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.

1 John 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:

1 John 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

2 John 1:7 For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.

2 John 1:8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.

2 John 1:9 Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.

2 John 1:10 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed:

(jd - and you wonder why many refuse to even open the door to you?! The next verse blesses those who refuse)

2 John 1:11 For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.


(jd - Christ became flesh just like you and me. He died on the cross just like the two men beside him. He was not some hybrid "spirit creature" as yours teach. He came into this sinful fallen world, born of a human, as a human, suffered as a human, died as a human, not as some spirit carrrying out an acting play hanging on a cross. Honor the Son, the rest is then taken care of, no need then to fear the Father)

- Collapse -
(NT) Sorry. No cookies.
Aug 24, 2017 3:40AM PDT
- Collapse -
Aww, you at them all?
Aug 24, 2017 11:10AM PDT

The milk was sour.

- Collapse -
Perhaps from this??
Aug 23, 2017 10:31AM PDT
- Collapse -
Steven, thanks for the link.
Aug 27, 2017 1:39PM PDT

I know of the site and its Q&A.
It's good scholarship, to a point. Please note their uncertainty about pronunciation; this is true of ALL proper nouns in Hebrew or Greek. We don't insist on any one way. We say, 'Who cares? The important thing is to use whatever name we have in our own language, because of Ex 3:15.' And C.A. admits that Adonai is a substitution, not a translation.
"Jewish superstition" is the phrase used by the editors of the ASV of 1901 in regard their decision to replace LORD with Jehovah in the OT. Using Adonai was NOT a custom of the Jews before the CE dates mentioned. Anyone can see this by reading Ruth 2:4 in any bible and back-substituting Jehovah for LORD to see how ordinary folk of the day used it. Vowel points? A red herring.
Our Aid book, 1971, was replaced in 1988 with a two-volume work with a different aim and format. The former discussed the monk Raymundus Martini; the latter does not. A photo caption from a 2006 pamphlet does mention him and his work.
Do we "loathe" the Catholic Church? We know that, in his word, Jehovah expresses loathing for any religion that he considers false. I can say, from the historical record, that Catholic clergy and lay people have attacked and killed Jehovah's Witnesses, while no Witness has ever killed a Catholic. History.
You said you don't carry a 'Catholic talking point' book with you. You can, from these same people. https://www.catholic.com/survival-guide
Of course, you've just seen that one of their answers is lacking in accuracy.

- Collapse -
I'd say your charge of Catholics killing Jehovah's Witnesses
Aug 27, 2017 3:02PM PDT

is more than a little bit misleading. Perhaps you're speaking mainly of Nazi Germany but there may be other instances of persecution and killings. It won't, however, be found as a policy of the Catholic Church. Hitler did have a big issue with people who would not go to war for him and it's been reported as "true" that he targeted your church members for that reason. He also targeted Catholic clergy who didn't support his war and imprisoned them at Dachau. Of course, Germany was primarily Catholic or Lutheran and Hitler knew how to play the two against each other but this war had no basis in religion. Any killing by a member of your church by a person belonging to the Catholic church had nothing to do with that. But, if you wish, you could also claim the same persecution by Lutherans, atheists, et al. Those who will carry guns in war will always kill more people than those who refuse to raise them.

- Collapse -
Steven, as you yourself note,
Aug 28, 2017 10:04AM PDT

The proximate causers of Witness deaths were the patriotic, churchgoing Lutherans and Catholics of Hitler's Europe. What sort of leadership did they get?
On the website you never visit, there are historical accounts of a Catholic priest rejoicing in print that JWs 'are now forbidden' in Poland; a Lutheran minister happy to announce on radio "the ban placed today [April 20, 1933]" on the Witnesses in Saxony. There are many more such accounts, including some from postwar publications by non-Witnesses.
Or, you can take the tour. https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/mobile/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005394
You'll read here that camp officers chose Witnesses to shave them and to be nannies for their children because they were convinced they would not be harmed.
My statement, and history's, stands.
And please re-read your last sentence.

- Collapse -
I've seen these reports and, of course that was then
Aug 28, 2017 10:28AM PDT
- Collapse -
(NT) Exvellent link. Thank you
Aug 28, 2017 11:28AM PDT
- Collapse -
The Russkies arrested me too, but refused to
Aug 28, 2017 12:07PM PDT

confiscate my stupid phone. Drat.
AFAIK, every word in it was true and accurate. [The picture actually shows people singing from the former songbook, but of course the psalms were prayers to Jehovah.]
That was a courageous move by Kovalesky, as a Russian and as a Catholic. As you can see by the graphs, religion in Russia is now a matter of politics; its impolitic to be anything but Orthodox. Happy
Many of those "converts" stopped attending under Communism, when they saw the Church cooperating with the government, and never went back. How 'firm in the faith' will they prove to be at the next change, do you think?
You may recall I've used statements like 'So far, there is freedom of religion in ____.' Well, so far ...
Newsweek focuses on our meetings problems, which would apply to most churches. Our worship is based on Mt 28:19,20 and Mt 24:14. That worship continues, but with less convenience. We've done this before.
For the last couple of years our meeting presentations have been featuring talks and videos on working under persecution, so we'll be focused on the right things. Lu 17:31 ff. You folks are free to do that, too.
Identity cards? Now, that's funny! Under any circumstances we're happy to be ID'd as Witnesses!
Putin should know, from his previous job, that Witnessing got its big start in Siberia from internal exiles.

- Collapse -
And here's one for you.
Aug 27, 2017 5:45PM PDT

If it holds up, and it looks good, this is far from trivial.
It isn't the Bible as such, but about how two sets of people looked at it, way back. This Greek/Latin thing was no small matter, and this is very close to the era where all the action was, at Constantine or even before.
Just from some side notes we can see what a chore it is to be reasonably sure of something that old. There was an important pagan named Celsus, an opponent of Origen, whose work is lost. But we have Origen's "Against Celsus", with his lengthy and honest quotes and paraphrases of Celsus, which is almost as good. This new stuff is probably better than that was, for scholars.


https://theconversation.com/lost-latin-commentary-on-the-gospels-rediscovered-after-1-500-years-thanks-to-digital-technology-82874

- Collapse -
Literal versus figurative language
Aug 28, 2017 2:04AM PDT

I've listened to many discussions about this. My personal consensus Happy is that the inspiration from God did not turn men into zombie-like writers. My church teaches that the writings reflect both individual styles and customs of the period. Seems more than reasonable to me. God gave us brains far beyond the capability of any other earthly creature. We can ask ourselves if that was a gift or a punishment but I believe that's already been postulated from events in the first writings.

- Collapse -
Relevance?
Aug 28, 2017 8:52AM PDT

It's clear that each writer was his own person. Zombies from a different religion. Scholars are always glad to have more and older information, which this is.

- Collapse -
Scholars
Aug 28, 2017 9:11AM PDT

I'd guess that sometimes the taste of the meat is never as sweet as the thrill of the hunt.

- Collapse -
Well, I'm enjoying it.
Aug 28, 2017 12:10PM PDT

BTW, it's straight Catholic stuff, since it was long before the Reformation.

- Collapse -
James, Putin is on your side, anyway.
Aug 30, 2017 10:36AM PDT
- Collapse -
I have a question
Aug 21, 2017 6:29PM PDT

Can you prove your GOD exist?

If the answer is NO then why would you point people at a doc that refs the teachings of your GOD?

I have the bible thumpers show up at my door yearly I always ask that simple question.

- Collapse -
Perhaps your powers of perception are too weak
Aug 21, 2017 7:18PM PDT

I mean yes, the ultimate truth would be standing in front of Him, but do you really want to die first to find out that truth? Reminds me of people who want to be saved without baptism. "Like the theif on the cross!" Reply; "OK, but you'll have to be crucified and we can have someone there to take your confession, just before you die". The strongest evidence would be fulfilled prophecies, showing someone was revealing events long before they happened, proving it wasn't just guess-work on their part. You could look up websites that connect prophecy to fulfillments, especially concerning Jesus.

- Collapse -
If you want to check some out
Aug 21, 2017 7:25PM PDT
- Collapse -
It was a simple question
Aug 21, 2017 7:40PM PDT

Yes/no.
You don't need to write 50 words to justify your belief.

- Collapse -
what I accept as proof
Aug 21, 2017 7:54PM PDT

You may not consider it so. I gave you my answer, it's up to you to either accept it or reject it. Honestly considering and studying would be better than failing to do so and rejecting outright. Yes, I could shoot someone dead and thereby give them proof they couldn't reject at all. Or, I can give them the proof that exists while living, and it's up to them to ignore, reject, or accept it.

- Collapse -
You don't have proof
Aug 21, 2017 8:31PM PDT

You have a belief.

I've asked that yes/no question to other religious types and what I get is a 100 word spiel about their belief.

They never answer the question yes/no.

Different religions have different beliefs with no proof that any of these beliefs are true.

Yet these people will point at some doc as if it was fact.

- Collapse -
Just to pipe in
Aug 22, 2017 1:59AM PDT

If the only thing you'll accept is scientific or tangible evidence that can be presented and reproduced over and over, your point is well taken. All I can add is that lack of such evidence that would show proof is not evidence that something does not exist. As for launching volleys of scripture to make points that is only useful if all parties have the same faith and understanding of those words. An extreme would be an argument between a Christian and Muslim with each using their own "book". That one goes nowhere.
Books, alone, prove nothing but can provide an incentive for further exploration. I'd say that it's not a bad idea at times to search for truth rather than proof. One of these can certainly exist without the other.

- Collapse -
And to add
Aug 22, 2017 2:22AM PDT

Bob__b. Do you adhere to the idea that "all men are created equal" as a being "self evident"? Is there any proof that this is true? It seems that there are many who do not believe it to be true. We hear them called Nazis, racists and many other vile things and we want to push them away. It seems, however, that there is plenty of scientific evidence to challenge our notion of what the word "equal" means in the context of our Declaration of Independence versus how we might view it today.

- Collapse -
all men are created equal
Aug 22, 2017 3:04AM PDT

Yes.
As you go through life you develop opinions/bias and that's when were not all equal.

Anti black/muslim/hispanic/other, these are all things you develop.

- Collapse -
The nit pick to that argument is
Aug 22, 2017 5:23AM PDT

the use of the word "created" because we certainly are not born equally in all abilities. As for bias and opinions, I believe these come largely from observations...be their our own or those shared by others. It's very natural for this to happen and it's not, IMO, a failing until we use them in harmful ways.
Our differences, I've learned, are actually gifts. One person's deficiencies can be considered a gift to another person who is stronger in those areas as it allows for an opportunity to use that strength in a productive manner. Belittling or mocking a person for such deficiencies is an example of using bias in a harmful rather than helpful way. This kind of thinking can become very confusing as I don't believe it's taught in secular educational systems. It is taught in my church. Of course the real head of that church is nothing more than a figment of some person's imaginations...or so I've heard.

- Collapse -
"all men are created equal"
Aug 22, 2017 7:19AM PDT

I can only guess what the founder's meant by that.
My guess is equal rights.

If they meant equal physical or mental abilities then my guess is wrong.

- Collapse -
Nope. Don't think so
Aug 22, 2017 7:35AM PDT

I'd say that the "founders" were looking at this from the standpoint of making laws but acknowledging that some things were a given and not to be tinkered with. There are some grammar issues in that full statement that could be argued. Perhaps they meant to use the word "equally" or the words "as equals" under the Creator's guidelines but I'm in no position to second guess. That's up to the SCOTUS.

- Collapse -
Guess
Aug 22, 2017 7:46AM PDT

Your guess sounds better than my guess.

Doubt will ever know what they meant with 'created equal'.

- Collapse -
I'll agree
Aug 22, 2017 2:44AM PDT

I neither believe or disbelieve that there is a god.

When someone use their belief and presents it as fact I don't think that's quite right.

We will most likely never know if there is or is not.