Mountain_Climber
Active Member
You have a good point there.
There is a bit more to it than the perfection involving works. As Jesus said, ".... Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." John 6:53
-
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!
JW's Jesus is Archangel Michael?
- Thread starter Yoshua
- Start date
There is a bit more to it than the perfection involving works. As Jesus said, ".... Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." John 6:53
Symbolic or literal, it makes Jesus a pagan.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Yes, very perceptive.
Until a dedication takes place they may be around the faith but they are not in the faith.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Rather than making Jesus Pagan it makes Jesus the only human Son of God in his own right.
Literally, for we are born only to begin dying from the very first. So are we born to life or are we born to death?
So if there were no 'part' Jewish families, why would there be 'part' Christian families, either from Jewish or Gentile converts?Yes, very perceptive.
Until a dedication takes place they may be around the faith but they are not in the faith.
It makes him either God or a human pagan. I go with God because God does as he pleases.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
And Jesus does always what pleases God.
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
Until a family member becomes by choice a member of an opposing false religious faith the unbelieving ones are sanctified in relation to the believing ones. This was illustrated in the family priests we see in the OT. The head of each household was as a priest of God toward all in his household.
We see the principle operating also here:
1 Corinthians 7:14 "For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy."
God always does what it right imho. Not "as he pleases". Hebrews 6:18 I do not doubt that many times it might have pleased God to undo us and start all over.
So the believing ones can also make the infant/unbeliever sanctified by the outward expression of Christian faith:baptism
kjw47
Well-Known Member
kjw47
Well-Known Member
then explain to all how Jehovah could produce wisdom without having wisdom to do so first?
Psalm 115
1Not to us, O LORD, not to us,
But to Your name give glory
Because of Your loving kindness, because of Your truth.
2Why should the nations say,
“Where, now, is their God?”
3But our God is in the heavens;
He does whatever He pleases.
4Their idols are silver and gold,
The work of man’s hands.
I know where you're coming from now. Your NWT translation changed the word "she" to "it." Even the Tanach has the word "she" in Proverbs 8
It's just another JW twist of scripture to back into your doctrine on Jesus. Tisk Tisk.
"Jehovah" saves = Jesus' name Isaiah 43:11 Isaiah 19:20 Isaiah 43:3 Isaiah 45:21 Isaiah 60:16 Hosea 13:4
Mountain_Climber
Active Member
I know of nothing prohibiting parents to have their infants baptized.
It would not be a sin to do so and may perhaps serve some useful purpose. I would suppose that it could be an outward expression of that sanctification through the faith of the parents providing the parents thereafter take responsibility to begin teaching the infant from the word of God. And that is the parent's responsibility. It cannot be excused to other teachers in any manner that absolves parents from having to do their part.
But no such requirement for baptism of infants exists. Infants are no more required to be baptized with the baptism commanded by Jesus than are family members who refuse it. Actually I said that wrong. A family head is no more required to have infants baptized than he is to force the unwilling ones in the family to be baptized. The truth is that everyone is required to be baptized once they are old enough to choose to accept God's Christ as their way to salvation.
Last edited:
kjw47
Well-Known Member
You didn't answer the question--- and since 1Cor 1:30 clearly says--Jesus became wisdom, and all know Jesus was a male--wisdom is referred to as she in a non human sense. But there is 0 doubt in all creation--Jesus = Gods master worker.=all things created through him, except for Jesus as Prov 8:22 clearly teaches as well as Coll 1:15.
kjw47
Well-Known Member
Neither does it appear anywhere in the nt.
The meaning of the name "Jesus" is "Jah is salvation" (in English) The words YHVH (Jehovah) and salvation are together many times in the ancient script. Please do not pretend you know how the ancients wrote.