The Value of Obedience

[metis]

Conviction brings peace and confidence. I sincerely hope you find it.

Again, you make assumptions based on nothing.

I actually do have much peace and confidence, but I don't go around strutting it as if only my way counts, and I simply don't buy into the "once size fits all" approach. Augustine was once asked if he knew "the answers", and his response was that all too often that he wasn't even too sure what the questions were.

 

[Oeste]

Then apparently, In your pov, God doesn't have sufficient power to protect His Word?

Because, Acts has been part of the Greek Scriptures for their entire existence! But I guess God, in your view, doesn't like the book, but He lacks the power to remove it.

See, if someone starts rejecting one part of the accepted Bible canon, there's no reason for them to accept any of it!

Do you honestly believe that God would leave us in doubt about what is "his" word and what is not? Do you honestly believe that God has no power to preserve his word regardless of who was used to compile it? Can God not use even his enemies for his own purpose? What kind of powerless god do you serve?

I don't understand this admonishment against 2ndPillar. Doesn't the Watchtower claim the same thing... that God was unable to protect his word? Don't you claim His Name was stripped from our manuscripts? Wasn't God powerless to do anything about it until your Governing Board came along to re-introduce it?

Both of you claim things were stripped from scripture, whilst @2ndpillar claims things were added. How should any of us look at this but as the pot calling the kettle black??

Where do you get this stuff? Who else believes what you believe?
Who are the members of your brotherhood....do you even have one?

Excellent questions Deeje!

I've asked before but didn't get a direct reply which leads me to believe he's most likely a congregation of one.

Also, I'm not sure why he feels the need to press delete on Paul anymore than Witnesses feel the need to press insert with "Jehovah". The principle to me is the same, but the result with 2ndPillar would be vastly more catastrophic as we remove whole books from our canon.

Perhaps 2ndPillar has a bible he believes more "authentic" than the one we have now. If so, I'd be interested in where we can find it.

 

[2ndpillar]

Perhaps 2ndPillar has a bible he believes more "authentic" than the one we have now. If so, I'd be interested in where we can find it.

The bible Yeshua used was the OT, the Law and the prophets. The NT crowd think the OT has been made "obsolete" (Hebrews 7:13). Sorry folks, the OT is the "Word of God" (Revelation 19:13), which is about to clean house (Daniel 2:44-45), which includes gathering out the tares to be burned (Matthew 13:30), and having the tare seed, the false gospel of grace/cross, put in its place, in that it "shall not stand" (Isaiah 28:18).

 

[Deeje]

I don't understand this admonishment against 2ndPillar. Doesn't the Watchtower claim the same thing... that God was unable to protect his word? Don't you claim His Name was stripped from our manuscripts? Wasn't God powerless to do anything about it until your Governing Board came along to re-introduce it?

Now this just makes me smile. Jehovah's name was removed from the Hebrew language by an apostate Jewish religious system long before Jesus arrived...the name remained in their scripture but was considered inutterable to this day. You think that God couldn't prevent that?.....or was it that he simply did not prevent it?

The wayward Jewish nation under the authority of their leaders were put on notice by Jesus in Matthew 23:37-39.

Jehovah's name has always been associated with his people, so when his nation failed him, he allowed his name to be disassociated from them, I believe, in all probability, deliberately.

Both of you claim things were stripped from scripture, whilst @2ndpillar claims things were added. How should any of us look at this but as the pot calling the kettle black??

You are free to look at it any way you wish. Are you a pot or a kettle yourself? Would you know?
Christendom mirrors Judaism exactly, selling out to traditional practices and beliefs that were introduced long after Jesus death. He foretold that "weeds" would infiltrate Christianity and corrupt it. Why do you think it didn't happen?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Don't you claim His Name was stripped from our manuscripts?

Is it a claim? Or is it a fact? Is the Hebrew YHWH the translated word for God, or is it His Name?

Wasn't God powerless to do anything about it until your Governing Board came along to re-introduce it?

Our Governing Board?
Well, the KJV restored it in 4 places, back in 1611. Way before 'our governing board.'

And the American Standard Version restored it over 6,800 times, in 1901....again, way before 'our governing board' authorized the NWT..

I'm glad you said, "re-introduce." That's fitting.

Take care.

 

[metis]

Now this just makes me smile. Jehovah's name was removed from the Hebrew language by an apostate Jewish religious system long before Jesus arrived

"Jehovah" is not correct as you've been told many times before because there's no "J" sound in Hebrew plus we don't know which vowels were originally used.

Secondly, "YHWH" (using English letters obviously) was not "removed from the Hebrew language" but was considered so holy that it should be only recited on Yom Kippur within the sanctuary of the Temple by the priest. In the Tanakh, there are, if my memory is correct, 17 names for God in Hebrew.

 

[Deeje]

"Jehovah" is not correct as you've been told many times before

It is correct in English....."Jesus" is correct in English. We are talking about translation you know.

there's no "J" sound in Hebrew plus we don't know which vowels were originally used.

And why don't even Jews know how to pronounce the divine name, metis? Who told them to stop using it when God's ancient people used it with frequency and due reverence? It is written in the Hebrew Scriptures almost 7,000 times and I do not see any hesitation in using the name that God gave to them to identify him....do you?

It is true that there are no "J" names in Hebrew, so when Hebrew is translated into English, the whole Bible is full of "J" names. Would you like all the English Bible translations to remove all those "J" names and replace them with Hebrew names.....including Jesus?....Jeremiah? Jehoshaphat?...and a host of others which actually incorporate the divine name.

To balk over using "Jehovah" (YHWH translated into English) and then use "Jesus" is just a tad hypocritical don't you think?

Secondly, "YHWH" (using English letters obviously) was not "removed from the Hebrew language" but was considered so holy that it should be only recited on Yom Kippur within the sanctuary of the Temple by the priest. In the Tanakh, there are, if my memory is correct, 17 names for God in Hebrew.

Who said God's name was too holy to be used? Was it God? Or was it the Jewish leaders who were so afraid of "taking God's name in vain" that they preferred not to use it rather than face the consequences of doing so in a meaningless way? Wasn't it true that frivolous oaths were being said in God's name and it was easier to remove the name than actually stop the practice? If it was too holy to be uttered, then why did God give it in the first place?....and why did he not tell his people that they shouldn't use it? This is a very thin argument metis.

God's name was given to Moses as one that was to be used by his people "generation after generation"....."forever" (Exodus 3:13-15) There is no sanction for removing it from human speech when it is clearly written in the Tanach. Where will I find any command from God to remove it from general human speech?

Any wonder Jesus said he had 'come to make God's name known'.....

"6 I have made your name known to those whom you gave me from the world. They were yours, and you gave them to me, and they have kept your word."

"I made your name known to them, and I will make it known, so that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.” (John 17:6; 26 NRSV)

This was damage control IMO. He was making God's name known to people who should never have lost it in the first place.

ETA: There are many titles for God....but only one name. (See Psalm 83:18 Tanach)

 

[metis]

It is correct in English....."Jesus" is correct in English. We are talking about translation you know.

Except you JW's say it with a "J" sound, and there is no such sound in Hebrew. [see further down] I couldn't care less, but it is you and your JW masters that keep telling you that it's essential to get it supposedly precisely correct.

And why don't even Jews know how to pronounce the divine name, metis?

They do it on the basis of how they think it might sound using those consonants, and there's the recognition that it might not be but that doesn't bother them because at least the correct consonents are there.

It is true that there are no "J" names in Hebrew, so when Hebrew is translated into English, the whole Bible is full of "J" names

Which are pronounced with a "y" sound, not a "j" one. Unimportant to me, but since you insist on being p.c., whereas you're actually not, it's a big deal to you and your masters.

To balk over using "Jehovah" (YHWH translated into English) and then use "Jesus" is just a tad hypocritical don't you think?

I'm not the one insisting that only one translation is supposedly mandatory, Deeje-- you are.

Who said God's name was too holy to be used? Was it God?

It is used, Deeje. How often Jews decide to say the holy name I would suggest is their business, not yours.

This was damage control IMO. He was making God's name known to people who should never have lost it in the first place.

They never lost it, Deeje, so now you are just fabricating just another one of your pathetic little lies. Your story-telling as supposed facts is disgusting, much like your dishonest insistence that Catholic worship the sun, amongst other lies.

 

[Oeste]

Now this just makes me smile. Jehovah's name was removed from the Hebrew language by an apostate Jewish religious system long before Jesus arrived...the name remained in their scripture but was considered inutterable to this day.

Now that just made me smile. We're talking about the New Testament, remember? If "....the name remained in their scripture but was considered inutterable" then it was never "stripped" from scripture.

You think that God couldn't prevent that?.....or was it that he simply did not prevent it?

I'm not the one claiming the Divine Name was stripped from scripture. In fact, I go the opposite route, and believe we have a remarkably solid canon.

The wayward Jewish nation under the authority of their leaders were put on notice by Jesus in Matthew 23:37-39.

So you blame the Jews for stripping the Divine Name from the New Testament?

Jehovah's name has always been associated with his people, so when his nation failed him, he allowed his name to be disassociated from them, I believe, in all probability, deliberately.

Did He also "deliberately" allow His name to be "disassociated" from scripture?

If NO:

Then there is no problem... our scripture is inspired and is not in need of a jot, tittle, tweak, or insertion here and there from the Watchtower or anywhere else.

If YES:

Then protecting scripture was not deemed worth the effort by God, or He was powerless to stop it, which makes the following question you posed to 2nd Pillar all the more puzzling:

Do you honestly believe that God would leave us in doubt about what is "his" word and what is not? Do you honestly believe that God has no power to preserve his word regardless of who was used to compile it? Can God not use even his enemies for his own purpose? What kind of powerless god do you serve?

Let's continue:

You are free to look at it any way you wish. Are you a pot or a kettle yourself? Would you know?

In this context, no. I'm neither pot or kettle. I don't claim there was an untraceable, totally undetectable and effective worldwide conspiracy that stripped and replaced the Divine Name with "Lord" in all existing manuscripts. Neither do I claim certain books need to be stripped from our canon as does 2ndPillar. If I did, I would find myself stewing in the same pot or kettle that attacks or undermines scripture that you and 2ndPillar find yourselves in now.

Christendom mirrors Judaism exactly, selling out to traditional practices and beliefs that were introduced long after Jesus death. He foretold that "weeds" would infiltrate Christianity and corrupt it. Why do you think it didn't happen?

But it has happened and you need look no further than your own Organization. Just look at some of the pop-up beliefs (now we believe it, "Poof!", now we don't) your Organization "channeled" during the past 150 years. Christians the world over cautioned your Organization against these unsound "weedy" teachings, advising them they did not come from God. Unfortunately they kept adding their own jots (1914, 1925, 1940, 1975, 2000) and tittles (aluminum,vaccinations, organ transplants, etc) in direct disobedience to the word of God (Deuteronomy 4:2, Deuteronomy 12:32, Revelation 22: 18-19).

Do you really believe that your Organization, given it's rich history of failed doctrines, oversights, prophetic failures, accusations of child abuse and brazen, finger-pointing hypocrisy is somehow more "clean" than the church across the street? If so, how do you explain these uniquely weedy doctrines your Organization attempted to graft into Christianity?

 

[Oeste]

Is it a claim? Or is it a fact? Is the Hebrew YHWH the translated word for God, or is it His Name?

It's a baseless assertion by the Watchtower.

Nothing was "stripped" from the manuscripts. The idea of a coordinated world wide conspiracy that was totally untraceable is nonsense. Did the scribes use a different pen to write YHWH, perhaps with disappearing ink, then secretly write in "LORD" afterwards?

Our Governing Board?
Well, the KJV restored it in 4 places, back in 1611. Way before 'our governing board.'

And the American Standard Version restored it over 6,800 times, in 1901....again, way before 'our governing board' authorized the NWT..

You can't simply add your own jots and tittles because you think they ought to be there HockeyCowboy.

Either the Tetragrammaton is in the manuscripts we have or it is not. Either God protected His word or He didn't, and you've already argued He has.

I'm glad you said, "re-introduce." That's fitting.

I think I was pretty clear...this is a restatement of Watchtower belief and not mine.

 

[Deeje]

Except you JW's say it with a "J" sound, and there is no such sound in Hebrew. [see further down] I couldn't care less, but it is you and your JW masters that keep telling you that it's essential to get it supposedly precisely correct.

Since the Jews themselves lost the ability to pronounce it, and God was the one who said that his name was to be for 'all their generations'...."forever" (Exodus 3:13-15)....when did the Jews get the memo to stop saying it? On what scriptural basis was this decision taken? "Not taking God's name in vain"? That is not what that means. It has nothing to do with saying God's name out loud otherwise the Bible writers would not have made mention of it some 7,000 times.... its more about using God's name in a worthless way and bringing reproach on it, something the Jews did on a regular basis.

They do it on the basis of how they think it might sound using those consonants, and there's the recognition that it might not be but that doesn't bother them because at least the correct consonents are there.

Actually it is transliteration that concentrates on that aspect....how it may have been originally pronounced. We accept the transliteration as a legitimate way to say the divine name, but prefer the English translation because it retains the meaning, not just the sound. That is the whole purpose of translation, is it not?

Which are pronounced with a "y" sound, not a "j" one. Unimportant to me, but since you insist on being p.c., whereas you're actually not, it's a big deal to you and your masters.

It means nothing at all to your own masters. Probably because they teach that Jesus is God and that removes any necessity to use any other name. That is not what Jesus said, however. (John 17:6; 26)

I'm not the one insisting that only one translation is supposedly mandatory, Deeje-- you are.

I wasn't aware of claiming to do that metis. God's name was always associated with his people. David, when confronting Goliath said that he had come to fight that giant in the name of Jehovah (YHWH) (1 Samuel 17:45)

I don't believe that God wanted his name associated with disobedient hypocrites. (Matthew 23) Which is why Jesus said he was going to make it known among his disciples.

 

[Deeje]

So you blame the Jews for stripping the Divine Name from the New Testament?

No. The Bible was never stripped of God's name.....it was the translations into English (and probably other languages) that took it out and substituted a title...some removed the name entirely, and others, like the KJV, left it in only in four verses. Read Psalm 83:18 in the KJV....and then ask why God's name was left out of Exodus 3:15 since the Tetragrammaton appears in both scriptures.

When the NT writers quoted OT scripture and the Tetragrammaton was clearly stated in the original, can you think of a legitimate reason why the divine name should have been omitted in those quotes? We can't, which is why you will find the divine name restored in those NT verses in the NWT.

Did He also "deliberately" allow His name to be "disassociated" from scripture

It is Christendom's translations that omit it, not the original Hebrew Scriptures from which they were taken. I like nothing better than to look up the Hebrew Scriptures in the Tanach, seeing the Tetragrammaton clearly in the Hebrew text, even though it is omitted from the English translation.

In this context, no. I'm neither pot or kettle. I don't claim there was an untraceable, totally undetectable and effective worldwide conspiracy that stripped and replaced the Divine Name with "Lord" in all existing manuscripts

So I guess a world under the control of the devil is going to keep God's name in the minds of man when God has never allowed the devil's name to be made known to anyone? (1 John 5:19; Luke 4:6) He is not Lucifer.

You do understand that the trinity could never have been accepted if the divine name had been retained in its original place? It was so easy to merge the "Lord" Jehovah and the "Lord" Jesus, even though the Bible never gives them equality.....Jesus never once said that he was God.
Christendom does not acknowledge that "the Son of God" is in no way the same as saying "God the Son"...or even "God the Sun" if the religion retains vestiges of sun worship.

But it has happened and you need look no further than your own Organization. Just look at some of the pop-up beliefs (now we believe it, "Poof!", now we don't) your Organization "channeled" during the past 150 years. Christians the world over cautioned your Organization against these unsound "weedy" teachings, advising them they did not come from God.

It wasn't recent. The foretold apostasy began whilst the apostles were still alive, but after the death of the last apostle John, there was nothing to stop it. From the second century onward, Christianity began a slow and steady decline into something Jesus would never recognize. Just as Judaism had done in the first century, Jewish worship had taken on man-made traditions that Jesus said had invalidated God's word in order for the Jews to uphold them. Christendom has done exactly the same thing. They are mirror images because the one standing behind them is the same god......the adversary....the pretender.....corrupting pure worship with false worship, leading God's own worshippers into offending their God. Its his favorite trick.

It was only to be in "the time of the end" that God would cleanse, whiten and refine his worshippers. Each of these are processes that take time and patience. If there was no filth and impurities that needed removing, then why bother to cleanse, whiten and refine at this time period, just before the final judgment? Why was this cleansing to occur only in the "the time of the end"? (Daniel 12:4; 9-10)

Do you really believe that your Organization, given it's rich history of failed doctrines, oversights, prophetic failures, accusations of child abuse and brazen, finger-pointing hypocrisy is somehow more "clean" than the church across the street? If so, how do you explain these uniquely weedy doctrines your Organization attempted to graft into Christianity?

Do you belong to a perfect body of Christians devoid of any accusations of wrongdoing? Did Jesus belong to a perfect nation of Jews who never did anything wrong? Human beings are prone to sin, and there are no organizations on earth who are exempt or immune to invasion by people who do the wrong thing. Do you live in a glass house?

The "cleanness" has more to do with spiritual "cleanness", which, whilst they engage in God dishonoring practices like the adopted pagan festivals that God told us to "quit touching", we have cleansed ourselves of those blatantly pagan things. (2 Corinthians 6:14-18) Everyone is free to engage in anything they wish in this time of separation, but they will never be able to say that no one told them the truth. No one will be able to plead ignorance.

I can show you the "weedy doctrines" that Christendom "grafted in" centuries ago and the Bible itself will explain why they don't belong in Christian teaching.....would you like a list? It's a long one.

 

[metis]

Since the Jews themselves lost the ability to pronounce it, and God was the one who said that his name was to be for 'all their generations'...."forever" (Exodus 3:13-15)....when did the Jews get the memo to stop saying it?

You really don't get it, Deeje.

Languages evolve over decades and centuries, but the Jewish oral tradition has it that the correct pronunciation of YHWH is "Yahweh". However, is the oral tradition correct on this? There's really no way of telling with the certainty of being correct. But either way, "Jehovah" certainly ain't it as there's no "J" sound in Hebrew, so this is where the JW hypocrisy comes in because they keep on insisting that it must be said exactly correctly.

Probably because they teach that Jesus is God and that removes any necessity to use any other name.

The Trinitarian concept, which I don't believe in btw, does differentiate between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, so saying "Jesus is God" is quite misleading. This has been covered many, many times over.

I don't believe that God wanted his name associated with disobedient hypocrites. (Matthew 23) Which is why Jesus said he was going to make it known among his disciples.

So, Jews are "disobedient hypocrites". I think the rest of us pretty know how to classify a statement like that, Deeje.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From these scriptures (both cited and quoted) do you think that the majority of those who call themselves Christians today, are obeying the Christ? They seem to feel that they can make up their own rules (as Israel had done before them,) and try to be 'friends with this world'.....I don't see how that is possible. (James 4:4; 1 John 2:15-17)

Are you talking about obedience to God, or to people like you who claim to speak for God?

If you disagree, please provide scriptural reasons for your view.

I think fretting over the righteousness of others shows a lack of faith in God and - for a Christian - is a bit blasphemous:

Romans 14:4:

Who are you to pass judgment on another’s servant? Before his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

IOW, all of this is God's concern. Trying to make it your concern:

- is an attempt to elevate your status to that of God's.
- suggests a lack of trust on your part that God can address disobedience on his own.

 

[2ndpillar]

Romans 14:4:

Who are you to pass judgment on another’s servant? Before his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

IOW, all of this is God's concern. Trying to make it your concern:

- is an attempt to elevate your status to that of God's.
- suggests a lack of trust on your part that God can address disobedience on his own.

I would think that quoting the false prophet Paul, the foremost of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15) & (Romans 7:25), and therefore a son of the devil (1 John 3:8), would be scraping the barrel. As for rebuking the "wicked" (the unrighteous), that would end with a blessing to be "upon them" (Proverbs 24:25). As for Paul, his master, and gift giver, appears to be Satan. ( Corinthians 12:7) Although for sure, as Dj seems to be a follower of Paul, her foundation seems to be a bit lacking.

New American Standard Bible Proverbs 24:25
But to those who rebuke the wicked will be delight, And a good blessing will come upon them.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

It's a baseless assertion by the Watchtower.

Nothing was "stripped" from the manuscripts. The idea of a coordinated world wide conspiracy that was totally untraceable is nonsense. Did the scribes use a different pen to write YHWH, perhaps with disappearing ink, then secretly write in "LORD" afterwards?



You can't simply add your own jots and tittles because you think they ought to be there HockeyCowboy.

Either the Tetragrammaton is in the manuscripts we have or it is not. Either God protected His word or He didn't, and you've already argued He has.



I think I was pretty clear...this is a restatement of Watchtower belief and not mine.

What are you talking about?! The ancient manuscripts had the Tetragrammaton in them...see DSS...later manuscripts removed it.

Do you doubt that?

 

[Deeje]

You really don't get it, Deeje.

Languages evolve over decades and centuries, but the Jewish oral tradition has it that the correct pronunciation of YHWH is "Yahweh". However, is the oral tradition correct on this? There's really no way of telling with the certainty of being correct. But either way, "Jehovah" certainly ain't it as there's no "J" sound in Hebrew, so this is where the JW hypocrisy comes in because they keep on insisting that it must be said exactly correctly.

You didn't read my reply, metis. I don't speak Hebrew and my Bible is not written in Hebrew. If every other name in the Bible is a translation, why would God's name not also be a translation? All the "J" names in the OT are translations. Most of them incorporate the divine name. Would you lobby to have all those translations changed, or would you produce a Bible that rightfully reinstated God's name in all the places where it had been removed?
That is what we did and we make no apology for it..

Just to be clear....we have no problem with the transliteration, (Yahweh) we just prefer the English translation because it retains the meaning of God's name.

What is the meaning of God's name given in the Tanach, metis? (Clue: It isn't "I Am")

"God said to Moses, "Ehyeh asher ehyeh (I will be what I will be)," and He said, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'Ehyeh (I will be) has sent me to you.'"
And God said further to Moses, "So shall you say to the children of Israel, 'The Lord God of your forefathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.' This is My name forever, and this is how I should be mentioned in every generation.
טווַיֹּ֩אמֶר֩ ע֨וֹד אֱלֹהִ֜ים אֶל־משֶׁ֗ה כֹּ֣ה תֹאמַר֘ אֶל־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵל֒ יְהֹוָ֞ה אֱלֹהֵ֣י אֲבֹֽתֵיכֶ֗ם אֱלֹהֵ֨י אַבְרָהָ֜ם אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִצְחָ֛ק וֵֽאלֹהֵ֥י יַֽעֲקֹ֖ב שְׁלָחַ֣נִי אֲלֵיכֶ֑ם זֶה־שְּׁמִ֣י לְעֹלָ֔ם וְזֶ֥ה זִכְרִ֖י לְדֹ֥ר דֹּֽר:"

Shemot - Exodus - Chapter 3 (Parshah Shemot)

We see the same thing again in Psalm 83:18...

"Let them know that You-Your name alone is the Lord, Most High over all the earth.
יטוְיֵֽדְע֗וּ כִּי־אַתָּ֬ה שִׁמְךָ֣ יְהֹוָ֣ה לְבַדֶּ֑ךָ עֶ֜לְי֗וֹן עַל־כָּל־הָאָֽרֶץ:"


Tehillim - Psalms - Chapter 83

You see that the English translation omits the divine name even though it is clearly written in the Hebrew.

It is you who doesn't seem to get it. Why did Israel fail to keep God's "forever" name in all their generations?

The Trinitarian concept, which I don't believe in btw, does differentiate between God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, so saying "Jesus is God" is quite misleading. This has been covered many, many times over.

You mean to tell me that you can be a "Catholic" and reject the trinity?!!! This is their baby and you don't believe it?
What else in Catholic teaching do you reject? How can you subscribe to a religion if you reject their foundation doctrine?

So, Jews are "disobedient hypocrites". I think the rest of us pretty know how to classify a statement like that, Deeje.

Oh good grief metis! When I refer to the Jews who were "disobedient hypocrites", I was echoing the words of Jesus Christ in condemning the religious leaders of his day. Read Matthew 23 if you doubt what he said. Are you calling Jesus anti-Semitic.

If the Jewish people of today stick to the teachings of those corrupt Pharisees and reject the Messiah that God sent to them, what does that make them? Somehow acceptable? What did Jesus say about his own nation? Read Matthew 23:37-39. Those who fail to recognize Jesus as the Christ will never be acceptable to God.....their house was "abandoned"....Jesus' words, not mine.

We all have choices and we all need to make them....but we also have to have the right information in order to make them intelligently, not emotionally.

 

[Deeje]

New American Standard Bible Proverbs 24:25
But to those who rebuke the wicked will be delight, And a good blessing will come upon them.

But what if you are dead wrong about Paul and you are rebuking a righteous one?

I have not seen you provide any evidence of Paul being a false apostle, except your opinion. So who told you that?

 

[Deeje]

Are you talking about obedience to God, or to people like you who claim to speak for God?

The Bible speaks for God....Jesus spoke for God....he told us to spread those teachings. We are to 'make disciples and teach them'. (Matthew 28:19-20) Part of that teaching, as Jesus demonstrated, was to expose error.

I think fretting over the righteousness of others shows a lack of faith in God and - for a Christian - is a bit blasphemous:

Romans 14:4:

Who are you to pass judgment on another’s servant? Before his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

IOW, all of this is God's concern. Trying to make it your concern:

- is an attempt to elevate your status to that of God's.
- suggests a lack of trust on your part that God can address disobedience on his own.

And this is coming from an atheist? I know that the devil can quote scripture too.

Passing judgment on our fellow humans is not permitted.....but passing judgment on their erroneous religious beliefs is what the Master taught us to do. Our lives depend on it.

We have to judge between what is good and bad and what is acceptable and unacceptable, every day in inconsequential things, and in really important things....there is nothing bigger than the prospect of losing our eternal future IMO. Why do you think so much of Jesus' teachings were focused on exposing the errors of the Pharisees? They were leading the people in the wrong direction, making them think that Jesus was a false Messiah. This made them responsible for his murder. It resulted in their abandonment by God. (Matthew 23:37-39)

There are leaders and followers in all walks of life, and each one of us is either one or the other. If we are Leaders, we have a huge responsibility to teach what is accurate because we can influence what people believe to their benefit or to their detriment.
OTOH if we are followers, we have to check out the validity of anyone who puts themselves forward as a teacher and test out their teachings. We have to be certain that what they teach is accurate.

This kind of judgment is necessary and can be life preserving.

 

[2ndpillar]

But what if you are dead wrong about Paul and you are rebuking a righteous one?

I have not seen you provide any evidence of Paul being a false apostle, except your opinion. So who told you that?

I have provided plenty of evidence for those with ears to hear. For the wicked/lawless, understanding will remain out of reach (Daniel 12:10). Most of the evidence comes from Paul's own mouth. The end of time, end of the age, is accompanied by the demon spirit of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet gathering the nations to Jerusalem (Zechariah 14:1-3), such as the kings of the world to Har-Magedon (Revelation 16:13-16). The "false prophet" is dead, that is why his demon spirit (unclean spirit) is doing the work. There is nothing covered, which will not be revealed (Matthew 10:26). The present "shepherds" are not feeding the sheep (Ezekiel 34:1-6).