JWs & The Bible

[nPeace]

In Aramaic, both Peter and stone [or rock] are "Kephas". Prior to that Matthew citation, Jesus had already given Peter his new name, thus that new name must have meant something to Peter and the others. And Jesus says "Thou are Peter...", whereas it's really quite clear that Jesus is making a play on words since Peter already knew his changed name.

Jesus, otoh, is referred to as being the "Cornerstone" for the Church, which is far more important than just being a "rock" ["Kephas"].

I understand that's what you believe... and your reasoning may sound good to you.
It doesn't make the text say what you want it to say, though.

Jesus does not identify Peter as the foundation of the Church. Peter is part of the Church.
You said it yourself. The Church is the congregation - the body of the Christ.

The scripture say more..
1 Peter 2 BSB
4As you come to Him, the living stone, rejected by men but chosen and precious in God’s sight, 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6For it stands in Scripture:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone,

a chosen and precious cornerstone;

and the one who believes in Him

will never be put to shame.”a7To you who believe, then, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,

“The stone the builders rejected

has become the cornerstone,”b8and,

“A stone of stumbling

and a rock of offense.”c

They stumble because they disobey the word—and to this they were appointed.9But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, to proclaim the virtues of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light. 10Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.d

Jesus drew attention to himself as the rock mass, whether he reminded Peter of the meaning of his name. or not, may have relevance to his way of teaching. He often used word pictures. That was the way of Jesus, the great teacher.

 

[Brian2]

Where did I say the Church would not be guided by the holy spirit?
Is this a smokescreen to avoid responding coherently to anything I said... or asked?

A smoke screen. Your MO is showing.
Matt 28:19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Jesus is with the Church always, even till the end of the age.

Matt 13:27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’
28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied.
“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’
29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”

The weeds are with the church always, until the end.

A Church that has gone astray in some areas is still the Church that was established in the first century with the apostles and prophets as the foundation and Jesus as the cornerstone.

Eph 2:19 Therefore you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of God’s household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the cornerstone. 21 In Him the whole building is fitted together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord.…

 

[Brian2]

When I reply to you all your text runs together and it is hard to see the breaks which you have in your reply to me, with quotes in between. What I do is to leave a line between the quote and text and between the text and quote so that the breaks can be seen easily. I hope you understand what I am saying. I'll not leave that line in this post and you may be able to see what I am talking about if you reply.

Just watched a really neat neuropsychology flick on youtube (let me know if u want a link) & in one part the guy was talking about how one side of the brain (iirc the right side) processed fundamental beliefs & the other side did the reevaluation/reality-check to keep the other side honest. So what's been working for me is periodic tours around my psycic house to "check my foundations" to see for example whether erosion or subsurface instability (or the belief/reality equivalent) was a problem.

I guess that is a good thing to do from time to time. I doubt that I would have time to look at the link.

Not too long ago I had some JW's over & they went thru their spiel + worked w/ me on my recheck of the Bible & I ran into a sort of brick wall. They really did not want to go any further & at the end they were disagreeing w/ everything I said just out of habit. I'd hoped that it could be different here but my take is that they were not even willing to look at what I was seeing.

I guess it is hard to see what others are saying if it fundamentally contradicts what you see the Bible means.

lol --so I guess that means I can't get specific w/ u about what I was looking at in the Bible! Seriously, what I gather is that given the fact that Baha'i membership is roughly in tune w/ the world in general, the average IQ of the Baha'is is 100. My guess is ur smarter than that. Sure I'm willing to get into what I've found in the Bible but you haven't asked (to my knowledge) & the world is very big w/ a lot of other things to talk about.

You can get specific about what you were looking at in the Bible with me if you want. I can't say I'll be much help but who knows.

My home is smack dab in the middle of a Panamanian rain forest & I got monkeys, parrots, sloths, iquanas, and orchids all running wild around the place. It's neat but I find I do better when I can chat in English about interesting things.

Sounds interesting and exciting. I'm on the edge of Melbourne in Australia and as I said there is rain forest and a variety of other forests and plenty of birds and some wallabies and echidnas and wombats and some feral deer etc It is classed as rural but there are a lot of houses and fences around and only a couple of farms. It is amazing that the animals want to stay, but they haven't got a map to tell them where to go to get to more bush land with no fences. Google Sherbrooke forest if you are interested.
If your native language is English it is supposed to be so much better to hear and communicate in that language than a more recently learnt language. That is one reason that the Bible has and is being translated into all languages.
I just tried to reply to myself and could still see the gaps between different parts. I don't know what you are doing. Maybe you are not even going to the next line when you put in the quote brackets.

 

[Brian2]

What answers don't you get for certain things the Bible says?
Name one. Just one, and I will prove that you are lying.
I can even prove it with just a few clicks of the mouse. Go ahead. Let's see you seal your doom.
If one went to jail for every lie they tell here, you would not escape... for sure.

When I read the Bible I expect all passages to be true. If I come across one that does not align with my beliefs then the task is to find out why. It could be that my beliefs are wrong. When it comes to the JWs and the Bible I find quite a few passages that do not align with the JW beliefs and which flatly contradict them. Sometimes these things can be answered quite easily and sometimes it is more difficult.
Anyway maybe we will get into just how these passages are answered later. The post that you did not answer is this one, which I will bring here:

1Kings 8:26 And now, O God of Israel, please confirm what You promised to Your servant, my father David. 27 But will God indeed dwell upon the earth? Even heaven, the highest heaven, cannot contain You, much less this temple I have built.
Acts 17:27 God intended that they would seek Him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. 28 ‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’

OK then I'll leave you to ponder on the scriptures above, but I like this game so I'll ask another.
It is a thread about JWs and the Bible and if they believe it after all.
Which of the scriptures below is true?
Isa 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,
who formed you from the womb:
“I am the Lord, who made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,
As applied to Jesus: Heb 1:10 And: “In the beginning, O Lord, You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.

What the heck, here's a some more:
Are the Biblical quotes below true?
John 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
Phil 2:9Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,…

Are both these statements true?
18No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father’s side, has made Him known.
Ex 24:10 ....and they saw the God of Israel. Under His feet was a work like a pavement made of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 But God did not lay His hand on the nobles of Israel; they saw Him, and they ate and drank.

Is the statement below true if people cannot see Jesus with their eyes? (iows if they only see with their eyes of faith their physical eyes do not see Him so it could not be said that "every eye will see him".
Rev 1:7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,”
and “every eye will see him,
even those who pierced him”;
and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”
So shall it be! Amen.

 

[nPeace]

A smoke screen. Your MO is showing.
I got no time for games. you are just using my words, with no relevance at all.

Matt 28:19Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20and teaching them to obey all that I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Jesus is with the Church always, even till the end of the age.

Yes he is, but not the apostate one. So what's your point?

Matt 13:27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’
28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied.
“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’
29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”

The weeds are with the church always, until the end.

The weeds and wheat were allowed to grow together, meaning that there would be a time when the wheat would be overrun with the weeds,
That period proved to be when the apostasy raised its ugly head, and dominated God's temple, with the man of lawlessness siting as a god.
The wheat was under that terrible man, and the corrupt idolatrous teachings like the Trinity, Hellfire, Immortality of the soul, etc. etc.
When Jesus began ruling in 1914, thereafter, he started to gather the wheat into the storehouses, the weeds also were collected for burning.
It was then that the wheat once again became visible.
The weed were to be "done away with by the manifestation of Jesus' presence'.
The GB again was visible as Jesus began cleaning house.
That man of lawlessness that sat in God temple was evicted.
Jesus was with his people as was evident by his gathering them where they collectively form the group first called Bible Students, then Jehovah's Witnesses, who now number over 8 000 000.
The body of Christ - the annointed - with the faithful and discrete slave taking the lead in dispensing truth, was once again busy, in this time of the end, doing what Christ wants done.
(Matthew 24:14) . . .this good news of the Kingdom will be preached in all the inhabited earth for a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

How can you not see how everything occured just as is writen. The fingerprint matches perfectly.
The apostate Christians grew many branches from the trunk. Both Protestant and Catholic clergy were highly politicised in [the nineteenth century].
Absolute pacifism was still largely restricted to small ‘peace churches’. Of these, the best known and most influential were the Quakers, who even had a presence within the British ‘establishment’, including prominent businessmen, academics and Liberal Members of Parliament. It is therefore not surprising that a significant minority of Quaker men of military age chose to fight.45 Other British churches with a strong anti-war ethos, such as the Brethren, Churches of Christ, Christadelphians, Jehovah’s Witnesses or the early Pentecostals, were much more socially marginal and were to some degree insulated from the conformist pressures by a more strongly sectarian identity. But the Churches of Christ were also divided in their response to the war.46 Of those Conscientious Objectors whose religious affiliation is known, the overwhelming majority were Protestant Nonconformists, most belonging to these smaller churches, but also including significant numbers of Methodists.47 The Methodist Churches all officially supported the war, but some of their members did not – most often because of their reading of the New Testament, sometimes reinforced by Socialist arguments. Only after, and as a result of the war, did absolute pacifism spread more widely to include many Anglicans and members of the Church of Scotland, as well as those from all of the larger Dissenting denominations.48

But most important of all was the fact that most clergymen shared with the majority of their fellow countrymen and countrywomen the conviction that their nation was fighting in a just cause.

Yes. you are still in there, and you apparently want to remain there.
Well, just bare in mind that Jesus also prophesied what would happen to the weeds, and he put it even more clearly when he gave the details to John.
(Revelation 17:15-18:8)
15 He said to me: “The waters that you saw, where the prostitute is sitting, mean peoples and crowds and nations and tongues. 16 And the ten horns that you saw and the wild beast, these will hate the prostitute and will make her devastated and naked, and they will eat up her flesh and completely burn her with fire. 17 For God put it into their hearts to carry out his thought, yes, to carry out their one thought by giving their kingdom to the wild beast, until the words of God will have been accomplished. 18 And the woman whom you saw means the great city that has a kingdom over the kings of the earth.”
18 
1 After this I saw another angel descending from heaven with great authority, and the earth was illuminated by his glory. 2 And he cried out with a strong voice, saying: “She has fallen! Babylon the Great has fallen, and she has become a dwelling place of demons and a place where every unclean spirit and every unclean and hated bird lurks! 3 For because of the wine of the passion of her sexual immorality, all the nations have fallen victim, and the kings of the earth committed sexual immorality with her, and the merchants of the earth became rich owing to the power of her shameless luxury.” 4 And I heard another voice out of heaven say: “Get out of her, my people, if you do not want to share with her in her sins, and if you do not want to receive part of her plagues. 5 For her sins have massed together clear up to heaven, and God has called her acts of injustice to mind. 6 Repay her in the way she treated others, yes, pay her back double for the things she has done; in the cup she has mixed, mix a double portion for her. 7 To the extent that she glorified herself and lived in shameless luxury, to that extent give her torment and mourning. For she keeps saying in her heart: ‘I sit as queen, and I am not a widow, and I will never see mourning.’ 8 That is why in one day her plagues will come, death and mourning and famine, and she will be completely burned with fire, because Jehovah God, who judged her, is strong.

Why chose to be waters under the skirts of that harlot?
When she is devastated, will her waters be spared?
The angel says, No. She will be completely burned with fire, therefore get out from her if you do not want to receive part of her plagues.
The waters have a choice - get out, or remain.
who wants to be part of such a disgusting woman, who is a dwelling place of all sorts of unclean things any way.

Oh wait. she glorified herself and lived in shameless luxury. For she keeps saying in her heart: ‘I sit as queen, and I am not a widow, and I will never see mourning.
Ah. Misguided belief.
How sad.

Too bad, you are happy to be a part of that.

A Church that has gone astray in some areas is still the Church that was established in the first century with the apostles and prophets as the foundation and Jesus as the cornerstone.

Wait.
Am I hearing right? are my ears deceiving me?

Is this the same person that keeps complaining about, and criticizing JWs for changes in their teachings over the years!!!

Eph 2:19 Therefore you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of God’s household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself as the cornerstone. 21 In Him the whole building is fitted together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord.…

That does not apply to you, nor apostate Christians, so ...
Paul was speaking to the Ephesian Congregation of brothers who were joined to the GB at that time.
You seem to choose scriptures which you think you can use conveniently. Why don't you choose this one...
(2 Timothy 4:2) . . .Preach the word; be at it urgently in favorable times and difficult times; reprove, reprimand, exhort, with all patience and art of teaching.
Or what about this... (Matthew 28:19, 20) Go, therefore, and make disciples of people of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you.

I wonder... what does it mean to go.... What does go mean?

 

[Brian2]

I posted the correct translation, but you picked out the 0.1 percent you wanted.
Tell me something Brian, and please, this time, no skipping, hopping, or jumping around direct questions.
Let's nip this in the bud once and for all.

1) Are angels spirit or flesh?
2) Do angels materialize physical bodies?
3) Let us say that Jesus was resurrected as spirit, could he materialize physical bodies?
4) When jesus was born on earth, what was he -

a) a human
b) a spirit
c) neither
Please state, if none of those apply, and provide the scripture supporting your answer.​

5) Did Jesus die... Yes or no?
6) Was Jesus raised flesh... Yes or no?

Yes
Yes
Yes
a human
yes
yes

No. I quoted you. However, maybe you deleted the post, or edited it, but I know that's what i read you did type. I was not dreaming. Anyway, I can't find it, so I have no proof. There is only my word against yours.

Post 115: ""I don't really see these as commands or even necessarily as instructions.""
In Post 119 you give a quote from what I said and it shows what it says.
You seem to be answering 2 posts (112 and 115) in Post 119.
I was on one forum where there was a link to the post you were answering in the answer post. That was helpful. It is hard to go back and search for things.

Can you show me please, where Jesus gave that command to the church to spread the Gospel?
Can you please show me where the method Jesus and his apostles ended, and another method and message is given?

The passage that comes to mind is: Matt 28:19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
There is no other message, and that it a problem that the JWs have, because they have a different message, one that is not found in the Bible, but is found coming from the mouths of the Governing Body.
There never was one particular method to spread the gospel. Show me where one method is given as the way to do it. That method also comes from the mouth of the GB and in this time of pandemic the methods have changed so what excuse have they got? Or maybe they don't need one, only Christendom needs one.

Can you please tell me what Romans 10:15 means to you?
Can you please tell me what is the gospel you are speaking of?
Can you please tell me whet is the gospel of the kingdom jesus said to preach, and will be preached. Do you preach the Gospel of the Kingdom? Can you please tell me where and when?

Romans 10:14 How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15 And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!”
Romans 10:15 means that people need to be sent to preach the gospel.
The Gospel of the Kingdom is that Jesus is setting up a Kingdom here on earth now, and has been for a while and is collecting citizens for it all the time. The Kingdom cannot be seen like others because the citizens are part of each earthly Kingdom and walk amongst us. The Kingdom will come in it's fulness when Jesus returns to judge the living and the dead and rule as King from New Jerusalem with His Father on earth.
The Gospel of Grace is that Jesus died for our sins so that all who believe in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.
There of course is more to the gospel than that.
The 2 Gospels are the one Gospel.
I usually talk about Jesus and the gospel on this forum,,,,,,,,,,,along with other things.

 

[metis]

So you agree the Church is the congregation - that is, the body of Christ - all baptized and annointed by holy spirit.
The annointed ones, who were pillars in the congregation said this..."I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among you and will not treat the flock with tenderness, and from among you yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves. (Acts 20:29, 30)
...

All the above is just a smokescreen whereas you never actually answer the question: Since the Church was created to act as an organization headed by Jesus, the Apostles, and their appointees, what happened to that Church that Jesus said he would guide until the end of times? A simple question deserves a simple answer, thus not a sermon that merely skirts the question.

Gradually [the Catholic Church] became entirely secular.

Nobody who has ever been to a Catholic mass and who pays attention would believe the above complete unadulterated nonsense. Here's the order of the mass that's claimed to be "secular":
In the Roman Rite, the Mass is made up of two principal parts: the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. It begins with the Introductory Rites and ends with the Concluding Rites.

Another way of dividing a Mass is into its "ordinary" parts—those texts which, with some variations, are part of the Mass on a daily basis—and its "proper" parts—the texts of prayers and selection of Scripture readings proper to the specific feast, feria or other occasion being observed.

Introductory Rites

• Entrance
• Greeting
• Penitential Act
• Glory to God
• Collect

Liturgy of the Word

• First Reading [OT or NT]
• Responsorial Psalm [from the Psalms]
• Second Reading (on Sundays and solemnities) [from the NT]
• Gospel Acclamation [from the NT]
• Gospel
• Homily [sermon that must reflect the Gospel and at least one other reading]
• Profession of Faith (on Sundays, solemnities, and special occasions)
• Universal Prayer

Liturgy of the Eucharist

• Presentation of the Gifts and Preparation of the Altar
• Prayer over the Offerings
• Eucharistic Prayer
  • Preface
  • Holy, Holy, Holy
  • First half of prayer, including Consecration
  • Mystery of Faith
  • Second half of prayer, ending with Doxology
• The Lord's Prayer
• Sign of Peace
• Lamb of God
• Communion
• Prayer after Communion

Concluding Rites

• Optional announcements
• Greeting and Blessing
• Dismissal -- Order of Mass | USCCB

Now does that appear to be "secular" to you?

As long as you allow yourself to be suckered by the GB, you will forever wallow in ignorance on this and many other things. And when I ask a simple question, at least try and respond directly with a simply versus a word-salad.

 

[metis]

Jesus does not identify Peter as the foundation of the Church.

I did not say that Peter is "the foundation of the Church", so why are you being so disingenuous? I said that Jesus is the "cornerstone" of the Church, thus not Peter. During mass and all our prayers, we worship God through Jesus and the Holy Spirit-- not Peter.

Listen, if you disagree with most or even all of Catholic teachings, that's clearly your choice, but at least be honest enough to get what we do and teach correctly, thus not perverting the Truth. If your GB teaches you that what you are posting is even remotely moral, maybe consider leaving the JW's and possibly converting to a Christian denomination that actually believes that honesty can lead to the Truth, which is most Christian denominations believe and teach, as I've visited a ton of them over the years.

 

[nPeace]

When I read the Bible I expect all passages to be true. If I come across one that does not align with my beliefs then the task is to find out why. It could be that my beliefs are wrong. When it comes to the JWs and the Bible I find quite a few passages that do not align with the JW beliefs and which flatly contradict them. Sometimes these things can be answered quite easily and sometimes it is more difficult.
Anyway maybe we will get into just how these passages are answered later. The post that you did not answer is this one, which I will bring here:

1Kings 8:26 And now, O God of Israel, please confirm what You promised to Your servant, my father David. 27 But will God indeed dwell upon the earth? Even heaven, the highest heaven, cannot contain You, much less this temple I have built.
Acts 17:27 God intended that they would seek Him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us. 28 ‘For in Him we live and move and have our being.’

OK then I'll leave you to ponder on the scriptures above, but I like this game so I'll ask another.
It is a thread about JWs and the Bible and if they believe it after all.
Which of the scriptures below is true?
Isa 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,
who formed you from the womb:
“I am the Lord, who made all things,
who alone stretched out the heavens,
who spread out the earth by myself,
As applied to Jesus: Heb 1:10 And: “In the beginning, O Lord, You laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.

What the heck, here's a some more:
Are the Biblical quotes below true?
John 1:3 All things came into existence through him, and apart from him not even one thing came into existence.
Phil 2:9Therefore God exalted Him to the highest place and gave Him the name above all names, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth,…

Are both these statements true?
18No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is Himself God and is at the Father’s side, has made Him known.
Ex 24:10 ....and they saw the God of Israel. Under His feet was a work like a pavement made of sapphire, as clear as the sky itself. 11 But God did not lay His hand on the nobles of Israel; they saw Him, and they ate and drank.

Is the statement below true if people cannot see Jesus with their eyes? (iows if they only see with their eyes of faith their physical eyes do not see Him so it could not be said that "every eye will see him".
Rev 1:7 “Look, he is coming with the clouds,”
and “every eye will see him,
even those who pierced him”;
and all peoples on earth “will mourn because of him.”
So shall it be! Amen.

I remember that was post 93.
It followed this one, where I wanted some specific questions answered, which you did not answer. So I saw no good reason for your post. it seemed to be a distraction to me, and besides that, it was basically full of scriptures that would only lead to a pointless argument with no direction at all.

For example, take the last one "every eye will see him".
A person might say, Every eye will see him literally.
Another person would say, Every eye will see him figuratively, in that...
When the person is shown from scripture, why it cannot be literal, they just stick it's literal, because it says that.
That get's us no where.
I tend to shy away from pointless arguments like that, but you seem to like them.

Remember the argument on the cross? Just arguing continuously, so I take my leave. I don't see the point of arguing where there is no finality on it.
I like where we can come to a finality by using scriptures and questions, that the answers must be conclusive, and there is no, "well we don't know" situation.

When Jesus comes you will know if you see him or not.... although for some they won't live to tell it... according to the scriptures.

Just take a look at your list, and you would realize that all your hand picked questions are a set up for pointless never ending argument, unless one says, "you believe what you will."

What's being discussed here could end that way too, but the difference, imo, is that there is a conclusion that one can see, There is evidence, and there is no need for a something to be left hanging in the air.

That's the way I see it. Maybe you see different, but that probably can't be helped.
I'll tell you what though, to se how it goes, post your best one from the list. The one you consider more important to you, and let's take a hit at it.
If what I just said proves to be true, then there is no point in considering the others.
If it goes differently, then i will consider the others.
What do you say to that?

 

[nPeace]

All the above is just a smokescreen whereas you never actually answer the question: Since the Church was created to act as an organization headed by Jesus, the Apostles, and their appointees, what happened to that Church that Jesus said he would guide until the end of times? A simple question deserves a simple answer, thus not a sermon that merely skirts the question.
Nobody who has ever been to a Catholic mass and who pays attention would believe the above complete unadulterated nonsense. Here's the order of the mass that's claimed to be "secular":
In the Roman Rite, the Mass is made up of two principal parts: the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Eucharist. It begins with the Introductory Rites and ends with the Concluding Rites.

Another way of dividing a Mass is into its "ordinary" parts—those texts which, with some variations, are part of the Mass on a daily basis—and its "proper" parts—the texts of prayers and selection of Scripture readings proper to the specific feast, feria or other occasion being observed.

Introductory Rites

• Entrance
• Greeting
• Penitential Act
• Glory to God
• Collect

Liturgy of the Word

• First Reading [OT or NT]
• Responsorial Psalm [from the Psalms]
• Second Reading (on Sundays and solemnities) [from the NT]
• Gospel Acclamation [from the NT]
• Gospel
• Homily [sermon that must reflect the Gospel and at least one other reading]
• Profession of Faith (on Sundays, solemnities, and special occasions)
• Universal Prayer

Liturgy of the Eucharist

• Presentation of the Gifts and Preparation of the Altar
• Prayer over the Offerings
• Eucharistic Prayer
  • Preface
  • Holy, Holy, Holy
  • First half of prayer, including Consecration
  • Mystery of Faith
  • Second half of prayer, ending with Doxology
• The Lord's Prayer
• Sign of Peace
• Lamb of God
• Communion
• Prayer after Communion

Concluding Rites

• Optional announcements
• Greeting and Blessing
• Dismissal -- Order of Mass | USCCB

Now does that appear to be "secular" to you?

As long as you allow yourself to be suckered by the GB, you will forever wallow in ignorance on this and many other things. And when I ask a simple question, at least try and respond directly with a simply versus a word-salad.

I answered your question, clear as mud.
If you did not understand it, don't blame me.
Try here and see if it becomes any clearer for you.
If it does not, I'm sorry. From your response here, i see what the problem is. It's not me.

 

[nPeace]

I did not say that Peter is "the foundation of the Church", so why are you being so disingenuous? I said that Jesus is the "cornerstone" of the Church, thus not Peter. During mass and all our prayers, we worship God through Jesus and the Holy Spirit-- not Peter.

Listen, if you disagree with most or even all of Catholic teachings, that's clearly your choice, but at least be honest enough to get what we do and teach correctly, thus not perverting the Truth. If your GB teaches you that what you are posting is even remotely moral, maybe consider leaving the JW's and possibly converting to a Christian denomination that actually believes that honesty can lead to the Truth, which is most Christian denominations believe and teach, as I've visited a ton of them over the years.

Wow. I'll hold my tongue.
You said Jesus is the cornerstone? Show me the post please.
I thought we were discussing your claiming that Jesus was calling Peter the rock on which the church was built.
What is the rock on which the church was built? I don't was it Peter. I mean what is it.

 

[nPeace]

@Brian2 Thank you for answering.
I'll get back to you later, I have something to do, but in the meantime, you answered the first question with a Yes, but it's not a Yes or no question. Can you fix that?
See you later.

 

[metis]

It's not me.

Your posting of a word-salad when a short answer should have been able to do the job, plus your dishonest posting that the Catholic Church is "secular" is pretty much a confirmation that it is you.

It's obvious that you cannot answer the simple basic question I asked, and also that you prefer to use dishonesty over honesty when in a pinch. If you were honest about this, you would have admitted and apologized for the clearly wrong link you posted on Catholicism being "secular"-- but you didn't. Again, that's you.

And the simple fact that you just cannot even get close to dealing with is how is it that you use the Biblical canon of the "apostate" church in "Christendom" when it's this Church that selected and passed on that canon to even you JW's.

 

[Pete in Panama]

When I reply to you all your text runs together and it is hard to see the breaks which you have in your reply to me, with quotes in between. What I do is to leave a line between the quote and text and between the text and quote so that the breaks can be seen easily. I hope you understand what I am saying. I'll not leave that line in this post and you may be able to see what I am talking about if you reply...

What I end up doing is constantly previewing my post to parse out ur comments so I can continue. I've long since given up on doing my proof reading from the posted draft.

...I guess that is a good thing to do from time to time. I doubt that I would have time to look at the link...

Just found out the guy who put it together is a gamer (man after my own heart), he's some genius from World of Warcraft that understands many disparate scientific disciplines so he's able to see connections that the myopic experts can't.

...I guess it is hard to see what others are saying if it fundamentally contradicts what you see the Bible means....

Or if one is emotionally involved w/ an understanding. In the youtube the guy said that anyone who's emotionally involved w/ a belief lacks free will, I'd amend that to say that we have to be willing to overcome our emotions.

...You can get specific about what you were looking at in the Bible with me if you want. I can't say I'll be much help but who knows...

Thanks, what I was hoping maybe is that you could help me explain what I'm asking about Jesus' advice about the time of the end in Matthew. My experience is that I just want to understand what nuance or something I'm missing but all I seem to get is squabbling.

...Sounds interesting and exciting. I'm on the edge of Melbourne in Australia and as I said there is rain forest and a variety of other forests and plenty of birds and some wallabies and echidnas and wombats and some feral deer etc It is classed as rural but there are a lot of houses and fences around and only a couple of farms. It is amazing that the animals want to stay, but they haven't got a map to tell them where to go to get to more bush land with no fences. Google Sherbrooke forest if you are interested.
If your native language is English it is supposed to be so much better to hear and communicate in that language than a more recently learnt language. That is one reason that the Bible has and is being translated into all languages.
I just tried to reply to myself and could still see the gaps between different parts. I don't know what you are doing. Maybe you are not even going to the next line when you put in the quote brackets.

Neat! So ur in a temperate rain forest & u reminded me that not all rain forests are tropical.

Bible translations are quite an adventure, in fact the earliest known copy of the new testament was a Greek translation of gospels that were written in who-knows-what. The recurring problem we all face now is whether we try it word by word or do we paraphrase the entire context. Advantages either way & my tack is to try to be willing to accept other people's takes. This is a typical spread of how our English language translations end up:

 

[Pete in Panama]

...It's obvious that you cannot answer the simple basic question I asked, and also that you prefer to use dishonesty over honesty...

Please forgive my sticking my nose in here but I couldn't help but noticing that you seem to be running into the same brick wall that I was meeting & I'm hard pressed to blame it simply on JW malfeasance. What I mean is their main website (jw.org) is a heck of a lot friendlier than what we're apparently getting here but the years have taught me that reality is not always what it appears to be.

You meantioned in your post a "simple question", was it this?

...what happened to that Church that Jesus said he would guide until the end of times? A simple question deserves a simple answer...

 

[metis]

You said Jesus is the cornerstone? Show me the post please.

My post #139: Jesus, otoh, is referred to as being the "Cornerstone" for the Church, which is far more important than just being a "rock" ["Kephas"].

I thought we were discussing your claiming that Jesus was calling Peter the rock on which the church was built.
What is the rock on which the church was built? I don't was it Peter. I mean what is it.

You're conflating two things, namely that Jesus is the "Cornerstone" of the Church, which is the most important stone, and Peter, otoh, is the stone or rock ["kephas" can be interpreted as being either] that one sees from Acts through the Epistles whereas Peter's name is almost always mentioned first amongst the Apostles and sometimes just being rendered "Peter and the others". Also, it is Jesus who tells Peter to "feed my sheep...", which is not mentioned of any other of the Twelve.

Again, this is essentially a side-bar as the main question is what exactly is the Church that Jesus created and promised to guide if it's not the CC? Name it. You can't, because there is no other Church that could even remotely fulfill that promise. And this is the exact same Church that selected the scriptures you use, so if that church supposedly fell into "apostacy", then why not give your Bible away to someone who can appreciate and use it even though it's from the Church you claimed slipped into "Christendom".

And I just can't help and notice that you cannot even be honest enough to admit that the Catholic Church is not a "secular" organization as you posted before, and I even mentioned it to you again as a reminder. Why can't you even admit that you did not tell the Truth? Even if you had admitted that you were "mistaken", that would have sufficed. But no, you couldn't even do that.

 

[metis]

Please forgive my sticking my nose in here but I couldn't help but noticing that you seem to be running into the same brick wall that I was meeting & I'm hard pressed to blame it simply on JW malfeasance. What I mean is their main website (jw.org) is a heck of a lot friendlier than what we're apparently getting here but the years have taught me that reality is not always what it appears to be.

I'm really quite used to their tactics as I lived next two JW families for many years. These were nice people though, but they fell victim to the GB propaganda as well. Fortunately, thy eventually left, and they very much admitted that it is very much a "cult".

You meantioned in your post a "simple question", was it this?
"'what happened to that Church that Jesus said he would guide until the end of times?' A simple question deserves a simple answer"

Yep, and they cannot answer it, and I have asked this same exactly question to several of them here over the years. Instead, all ya get is smoke & mirrors, whereas they'll deflect on to something else, often with a huge plate of "word-salad" that ya have to wade through. Then they'll falsely claim that they answered it, as we've seen on this thread.

 

[metis]

In Catholicism, we in recent decades more used the "New American Bible: Catholic Edition" but the most recent one I bought is the "Revised Standard Edition: Catholic Edition", which is a better choice for ecumenical Bible study programs because it tends to more use more word-for-word translations as the RSV has been the most widely used Bible in theological circles.

 

[nPeace]

Your posting of a word-salad when a short answer should have been able to do the job, plus your dishonest posting that the Catholic Church is "secular" is pretty much a confirmation that it is you.

It's obvious that you cannot answer the simple basic question I asked, and also that you prefer to use dishonesty over honesty when in a pinch. If you were honest about this, you would have admitted and apologized for the clearly wrong link you posted on Catholicism being "secular"-- but you didn't. Again, that's you.

And the simple fact that you just cannot even get close to dealing with is how is it that you use the Biblical canon of the "apostate" church in "Christendom" when it's this Church that selected and passed on that canon to even you JW's.

I think it is clear that your everyday conversations with people you disagree with is to constantly try to insult and demean.
I don't think you try to be any different.
I think it is part of your personality, amd I think you don't try to change it. I don't know.
Having a conversation with you can never end peacefully no matter how one tries, because your hatred for those you consider "fundamental", shines through. That blinds one.

I answered your question.
Maybe it was not in the way you wanted, but life does not work that way.
Sometimes we just have to try and understand people who are trying, and give them credit and respect.
You do neither. Habit? I think so.

Since I believe I am a fair person... I like to be fair to people, I will do what I don't normally do on RF for people who seem to think they are too important to read a post because it surpasses 200 words.
I will repeat myself in as little words as possible.

The GB existed in the first century with Jesus apostles.
All in the Christian congregation were baptized and annointed - the body of Christ.
They prophesied that apostasy would rise and take over the congregation, once the last individual holding strain was gone.
It was present, just not dominating.
We have an example of super-fine apostle - false apostles who opposed Paul, and Paul had to encourage young Timothy to stand up to them.
even Jesus to the congregation warned that they repent lest he take away what they had.
Paul said that God would let an operation of error go to them that the would believe the lie. So that is what happened when the man of lawlessness 'sat in the temple of god, proclaiming himself a god".
The GB was allowed to fade out, as the apostasy - a deviation and turning away from the truth - took root in the congregation. wicked men took over, or took the lead. God allowed it, just as he allowed the Israelite nation to be disciplined when they lost their city and temple and went into captivity to Babylon.
So even though there were annointed ones who more than likely tried to oppose the man of lawlessness, because that apostate tyrant was powerful, they did not prevail.
The apostate Church showed by vivid display what happens to those who do not conform to its authority.

So for centuries the man of lawlessness sat a a god in the temple of the living God... until after Christ' presence in 1914.
After 1914, the GB again surfaced as the wheat is being gathered, into the storehouses. while the weeds are being gathered to be burned up. The process is ongoing.
The evidence is clear that apostate Christianity so full of bloodshed and other god dishonoring acts, is to be completely destroyed. The action has started. It's only a matter of time.

(Revelation 17:16) . . .And the ten horns that you saw and the wild beast, these will hate the prostitute and will make her devastated and naked, and they will eat up her flesh and completely burn her with fire.​

Thus, Jesus has always been with his people, just as he proved to be with his people while they were in Babylon, when Nebuchadnezzar sacked Jerusalem.
Recall how he was with Ezekiel, Daniel, etc.
Even though Jehovah allowed the faithful followers of Jesus to be "taken captive" by an element of Babylon the Great - apostate Christianity, he was with them. So that when he began gathering them, he knew who they were. he knew whom he could use. He knew that he could use this group to dispense food at the proper time.
He appointed those of the GB, and leads them by his spirit.

That's it, with the least words I could probably use.
taking the time to read and consider it, is entirely up to you.
I did more than was necessary. let it be known, your question was answered... again.
It may not be what you want to hear, but it is an answer, and it is, as I see it, the answer.

 

[nPeace]

Please forgive my sticking my nose in here but I couldn't help but noticing that you seem to be running into the same brick wall that I was meeting & I'm hard pressed to blame it simply on JW malfeasance. What I mean is their main website (jw.org) is a heck of a lot friendlier than what we're apparently getting here but the years have taught me that reality is not always what it appears to be.

You meantioned in your post a "simple question", was it this?

It is indeed, much more friendly.
That's one reason we encourage you to go there, and ask question.
You can also start your own free Bible study course available online.
Or, there the the JWs DIR on RF, if you really want answers to specific questions.
Often, on the debate threads things can heated up when both sides get frustrated where it seems to be not a case of asking questions to get an answer, but taking the discussion along a path that causes one to wonder what is really being discussed.

I am not saying you have deliberately done this, but it happens sometimes.
Then the blame game starts. ...and the discrediting.

Then too, there is the case of people not wanting to rea "too much".
Everyone does not have the time to sit on a computer typing one or two sentences at a time. I can make a post, and have time for other stuff. then return later, and respond to posts. That's easier for me.

Admittedly, we could try harder.